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

, an eminent physician of Montpellier, the son of Nicholas Fizes, professor of mathematics in that university, was born in 1690, and at first educated by his father, who hoped that he would succeed him in the mathematical chair; but his disposition being more to the study of medicine, his father sent him to complete his medical education at Paris, under the tuition of Du Verney, Lemery, and the two messrs. De Jussieu. On his return to Montpellier, he employed himself in observing diseases in the hospital de la Charite, and in public teaching. On the death of his father, he was appointed joint professor of mathematics with M. de Clapiers, and soon became his sole successor. In 1732, the medical professorship in the university being vacant by the resignation of M. Deidier, Fizes was elected his successor. He fulfilled the duties of this chair with great propriety, but was more highly distinguished as a practitioner. He appreciated at once the character of the most complicated disease; and was above all admired for the accuracy of his prognostics. These qualifications placed him at the head of his profession at Montpellier; his fame extended to the metropolis, and he was invited to the office of physician to the duke of Orleans. His age was now, however, advanced; and the fear of the jealousy which this high appointment might produce among his brethren, led him to make some efforts to be permitted to decline this honour. He removed to Paris, nevertheless; but, unused to the intrigues and railJeries and cabals of a court, he was unhappy in his situation; his health began to fail, and he was induced to request permission to resign his office, and returned to Montpellier, after residing fourteen months at Paris, honoured with the protection of the prince, and the friendship of M. Senac, Astruc, Bordeu, &c. He was accused of a little misanthropy on this occasion; but he was an enemy to adulation and selfishness, and seemed to revolt from very species of artificial politeness. He resumed the functions of his professorship at Montpellier but for a short period; for he was carried off by a malignant fever in the course of three days, and died on August 14, 1765, aged about seventy-five years. His works were principally essays on different points of theory and practice. 1. “De Hominis Liene sano,” Montpellier^ 1716; 2. “De naturali Secretione Bilis in Jecore,” ibid.' 1719 3. “Specimen de Suppuratione in Partibus mollibus,” ibid. 1722 4. “Partium Corporis himiani Solidarum Conspectus Anatomico-Mechanicus,” ibid. 1729; 5. “De Cataracta” 6. “Universae Physiologiae Conspectus,” ibid. 1737; 7. “De Tumoribus in Genere,” ibid. 1738; 8. “Tractatus de Febribus,” ibid. 1749. The greater part of the writings of Fizes were collected in one 4to volume, and were published at Montpellier in 1742.

, was an ancient Latin poet, of whom our accounts are very imperfect. There are many places that claim him, but Setia, now Sezzo, a town of Campania, seems to have the best title; and it is from thence that he bears the surname Setinus. Martial, who was his contemporary and friend, intimates that he lived at Padua, or at least was born there, as may be collected from" an epigram in which he advises him to quit the beggarly study of poetry, and to apply himself to the bar, as the more profitable profession of the two. He died when he was about thirty years of age, in the year 93 or 94, and before he had put the finishing hand to the poem which he left.

Flaccus chose the history of the Argonautic expedition for the subject of his poem; of which he lived to compose no more than seven books, and part of an eighth. It is addressed to the emperor Vespasian; and Flaccus takes occasion at the same time to compliment Domitian on his poetry, and Titus on his conquest of Judaea. The learned world have been divided in their opinion of this author; some not having scrupled to exalt him above all the Latin poets, Virgil only excepted; while others have set him as much below them. This poem of the Argonautic expedition is an imitation, rather than a translation, of the Greek poet Apollonius, four books of whose poem upon the same subject are yet remaining; and it has generally been agreed that the Latin poet has succeeded best in those parts where he had not the Greek in view. Apollonius has by no means suffered where Flaccus has seemed to translate him, none of his spirit having been lost in the transfusion; and some have ranked him among the few whose copies have rivalled their originals. He professedly imitated Virgil, and is often successful. Upon the whole, he does not deserve to be so neglected as he has been; especially while other poets of antiquity have been thought worthy of notice, who are not superior to him either for matter, style, or versification. Quintilian seems to have entertained the highest opinion of his merit, by the short eulogium he has left of him: “multum in Valeric Flacco nuper amisimus.” After several editions of this poet, with notes of the learned, Nic. Heinsius published him at Amsterdam, in 1680, 12mo; which edition was republished in the same size, in 1702. But the best edition is that, “cum notis integris variorum & Petri Burmanni,” printed at Leyden, ia 1724, 4to.

It may be proper to mention, that John Baptista Pius, an Italian poet, completed the eighth book of the Argonautics, and added two more, by way of supplement, partly from Apollonius; which supplement was also printed at the end of Flaccus, in Aldus’ s edition of 1523, and has been subjoined to all, or at least most of the subsequent editions.

, an Irish gentleman of learning, who had a considerable knowledge in the history and antiquities of his country, was born in. 1650, at Moycullin, co. Galway, the ancient estate of his family, which became forfeited by the rebellion in 1641, when he was only eleven years old. He published at London, 1685, a book under the singular and mystic title of “Ogygia, or Rerum Hibernicarum Chronologia,” containing chronological memoirs upon the antiquities of the kingdom of Ireland; compiled, as he observes, “ex pervetustis monumentis fideliter inter se collatis eruta, atque e sacris et profanis litteris primarum orbis gentium, tarn genealogicis, quam chronologicis suffulta prresidiis.” This work, a 4to volume, containing about 600 pages, he" dedicated to the then duke of York, afterwards king James II. of England. The author commences his history from the deluge, continues it to the year of Christ 42 8, and has divided it into three parts. The first describes the island, its various names, inhabitants, extent, kings, the manner of their annual election, &c. The second is a kind of chronological parallel of the Irish affairs, with the events that happened during the same period in other countries. The third is a more ample detail of particular transactions in the same kingdom. To this is added a professedly exact chronological table of all the Christian kings who have ruled over Ireland, from A. D. 482 till A. D. 1022; and a brief relation of the most prominent historic features of the island till the time of Charles II. in 1685. To this succeeds a chronological poem, which forms a summary of Irish history to the same period. At the end is a very curious catalogue of the Scottish kings, Irish, who have reigned in the British isles. In his genealogical remarks on the regal house of the Stewarts, the author attempts to prove they were originally an Irish family. It is surprising that neither the author nor his work has been noticed by Macpherson or Whitaker in their controversy respecting the peopling of Hibernia, and the origin of the Caledonians; although he is particularly noticed by O'Hallaran in his History of Ireland.

Mr. O-Flaherty promised a second part, in which he intended to give an account at large of the Christian kings of Ireland, but never accomplished it; although Harris mentions a report that it existed in manuscript, in the hands of his relations, which probably was only a short abstract of annals from 1187 to 1327, which Nicolson say was extant in his time. He wrote also a treatise in vindication of his “Ogygia” against the objections of sir George Mackenzie and others, which was intended for the press, but we know not that it ever appeared. Sir Richard Cox only seems to speak slightingly -of the “Ogygia,” which is highly praised by Dr.Dudley Loftus, Belling, and Stillingfleet.

, a painter of historical subjects, was born at Liege in 1614, and began his studies in Flanders, but at the age of twenty-four he went into Italy to cultivate his talents by a view of the works of the renowned painters of that country. At Rome, he copied the best works of the great masters, and soon acquired a reputation which recommended him to the court of Florence, to which the grand duke invited him, and there employed him in several works, the execution of which acquired for him the esteem of that prince, and the applause of the public. In returning from hence homewards, after an absence of nine years, he went to Paris, where some of his best works were executed. In 1647 he returned to Liege, where he was received with great warmth, and by his subsequent works confirmed the high, opinion which his countrymen had conceived of his merit. He then visited Paris again, was admitted a member of the academy of painting, and appointed professor. Returning home, he became rich enough to build a house at St. Remi, which cost 50,000 florins. He also embraced the clerical profession, and although he knew nothing of Latin, was made a canon of St. Paul, by a dispensation from the pope. But in the midst of wealth, possessed of public and private esteem, and of every other circumstance that could render life comfortable, he was seized with an unaccountable melancholy and dejection of spirits, which incessantly oppressed him, till it occasioned his death in 1675; and many persons believed his disorder to have been occasioned by poison administered to him by the celebrated marchioness de Brinvilliers, with whom he had formed an unfortunate connexion, but for this there appears no proof, and his death seems more reasonably attributed to his disordered mind. He appears indeed to have given way to that selfish jealousy which some have reckoned a system of approaching derangement. When one of his scholars, Carlier, had begun to give extraordinary proofs of excellence in his art, Flameel did every thing he could to discourage him, and actually transferred him to a grinder of colours. Carlier, however, conscious of his abilities, secretly painted “the Martyrdom of St. Denis,” which was placed in the church dedicated to that saint; and Flameel had no sooner seen it, than he threw his pencil into the fire, and never painted more.

This master had a lively imagination, and a noble taste for historical compositions. He was singularly skilled in antiquities, and in all his designs strictly observant of the costume. His pictures usually are enriched with porticos and colonnades, as he was an accomplished architect; his choice of nature was elegant, his expression animated, and his pencil delicate. His colouring was exceedingly good; and his taste of design was entirely of the Roman school, as well in regard to correctness, as to the objects which he chose to represent. In the cupola of the barefooted Carmelites at Paris, he painted, in fresco, Elijah ascending to Heaven in a Chariot of Fire, and Elisha below, with his arms extended, to catch the mantle of the Prophet. At Liege are several grand altar-pieces, among which one in St. Paul’s church describes the Conversion of that saint and in the cathedral there is another by this master, representing the Resurrection of Lazarus.

, falsely celebrated as an alchymist, under which supposition some forged works have been attributed to him (as, “A Philosophical Summary,” in verse, 1561, and a treatise “On the Transformation of Metals,” in 1621), was a native of Pontoise, towards the close of the fourteenth century, and exercised the profession of a notary at Paris. He began life without any fortune, but suddenly became rich, which occasioned the upposition that he had found the grand secret. He made, however, no other use of his riches than in relieving the distressed, founding hospitals, and repairing places of divine worship. To account for this sudden wealth in a more probable way, it has been said, that he bought up the debts owing to the Jews when they were expelled in 1394, and made great profits by the contracts, This, however, has been refuted, and the truth perhaps is, that he made his money by a profound knowledge of commerce, at a time when men in general were ignorant of its principles. He died at Paris, March 22, 1418. He and his wife Pernelle have been the subject of some curious inquiries at Paris, where they pretended to have found his alchemical apparatus. Paul Lucas, a thorough traveller, asserted that he had heard of him alive in India, long after his real decease. In the “Essais sur Paris,” by IVt,. St. Foix, there are many particulars of Flamel, also in the 44 Hermippus Redivivus,“London, 1749, second edit, anc) in the” Varieties of Literature," 1795, 8vo.

, an eminent Latin poet, whose family name was Zarrabini, was born at Serevalle in 1498. His father, John Anthony, who first changed the family name to Flaminio on entering a literary society at Venice, was himself a man of learning, and professor of belles-lettres in different academies in Italy, and has left some works both in prose and verse, particularly twelve books of letters, in which are many particulars of literary history. He bestowed great pains on the instruction of his son, and sent him, when at the age of sixteen, to Rome, with a poem addressed to Leo X. exhorting him to make war against the Turks, and a critical work entitled “Annotationum Sylvae.” Leo appears to have been so pleased with the appearance of young Flaminio, as to request that he might remain at Rome, promising to encourage his studies there; but although this did not take place, in his after-visits to Rome, the pope patronized him with great liberality, and Flaminio answered every expectation that had been formed of his talents. In 1515 he accompanied the count Castiglione to Urbino, where he resided some months, and was held in the highest esteem by that accomplished nobleman for his amiable qualities and great endowments, but particularly for his. early and astonishing talents for Latin poetry. In this year he published at Fano, the first specimen of his productions, with a few poems of Marullus, not before printed, in a very rare volume in 8vo. entitled, “Michaelis Tardaaniotas Marulli Neniae. Ejusdem epigrammata nunquarn alias impressa. M. Antonii Flaminii carminum libellus. Ejusdem Ecloga Thyrsis.” Of these poems some have been printed, often with variations, in the subsequent editions of his works; but several pieces appear there which are not to be found in the edition by Mancurti, published at Padua, by Comino, in 1727, which is considered as the most complete; whence it is probable this early publication of Flaminio was not known to his editors.

After this, Flaminio was removed by his father to Bologna for the study of philosophy, after which he returned again to Rome, and formed an intimacy with the most illustrious scholars of that city. Without devoting himself to any profession, he for some years attached himself to the cardinal de Sauli, and after his death resided with the prelate Ghiberti, either at Padua, or at his see of Verona, where he secured the friendship of Fracastorius and Naugerius, a friendship of the most generous and disinterested kind, as appears from many passages in their writings. About 1538 he went to Naples in consequence of a long indisposition, and by relaxation from his studies, recovered his former health, and repaired to Viterbo, where cardinal Pole then resided as pontifical legate, and honoured Flaminio by the most friendly intimacy. He also accompanied the cardinal to the council of Trent, but refused the office of secretary to this council, and by this refusal, as well as by other parts of his conduct, and a certain liberality of sentiment displayed in some of his writings, gave rise to suspicions that he was inclined towards the. opinions of the reformers. Whether this was actually the case has been a subject of dispute among his biographers; but that he was suspected is certain, for his writings were for some time prohibited in the Index Expurgatorius of the Roman church. Those who feel an interest in the question may consult Schelhornius’ dissertation on the subject in his “Amcenitates Hist. Eccles.” and compare it with Tiraboschi’s answer, who after being obliged to admit that Flaminio had embraced the opinions of the reformers, informs us that he was recalled to his former faith by cardinal Pole. And another account says, that cardinal Caraflfa (afterwards Paul IV.) attended him on his /death-bed. His death, which happened at Rome in 15.50, was lamented by all the learned of his time, and he appears to have deserved their highest encomiums. His poems place him in the first rank of the Latin school. Most of his poems are in the “Carmina quinque illustrium poetarum;” but the scarce editions of his works are, I. “M. Ant. Flaminii in Librum Psalmorum brevis explanatio,” Venice, 1545, 8vo. 2. “Epistolae aliquot de veritate doctrinae eruditae et sanctitate religionis, in Latinum veterem sermonem conversse, ex Italico hodierno, nee non narrationes de Flaminio,” &c. Noriberg. 1571, 8vo. 3. “M. A. Flaminii Carmina sacra, quue extant omnia, hoc modo nunquam hactenus edita,” c. Rostock, 1578, 8vo. There is an edition of his works, with those of his father, by Maucurti, mentioned before, which was reprinted in 1743.

, a very eminent English astronomer, was born of reputable parents at Denby in Derbyshire, Aug. 19, 1646. He was educated at the free-school of Derby, where his father lived; and at fourteen was visited with a severe fit of sickness, which being followed by other distempers, operating upon a very delicate constitution, prevented his going to the university, as was designed. He was taken from school in 1662, and within * month or two after had Sacrobosco’s book “De Sphscra,” put into his hand, which he set himself to read without any director. This accident, and the leisure that attended it, laid the groundwork of all that mathematical and astronomical knowledge, for which he became afterwards so justly celebrated. He had already perused a great deal of history, ecclesiastical, as well as civil: but astronomy was entirely new to him, and he found great pleasure in it. Having translated as much from Sacrobosco, as he thought necessary, he proceeded to make dials by the direction of such ordinary books as he could get together; and having changed a volume of astrology, found among his father’s books, for Mr. Street’s Caroline Tables, he undertook to calculate the places of the planets, but found very little help from that concise author.

Having, however, calculated by these tables an eclipse of the sun, which was to happen June 22, 1666, he imparted it to a relation, who shewed it to Mr. Halton of Wingfield manor in Derbyshire, a good mathematician, as appears from some pieces of his, in the appendix to Foster’s “Mathematical Miscellanies.” He came to see Flamsteed soon after; and finding he was not acquainted with the astronomical performances of others, he sent him Riccioli’s “Almagestum Novum,” and Kepler’s “Tabulae Rudolphinae,” to which he was before a stranger. He prosecuted his astronomical studies from this time with all imaginable vigour and success. In 1669, he collected some remarkable eclipses of the fixed stars, by the moon, which would happen in 1670, calculating them from the Caroline Tables; and directed them to lord Brouncker, president of the royal society. This produced very good effects; for his production being read before that society, was so highly approved, that it procured him letters of thanks, dated Jan. 14, 1669-70, from Oldenburg their secretary, and from Mr. John Collins, one of their members, with whom he corresponded several years. These Jetters were in the hands of William Jones, esq. F. R. S, father of the celebrated sir William Jones. Extracts from them are given in the “Biographia Britannica.”

In 1673-4, he wrote an Ephemeris, to shew the falsity of astrology, and the ignorance of those that pretended to it; and gave a table of the moon’s rising and setting carefully calculated, together with the eclipses and appulses of the moon and planets to the fixed stars. This fell into the hands of sir Jonas Moore, for whom he made a table of the moon’s true southings for that year; from which, and Philips’s theory of the tides, the high waters being made, he found that they shewed the times of the turn of the tides very nearly, whereas the common seaman’s coarse rules would err sometimes two or three, hours. In 1674, passing through London in the way to Cambridge, sir Jonas Moore informed him, that a true account of the tides would be highly acceptable to the king; upon which he composed a small ephemeris for his majesty’s use. Sir Jonas had heard him often discourse of the barometer, and the certainty of judging of the weather by it, from a long series of observations he had made upon it; and now requested of him to construct for him one of these glasses, which he did, and left him materials for making more. Sir Jonas highly valued this barometer; and mentioning it as a curiosity to the king and duke of York, he was ordered to exhibit it the next day, which he did, together with Fiamsteed’s directions for judging of the weather from its rising or falling. Sir Jonas was a great friend to our author had shewn the king and duke his telescopes and micrometer before and, whenever he acquainted them with any thing which he had gathered from Flamsteed’s discourse, he told them frankly from whom he had it, and recommended him to the nobility and gentry about the court.

Having taken his degree of master of arts at Cambridge, he designed to enter into orders, and to settle on a small living near Derby, promised to him by a friend of his father’s. In the mean time, sir Joitas Moore, having notice of his design, wrote to him to come to London, whither he returned Feb. 1674-5. He was entertained in the house of that gentleman, who had other views for serving him, but Flamsteed persisting in his resolution to take orders, he did not dissuade him from it. March following, sir Jonas brought him a warrant to be the king’s astronomer, with a salary of iOOl. per annum, payable out of the office of ordnance, to commence from Michaelmas before; which, however, did not abate his inclinations for orders, so that at Easter following he was ordained at Elyhouse by bishop Gunning, who ever after conversed freely with him, and particularly upon the new philosophy and opinions, though that prelate always maintained the old. August 10, 1675, the foundation of the royal observatory at Greenwich was laid; and during the building of it, Flamsteed lodged at Greenwich; and his quadrant and telescopes being kept in the queen’s house there, he observed the appulses of the moon and planets to the fixed stars. In 1681, his “Doctrine of the Sphere” was published in a posthumous work of sir Jonas Moore, entitled, “A new System of the Mathematics,” printed in 4to.

About 1684, he was presented to the living of Burstow, near Blechingley, in Surrey, which he held as long as he lived. He was, indeed, very moderately provided for, yet seems to have been quite contented, aspiring after nothing but knowledge, and the promotion of the sciences. This, however, as it raised him to the notice of the world, and recommended him to royal favour and protection, likewise procured him the friendship and confidence of some of the most illustrious persons for scientific pursuits; such as sir Isaac Newton, Dr. Halley, Mr. Molineux of Dublin, Dr. Wallis, Cassini, &c. He shewed the same assiduity in labouring for the improvement of astronomy, after this moderate prdvision was made for him, as he did before; which appears from the numberless papers addressed by him to the secretaries of the royal society, many of which are printed in the Philosophical Transactions. He spent the latter, as he had done the former part of his life, in promoting true and useful knowledge; and died of a strangury, Dec. 3 1, 1719. Though he lived to above 73 years of age, yet it is remarkable, that he had from his infancy a peculiar tenderness of constitution; and in a letter to Mr. Collins, March 20, 1670-71, he says, that “he shall scarcely have time to transcribe, and fit his papers for the press, partly, because his occasions, but more frequently his distempers, withdraw and detain him from his pen-endeavours. For the spring,” says he, “coming on, my blood increases, which, if I should not exercise strongly, I should spit up, or receive into my stomach, with great detriment to my health.” He was married, but had.no children.

His great work, and that which contained the main operations of his life, was the “Historia Cœlestis Britannica,” published in 1725, in 3 large folio volumes. The first of which contains the observations of Mr. William Gascoigne, the first inventor of the method of measuring angles in a telescope by means of screws, and the first who applied telescopical sights to astronomical instruments, taken at Middleton, near Leeds in Yorkshire, between the years 1638 and 1643; extracted from his letters by Mr. Grubtree: with some of Mr. Crabtree’s observations about the same time; and also those of Mr. Flamsteed himself, made at Derby between the years 1670 and 1675; besides a multitude of curious observations, and necessary tables to be used with them, made at the Royal Observatory, between the years 1675 and 1689. The 2d volume contains his observations, made with a mural arch of near 7 feet radius, and 140 degrees on the limb, of the meridional zenith distances of the fixed stars, sun, moon, and planets, with their transits over the meridian; also observations of the diameters of the sun and moon, with their eclipses, and those of Jupiter’s satellites, and variations of the compass, from 1689 to 1719: with tables shewing how to render the calculation of the places of the stars and planets easy and expeditious. To which are added, the moon’s place at her oppositions, quadratures, &c. also the planets’ places, derived from the observations. The 3d volume contains a catalogue of the right-ascensions, polardistances, longitudes, and magnitudes of near 3000 fixed Stars, with the corresponding variations of the same. To this volume is prefixed a large preface, containing an account of all the astronomical observations made before his time, with a description of the instruments employed; as also of his own observations and instruments; with a new Latin version of Ptolomy’s catalogue of 1026 fixed stars; and Ulegh-beig’s places annexed on the Latin page, with the corrections a small catalogue of the Arabs Tycho Brahe’s of about 780 fixed stars the Landgrave of Hesse’s of 386 Hevelius’s of 1534: and a catalogue of some of the southern fixed stars not visible in our hemisphere, calculated from the observations made by Dr. Halley at St. Helena, adapted to the year 1726.

Of his personal character we are only told that he was a man of warm passions, but of great good nature and humour, and associated with some of the wits of his day.

, an English poet, was born in Aldersgate-street, London, about 1633; and educated at Winchester school. He went from thence to New college, in Oxford; but leaving the university without a degree, he removed to the Inner Temple, where in due time he became a barrister. Jt does not appear that he ever followed the profession of the law; but, having a turn for the fine arts, he indulged his inclination, and made some proficiency, both as a poet and a painter. He speaks of himself as a painter, in a poem called “The Review,” and it appears from thence, that he drew in miniature. The third edition of his poems, with additions and amendments, was published by himself, with his portrait before them, in 1682, and dedicated to the duke of Ormond. The first poem in this collection is, “On the Death of the right honourable Thomas earl of Ossory,” and had been published separately the year before. Soon after, it was read by the duke of Ormond his father, who was so extremely pleased with it, that he sent Flatman a mourning ring, with a diamond in it worth 100l. He published also in 1685, two Pindaric odes; one on the death of prince Rupert, the other on the death of Charles II.

In 1660, came out, under the letters T. F. a collection of poems, entitled “Virtus Rediviva; a Panegyric on the late king Charles the First, of ever blessed memory,” &c, but these not being reprinted in any edition of his “Poems,” Wood will not afiinn them to be FJatman’s. In 1661, was published a piece in prose, entitled “Don Juan Lamberto, or a Comical History of the late Times,” with a wooden cut before it, containing the pictures of giant Desborough with a great club in his right hand, and of Lambert, both leading under the arms the meek knight Richard Cromwell; and this being very successful, a second part was published the same year, vrith the giant Husonio before it, and printed with the second edition of the first. This satirical work has to it the disguised name of Montelion, knight of the oracle; but Wood says, the acquaintance and contemporaries of Flatman always averred him to be the author of it. Montelion' s Almanack came out in 1660, 1661, 1662. The Montelions of the two last years are supposed to be Flatman’s, that of the first was written by Mr. John Philips. It is remarkable, that Flatman, in his younger days had a dislike to marriage, and made a song describing the incumbrances of it, with this beginning “Like a dog with a bottle tied close to his tail, Like a tory in a bog, or a thief in a jail,” &c. But being afterwards, according to Wood, “smitten with a fair virgin, and more with her fortune, he espoused her in 1672; upon which,” says the same author, “his ingenious comrades did serenade him that night with the said song.” He died at his house in Fleet-street, London, in 1688; his father, a clerk in chancery, being then alive, and in his eightieth year. Although of very little value as a poet, he succeeded better as a painter, and as Granger says, one of his heads is worth a ream of his Pindarics.

, a very popular nonconformist divine, was born in Worcestershire about 1627, and educated at University-college, Oxford, where he took his degree of B. A. In 1650 he settled as assistant minister to Mr. Waiplate, rector of Diptford, in Devonshire, and shortly after succeeded to the rectory, which, however, in 1656 he resigned to become minister of a very populous parish at Dartmouth, though the stipend in this situation was much less. In 1662, when ejected with the other nonconformists, he occasionally preached and administered the sacrament privately till the passing of the Oxford act, in 1665, when he was obliged to retire to Slapton, a village five miles from Dartmouth, where also he sometimes preached when he could do it with safety, and sometimes when his safety was endangered. In 1685, the mob was excited against him, and would probably have destroyed him, had he fallen into their hands. He then came to London, where he narrowly escaped being apprehended, but returning to Dartmouth, when in 1687 king James granted more liberty to nonconformists, Mr. Flavel’s congregation immediately obtained for him a large place, in which he was enabled to exercise his ministerial functions; and by the revolution in 1688, he enjoyed complete liberty. He died at KxeUT in 1691, in his sixty-fourth year, having long possessed, in an eminent degree, the respect and esteem of all good men. He was a man of exemplary piety, and his various works are still in considerable popularity, and are regarded by those who hold Calvinistic sentiments. They were collected after his death, in 2 vols. folio, and have been since often printed in 6 vols. 8vo.

, patriarch of Antioch, in the fourth century, was a man of illustrious birth, and still superior virtues, and was placed on the patriarchal throne during the life of Paulinus. This election being confirmed by the council of Constantinople in the year 382, was the origin of a schism, which was terminated by the prudence of Flavian, and the death of his rival, Paulinus. After this, he evinced his zeal for orthodoxy by prosecuting the Arians, and he expelled the Messalian heretics from his diocese. When the inhabitants of Antioch, vexed at a new tax imposed to celebrate the tenth year of the emperor’s reign, had proceeded to various acts of outrage, particularly against the statues of the emperor and empress, Flavian interceded with Theodosius for them, and obtained their pardon by his eloquence. This happened in the year 387. He died in the year 404, after having been patriarch thirteen years. He wrote some epistles and homilies, of which fragments only remain.

, patriarch of Constantinople in the fifth cen tury, succeeded Proclus in that dignity, in the year 447; and although Chrysaphius, favourite of the younger Theodosius, wished to drive him from his see, Flavian despised his menaces. In his time arose the Eutychian heresy, which he condemned in a synod held ut Constantinople. But the partizans of Eutyches condemned and deposed Flavian in the year 449, in the council called “Latrocinium Ephesinnm,” or “Conventus Latronum,” the “Assembly of Robbers.” Dioscurus bishop ol Alexandria, was placed at the head of this council by Tlicodosius, who carried matters with such violence, that Flavian was personally mal-treated, publicly scourged, and banished to Hypacpa, in Lydia, where he died soon after, in consequence of this scandalous usage. Before his death he appealed to Leo, and this appeal produced another council, in which Eutyches was condemned, and the savage Dioscorus deposed. Flavian was the author of “Two Letters” to pope Leo, which are printed in the fourth volume of the “Collectio Conciliorum,” and of a “Declaration of Faith delivered to the emperor Theodosius.”

, a learned doctor of the house and society of the Sorbonne, was born in the diocese of Loan. He took a doctor’s degree in 1621, and was canon of Rheims, and Hebrew professor at the royal college, in 1630. In 1656 he was promoted to be dean of the college royal, and died April 29, 1674, in the Sorbonne. Flavigni assisted M. le Jay in the Polyglott Bible, and wrote against Abraham Echellensis, in his “Epistolsa de Heptaplis Parisiensibus,” the most important of his works. He also left the defence of a thesis he had signed, in which it was asserted that episcopacy was not a distinct sacrament from the priesthood. This apology was printed at Tournay, 1668, 4to, 128 pages. His style is said to have been as violent as his temper.

, or Flavius Blondus, an Italian anticjuaryand historian, was born at Forli, in 1388. We have only a very slight account of his early years, but he appears to have been young when he was sent to Milan by his fellow-citizens to negociate some affairs for them. In 1434 he was secretary to pope Eugene IV. in which office he served three of the successors of that pontiff, but was not always with them. He travelled much through various parts of Italy, studying carefully the remains of antiquity. He died at Rome, in 1463, leaving three sons well educated, but without any provision, his marriage having prevented him from rising in the church. His long residence at Rome inspired him with the design of publishing an exact description of all the edifices, gates, temples, and other remains of ancient Rome, which then existed as ruins, or had been repaired. This he executed in a work entitled “Romae instauratae lib. III.” in which he displays great learning, as he did in his “Romce triumphantis, lib. X.” in which he details the laws, government, religion, ceremonies, sacrifices, military state, and wars of the ancient republic. Another elaborate work from his pen, was his “Italia illustrata,” or ancient state of Italy; and he published also a history of Venice, “De origine et gestis Venetorum.” At his death he had made some progress in a general history of Rome from its decline to his own time, the manuscript of which is in the library of Modena. His style is far from elegant, nor are his facts always correct; but he has the merit of paving the wav for future antiquaries, who have been highly indebted to his researches. A collection of his works was published at Basil, in 153 1.

. If a man deserves to be celebrated who employs fifty years on one work, the name of Flaust should not be omitted. He was an advocate in the parliament of Rouen, and his great work was entitled “Explication de la Jurisprudence et de la coutume de Normandie, dans une ordre simple et facile.” “Explication of the Jurisprudence and Usage of Normandy, in an easy and simple order.” In 2 vols. folio. He died in 1783, at the age of seventy-two.

, the celebrated bishop of Nismes, distinguished equally for elegant learning, abilities, and exemplary piety, was born June 10, 1632, at Perne, near Avignon, in Provence, and educated in the study of literature and virtue under his uncle Hercules AudifiTret. After the death of this relation, who was principal of the congregation styled De la Doctrine Chretienne, he appeared at Paris, about 1659, where he was soon distinguished as a man of genius, and an able preacher. A description of a carousal, in Latin verse, which, notwithstanding the difficulty of a subject unknown to the ancients, was pure and classical, first attracted the public admiration. It was published in 1669, in folio, and entitled “Cursus Regius,” and has since been included in his miscellaneous works. His funeral orations completed the fame which his sermons had begun. He had pronounced one at Narbonne, in 1659, when professor of rhetoric there, on the bishop of that city, but this is not extant. The first of those that are published, was delivered in 1672, at the funeral of madam de Montausier, whose husband had become his patron and friend. He soon rose to be the rival of Bossuet in this species of eloquence. His oration on mareschal Turenne, pronounced in 1676, is esteemed the most perfect of these productions; it excited at once the liveliest regret for the deceased hero, and the highest admiration of the orator. The last oration in the collection must have agitated his feelings as well as exercised his talents, for it was in honour of his well-tried friend the duke of Montausier, who died in 1690. In 1679 he published his history of the emperor Theodosius the Great, the ouly part that was ever executed, of a plan to instruct the dauphin, by writing for him the lives of the greatest Christian princes. The king, after having testified his regard for him by giving him the abbey of S. iSeverin, and the office of almoner in ordinary to the dauphin, promoted him in 1685 to the see of Lavaur, saying to him at the same time, < Be not surprised that I so Jong delayed to reward your merit; I was afraid of losing the pleasure of hearing your discourses.“Two years after, he was made bishop of Nismes. In his diocese he was no less remarkable for the mildness and indulgence by which he drew hack several protestants to his church, than for his general charity, and attention to the necessities of the unfortunate of all descriptions. At the time of a famine, in 1709, his charity was unbounded, and was extended to persons of all persuasions; and his modesty was at all times equal to his benevolence. Numbers were relieved by him, without knowing the source of their good fortune. His father had been a tallowchandler; but Flechier had too much real greatness of mind to conceal the humbleness of his origin: and, being once insolently reproached on that subject, he had the spirit to reply,” I fancy, sir, from your sentiments, if you had been so born, you would, have made candles still.“It is said that he had a presentiment of his death by means of a dream; in consequence of which, he employed an artist to design a monument for him, wishing to have one that was modest and plain, not such as vanity or gratitude might think it necessary to erect. He urged the artist to execute this design before his death, which happened Feb. 16, 1710.” He died,“says d'Alembert,” lamented by the catholics, regretted by the protestants, having always exhibited to his brethren an excellent model of zeal and charity, simplicity and eloquence."

His works are, 1. “CEuvres Mesle*es,” miscellaneous works, 12mo, in verse and prose, both French and Latin, Of his compositions in the latter language, it is generally remarked, that they are distinguished by classical purity and good taste. 2. An edition of Gratiani, “De casibus iliustriuni Virornm,” 4to. S. “Panegyrics of the Saints,” esteemed one of the best works of the kind. 4. His funeral Orations, which are* eight in number. 5. His Sermons, in 3 vols. If mo, less forcible than his panegyrics, or his orations. He had studied old quaint discourses, which he ridiculed, and called his buffoons; yet they had in some degree vitiated his style of writing sermons. 6. “The History of Theodosius,” above-mentioned. 7. “The Life of cardinal Ximenes,” one volume, 4to, or two volumes, 12mo. 8. “Letters,” 2 vols. 12mo, in a pure, but not an epistolary style, y. “The Life of cardinal Commendon, translated from the Latin of Gratiani,” one vol. 4 to, or two vols. 12mo. 10. Posthumous Works, containing pastoral letters of the most excellent paternal tenderness, and other matters. Of all these a handsome edition was printed in 1782, 9 vols. 8vo. But in this edition the correspondence with Baville, the persecuting intendant of Languedoc, which had been promised, was suppressed by authority.

, an English poet and dramatic writer in the reign of Charles II. whose productions, although not without some proportion of merit, would not have preserved his name so long as the satire of Dryden, entitled “Mac Flecnoe,” is said to have been originally a Jesuit, and to have had connections with some persons of high distinction in London, who were of the Roman catholic persuasion. What was the cause of Dryden’s aversion is not determined. Some have said that when the revolution was completed, Dryden, having some time before turned papist, became disqualified for holding his place of poet-laurcat. It was accordingly taken from him, and conferred on Flecknoe, a man to whom Dryden is said to have had already a confirmed aversion; and this produced the famous satire, called from him Mac Flecknoe, one of the most spirited and amusing of Dryden' s poems; and, in some degree, the model of the Dunciad. That this is a spirited poem is as certain, as that all the preceding account from Cihber and his copiers is ridiculous. Shadwell was the successor of Dryden, as laureat, and in this poem is ridiculed as the poetical son of Flecknoe. However con.­temptibly Dryden treated Flecknoe, the latter at one time wrote an epigram in his praise, which, with his religion, might have conciliated both Dryden and Pope. Perhaps Dryden, says a modern critic, was offended at his invectives against the obscenity of the stage, knowing how much he had contributed to it. Be this as it may, Flecknoe himself wrote some plays, but not more than one of them was acted. His comedy, called “Damoiselles a la mode,” was printed in 1667, and addressed to the duke and duchess of Newcastle; the author had designed it for the theatre, and was not a little chagrined at the players for refusing it; He said upon this occasion: “For the acting this comedy, those who have the government of the stage have their humours, and would.be in treated and I have mine, and won't intreat them and were all dramatic writers of my mind, tljeyshould wear their old plays thread-bare, ere they should have any new,till they better understood their own interest, and how todistinguish between good *nd bad.”

His other dramatic pieces are, “Ermina, or the Chaste Lady f” Love’s Dominion;“and,” The Marriage of Oceanus and Britannia.“The second of these performances, was printed in 1654, and dedicated to the lady Elizabeth Claypole; to whom the author insinuates the use of plays, and begs her mediation to gain a licence for acting them. It was afterwards republished in 1664, under the title of” Love’s Kingdom,“and dedicated to the marquis of Newcastle. The author then with great pains introduced it on the stage, but it was condemned by the audience, which Flecknoe styles the people, and calls them judges without judgment. He owns that his play wants much of the ornaments of the stage; but that, he says, may be easily supplied by a lively imagination. His other works consist of, 1.” Epigrams and Enigmatical Characters,“usually bound up with his” Love’s Dominion;“but there is a separate edition in 1670, 8vo,” by Richard Flecnoe, priest.“2.” Miscellanea, or poems of all sorts, with divers other pieces,“1653, 12mo. 3.” Diarium, or the Journal, divided into twelve jornadas, in burlesque verse,“Lond. 1656, 12mo. Mr. Harris mentions also a book in the catalogue of the Bodleian library written by one Rich. Flecknoe, entitled” The Affections of a pious soul unto Christ,“1640, 8vo. He thinks it probable this was the same person, and that he wrote it in his younger years,” before his principles were debauched by the world.“Flecknoe died in the summer of 1678, according to Mr. Malone, who speaks with as much contempt of Flecknoe as if he were personally interested in Dryden’s antipathies. Mr. Southey, in his” Omniana," has a faf more favourable opinion of our poet, and confirms it by extracts from his works, some of which refute Mr. Harris’s opinion of Flecknoe’s principles being debauched. He indeed every where expresses an abhorrence of immorality.

, lord deputy of Ireland during the usurpation, descended of a good family in Lincolnshire and Staffordshire, was the son of sir William Fleetwood, knt. cup-bearer to James I. and Charles I. and comptroller of Woodstock park. His grandfather, sir William Fleetwood, had been receiver of the court of wards, an office, which in May 1644, was conferred upon the subject of this article, who embarked on the parliamentary side in the beginning of the rebellion. He was next, in May 1644-45, advanced to the rank of colonel of horse, and in Oct. following made governor of Bristol, and knight of the shire for the county of Bucks. In July 1647, he was appointed one of the commissioners of the army for treating with those of the parliament, with relation to the points in dispute between those two bodies, but notwithstanding his zeal for the interests of the former, he was not personally concerned in the death of Charles I. After the establishment of the commonwealth he was raised to the rank of lieutenant-general, and in Feb. 1650-1 chosen a member of the council of state, and Sept. 3 following, had a considerable share in the victory gained at Worcester over king Charles II. Soon after this he was present at the conference held between several members of the parliament and the principal officers of the army, at the speaker’s house, concerning the settlement of the nation, in which he declared that it appeared to him very difficult to determine, whether an absolute republic, or a mixed monarchy, was the most proper form of government to be established; though the soldiers in general discovered themselves to be averse to any thing of monarchy, while every one of them was a monarch in his own regiment or company. The lawyers, however, were, most of them, for a mixed monarchical government.

After the death of general Ireton, Cromwell fixed upon him to marry his widow, not only on account of his own interest, but also that of his numerous relations, several of whom were persons of no small weight in the army, particularly Lambert; and being now Cromwell’s son-in-law, the latter in 1652 appointed him commander in chief of the forces in Ireland, and one of the commissioners for the civil affairs of that kingdom; upon which posts he entered in September following, and under his conduct Ireland was soon reduced to a perfect subjection; and he was made lord deputy of it after his father-in-law had assumed the protectorship. Notwithstanding this, he, in conjunction with Disbrowe and Lambert, vigorously opposed Cromwell’s taking the title of king, when pressed upon him by the parliament in May 1657; on which account, it is probable, he was soon after removed from his post of lord deputy, which was given to Henry Cromwell, the protector’s younger son: though Fleetwood had afterwards so much regard shewn him, as to he appointed, in December following, one of the other house of parliament.

Upon his brother-in-law Richard Cromwell’s succeeding to the title of protector, he signed the order for his proclamation; but soon discovered his enmity to that succession, being disappointed of the protectorship, which he had expected, and determined that no single person should be his superior. He joined therefore with the discontented officers of the army in deposing Richard, after he had persuaded him to dissolve his parliament; and invited the members of the long parliament, who had continued sitting till April 20, 1653, when they were dissolved by Oliver Cromwell, to return to the exercise of their trust. Upon their meeting in May 1659, he was chosen one of the council of state, and the next month made lieutenant general of the forces; which post he held till Oct. 12 following, when he was appointed one of the commissioners to govern all the forces; and on the 17th of that month was nominated by the general council of state, commander in chief of all the forces. But in December 1659, finding that his interest declined in the army, who were now zealous to have the parliament sit again in honour, freedom, and safety, and that this, concurring with the general temper of the nation, would evidently restore the king, he was advised by Whitelocke to send immediately some person of trust to his majesty at Breda, with offers of restoring him to his rights, and by that means anticipate Monk, who had undoubtedly the same design. Fleetwood in return asked Whiteiocke, whether he was willing to undertake that employment; who consenting, it was agreed that he should prepare himself for the journey that evening or the^ next morning, while the general and his friends should draw up instructions for him. But sir Henry Vane, general Disbrowe, and col. Berry, coming in at that critical moment, diverted Fleetwood from this resolution; who alledged, that those gentlemen had reminded him of his promise, not to attempt any such affair without general Lambert’s consent; while Whitelocke, on the other hand, represented to him that Lambert was at too great a distance to give his assent to a business which must be immediately acted, and was of the utmost importance to himself and his friends. He appears, indeed, before that time, to have entertained some design of espousing the king’s interests, if he had had resolution to execute it; for lord Mordaunt, in a letter to the king, dated from Calais, October 11, 1659, asserts, that Fleetwood then 1 looked upon his majesty’s restoration as so clearly his interest as well as his duty, that he would have declared himself publicly, if the king or the duke of York had landed; and that although that engagement failed, he was still ready to come in to his majesty, whensoever he should attempt in person. Sir Edward Hyde likewise, in a letter to the marquis of Ormonde from Brussels of the same date, rves, that the general made then great professions of being converted, and of his resolution to serve the king upon the first opportunity. But the same noble writer, in his “History of the Rebellion,” represents Fleetwood as “a weak man, though very popular with all the praying part of the army, whom Lambert knew well how to govern, as Cromwell had done Fairfax, and then in like manner to lay him aside;” and that amidst tbo several desertions of the soldiers from the interests of their officers to the parliament in December 1659, he remained still in consultation with the “committee of safety;” and when intelligence was brought of any murmur among the soldiers, by which a revolt might ensue, and he was desired to go among them to confirm them, he would fall upon his knees to his prayers, and could hardly be prevailed with to go to them. Besides, when he was among them, ancj in the middle of any discourse, he would invite them all to prayers, and put himself upon his Icnees before them. And when some of his friends importuned him to appear more vigorous in the charge he possessed, without which they must be all destroyed, they could get no other answer from him than that “God had spit in his face, and would not hear him.” So that it became no great wonder why Lambert had preferred him to the office of general, and been content with the second command for himself.

Upon the restoration he was one of the persons excepted out of the general act of pardon and indemnity, to suffer such pains, penalties, and forfeitures, not extending to life, as should be inflicted on them by an act to be made for that purpose. The remainder of his life he spent in great obscurity among his friends at Stoke-Newington, near London, where he died soon after the revolution, leaving issue by his second wife, Frances, daughter of Solomon Smith of Norfolk, esq. one son, Smith Fleetwood, of Feltwell in that county, esq. who marrying Mary, daughter of sir John Hartopp, bart. had two sons, Smith Fleetwood, and Charles Fleetwood, esqrs. General Fleetwood had likewise a daughter, Elizabeth, married to sir John Hartopp, bart

, an English lawyer, and recorder of London in the reign of Elizabeth, was the natural son of Robert Fleetwood, esq. who was the third sou of William Fleetwood, esq. of Hesketh in Lancashire. He had a liberal education, and was for some time of Oxford, whence he went to the Middle Temple, to study the law; and having quick as well as strong parts, became in a short time a very distinguished man in his profession. In 1562 he was elected summer reader, and in 1568 double reader in Lent. His reputation was not confined to the inns of court; for when it was thought necessary to appoint commissioners in the nature of a royal visitation in the dioceses of Oxford, Lincoln, Peterborough, Coventry, and Litchtield, Fleetwood was of the number. In 1569 he became recorder of London. It does not appear whether his interest with the earl of Leicester procured him that place or not; but it is certain that he was considered as a person entirely addicted to that nobleman’s service, for he is styled in one of the bitterest libels of those times, “Leicester’s mad recorder;” insinuating, that he was placed in his office to encourage those of this lord’s faction in the city. He was very zealous against the papists, active in disturbing mass-houses, committing popish priests, and giving informations of their intrigues: so zealous, that once rushing in upon mass at the Portuguese ambassador’s house, he was, for breach of privilege, committed prisoner to the Fleet, though soon released. In 1580 he was made serjeant at law, and in 1592, one of the qneen’s Serjeants; in which post, however, he did not continue long, for he died at his house in Noble-street, Aldersgate, February 28, 1594, and was buried at Great Missenden in Buckinghamshire, where he had purchased an estate. He was married, and had children. Wood says that “he was a learned man, and a good antiquary, but of a marvellous merry and pleasant conceit,” He was farther esteemed an acute politician; which character was most likely to recommend him to his patron Leicester. He was a good popular speaker, and wrote well upon subjects of government. He made a great figure in his profession, being equally celebrated for eloquence as an advocate, and for judgment as a lawyer.

, an English bishop, was descended from the family of Fleetwood just mentioned, and born in the Tower of London, in which his father, JefFery Fleetwood had resided, Jan. 21, 1656. He was educated at Eton, whence he was elected to king’s college in Cambridge. About the time of the revolution he entered into holy orders; and from the first was a celebrated preacher. He was soon after made chaplain to king William and queen Mary; and by the interest of Dr. Godolphin, at that time vice-provost of Eton, and residentiary of St. Paul’s, he was made fellow of that college, and rector of St. Austin’s, London, which is in the gift of the dean and chapter of St. Paul’s. Soon after he obtained also the lecture of St. Dunstan’s in the West, probably by his great reputation and merit as a preacher. In 1691 he published, 1. “Inscriptionum Antiquarum Sylloge,” &c. 8vo. This collection of ancient inscriptions consists of two parts: the first, containing remarkable pagan inscriptions collected from Gruter, Keinesius, Spon, and other writers the second, the ancient Christian monuments the whole illustrated with very short notes for the use of the young antiquary. In 1692 he translated into English, revised, and prefixed a preface to, 2. “Jurieu’s plain method of Christian Devotion, laid down in discourses, meditations, and prayers, fitted to the various occasions of a religious life;” the 27th edition of which was printed in 1750. In the mean time he was highly distinguished by his talents for the pulpit, which rendered him so generally admired, that he was frequently called to preach upon the most solemn occasions; as, before the king, queen, lordmayor, &c. In 1701 he published, 3. “An Essay upon Miracles,” 8vo, written in the manner of dialogue, and divided into two discourses. Some singularities in it occasioned it to be animadverted upon by several writers, particularly by Hoadly, in “A Letter to Mr. FleetvVood, 1702;” which letter is reprinted in Hoadly’s tracts, 1715, in 8vo. The author of Fleetwood’s life assures us that the bishop did not give up his opinions, though he disliked, and avoided controversy. This essay is said to contain the substance of what he would have preached at Mr. Boyle’s lectures, in case his health would have permitted him to undertake that task when it was offered him.

About a week before king William’s death, he was nominated to a canonry of Windsor; but the grant not having passed the seals in time, the house or commons addressed the queen to give that canonry to their chaplain. His patron, lord Godolphiri, laid the matter before the queen, who said, that, if king William had given it to Mr. Fleetwood, he should have it; and accordingly he was installed in 1702. In 1704 he published, without his name, a piece entitled, 4. “The Reasonable Communicant; or, an explanation of the doctrine of the sacrament of the Lord’s Supper.” This book, of which there haVe been several editions, has, in the catalogue of the tracts distributed by the society for propagating Christian knowledge, been given to another person; but it is agreed, at length, to be Fleetwood’s. In 1705 he published, in two volumes, 8vo, 5. “Sixteen Practical Discourses upon the relative duties of parents and children, husbands and wives, masters and servants; with three sermons upon the case of Self-murder.” About this time he took a resolution of retiring from the noise and hurry of the town; much to the concern of his friends and admirers. His parishioners of St. Austin’s were so deeply affected with it, that, among other temptations, they offered to keep him a curate but nothing could divert him from his resolution so that he gave up his preferments, and withdrew to Wexham, a small rectory of about 60l. a year in Buckinghamshire. Here he enjoyed the tranquillity and pleasure of that privacy for which he had so much longed, in a commodious house and gardens; and what made this retirement more agreeable, was its nearness to his beloved Eton. Here also he indulged his natural inclination for the study of British history and antiquities, which no man understood better; and, in 1707, gave a specimen of his great skill therein, in 6. “Chrbnicon Preciosum; or, an account of the English money, the price of corn, and other commodities, for the last 600 years. In a letter to a student of the university of Oxford” without his name, but improved ina second edition, with plates, published in 1726.

He did not remain long in this retirement; for, in 1706, upon the death of Beveridge, he was nominated by the queen to the see of St. Asaph, without any solicitation, or even knowledge of his own; so that, as he assured a friend, the first intelligence he had of his promotion was from the Gazette. He was but just gone out from waiting as chaplain, when his predecessor died; upon which one of the ladies of the bed-chamber asking the queen whom she intended to make bishop of St. Asaph her majesty replied, “One whom you will be pleased with whom 3*ou have lately heard preach I intend it for Dr. Fleetwood.” This spontaneous goodness of the queen contributed to reconcile him to the world again; for he thought he saw the hand of God in it, and so was consecrated in June 1708. Tn this station he acted in the most exemplary manner. His biographer tells us, that “his great and clear reputation, his uncommon abilities and unblemished life., which set off the episcopal character with so much lustre, his obliging and easy deportment, free from the least tincture of pride, or shew of superiority, did not only place him above all indecent treatment, which was a great point gained in those unequal times, but procured much reverence and affection to his person from a clergy that almost to a man differed from him in principle.”

In the mean time he preached often before the queen, and several of those sermons were printed. He attended the house of lords constantly, and acted there with dignity and spirit. He visited his diocese; and his charge to his clergy, published in 1710, shews that he was a zealous, but not a furious churchman. Yet he was highly disgusted with the change of the ministry that year, and withdrew from, court. He could not he induced to give any countenance to the measures of the new ministry, though endeavours had been used, and intimations given by the queen herself, who had a great value for him, how pleasing his frequent coming to court would be to her. The same year, he published without his name> a piece entitled, 7. “The Thirteenth Chapter to the Romans vindicated from the abuses put upon it. Written by a Curate of Salop, and directed to the Clergy of that County, and the neighbouring ones of North Wales, to whom the author wisheth patience, moderation, and a good understanding, for half an hour.”* Upon the pretended authority of this chapter, the regal power had been magnified in such a manner, that tyranny might seem the ordinance of God, and the most abject slavery to be founded in the principles of religion. Thfc bishop was highly offended with this doctrine; and in this pamphlet argues, “that this chapter of St. Paul requires of the people any more submission to the higher powers, than the laws of their several countries require.”

Notwithstanding his difference with the ministry, when a fast was appointed to be kept, Jan. 16, 1711-12, he was chosen by the house of lords to preach before them; but, by some means or other getting intelligence that he had censured the peace, they contrived to have the house adjourned beyond that day. This put it indeed out of his power to deliver his sentiments from the pulpit; yet he put the people in possession of them, by sending them from the press. Though without a name, from the spirit and language it was easily known whose sermon it was. It gave offence to some ministers of state, who now only waited for an opportunity to be revenged; and this opportunity the bishop soon gave them, by publishing, 8. “Four Sermons; viz. On the Death of queen Mary, 1694; on the Death of the duke of Gloucester, 1700; on the Death of king William, 1701; on the Queen’s accession to the throne, 1702. With a preface,” 1712, 8vo. This preface, bearing very hard upon those who had the management of public affairs, was made an object of attack, and, upon a motion made for that purpose in the house of commons, an order was made to burn it, which was accordingly done on the 12th of May. The bishop, knowing this to be the effect of party rage, was very little affected with it; but rather pleased to think that the very means they had used to suppress his book, was only a more effectual way of publishing and exciting the whole nation to read it. It was owing to this, certainly, that it was printed in the Spectator, No. 384, and thereby dispersed into several thousand hands. This same year, and indeed before his sermons, he published, but without his name, 9. “The Judgment of the Church of England in the case of LayBaptism, and of Dissenter’s Baptism; by which it appears that she hath not, by any public act of hers, made or declared Lay-Baptism to be invalid. The second edition. With an additional letter from Dr. John Cosin, afterwards bishop of Durham, to Mr. Cordel, who scrupled to communicate with the French Protestants upon some of the modern pretences,” 8vo. This piece was occasioned by the controversy about Lay-Baptism, which was then au object of public notkv. In 1713, he published without his name, 10. “The Life and Miracles of St. Wenefrede, together with her Litanies, with some historical observations made thereon.” In the preface, he declares the motives which induced him to bestow so much pains upon this life of St. Wenefrede; and these were, that the concourse of people to the well which goes by her name was very great that the papists made use of this to influence weak minds that they had lately reprinted a large life of this saint in English; that these considerations might justly affect any protestant divine, and th,at for certain reasons they affected him in particular. Upon the demise of the queen, and the Hanover succession, this prelate had as much reason to expect that his zeal and services should be rewarded, as any of his rank and function: but he did not make any display of his merit, either to the king or his ministers. However, upon the death of Moore, bishop of Ely, in 1714, Tenison, then archbishop of Canterbury, strenuously recommended Fleetwood to the vacant see; and he was accordingly, without the least application from himself directly or indirectly, nominated to it.

We have already mentioned ten publications of this author, besides occasional sermons, of which he published many that were very excellent. There remain yet to be mentioned some pieces of a smaller kind; as, II. “The Counsellor’s Plea for the Divorce of sir G. D. (Downing) and Mrs. F.” 1715. This relates to an affair which was brought before -the house of lords. 12. “Papists not excluded from the Throne upon the account of Religion. Being a vindication of the right reverend lord bishop of Ban go r' a Preservative, &c. in that particular. In a short Dialogue,” 1717. 13. “A Letter from Mr. T. Burdett, who was executed at Tyburn for the murder of capt. Falkner, to some attorneys’ clerks of his acquaintance; written six days before his execution,” 1717. 14. “A Letter td an Inhabitant of the Parish of St. Andrew’s, Holborn, about new ceremonies in the church,” 1717. 15. “A Defence of Praying before Sermon, as directed 'by the 55th canon.” All these were published without his name. The indefatigable labours of this prelate brought him at length into a bad state of health, which made life troublesome to him a good while before his death. He died at Tottenham, in Middlesex, whither he had retired for the benefit of the air, Aug. 4, 1723 and was interred in the cathedral church of Ely, where a monument was erected to him by his lady, who did not long survive him. He left behind him an only son, Dr. Charles Fleetwood, who inherited his paternal estate in Lancashire; and had been presented a few years before by his father, as bishop of Ely, to the great rectory of Cottenham, in Cambridgeshire, which he did not long enjoy.

Bishop Fleetwood’s character was great in every respect. His virtue was not of the fanatical kind, nor was his piety the least tinctured with superstition; yet he cultivated and practised both to perfection. As for his accomplishments, he was inconteslibly the best preacher of his time; and for occasional sermons, may be considered as a model. He was also very learned, but chiefly distinguished as an antiquary. Dr. Hickes acknowledges him as an encourager of his great work entitled “Linguarum Veterum Septentrionalium Thesaurus,” and Mr. Hearne often confesses himself much obliged by many singular instances of his friendship. In the “Richardsoniana,” are two anecdotes of bishop Fleetwood, which we shall not copy, because we doubt their authenticity. If true, they would prove that the religious opinions of our prelate were extremely lax."

, a miscellaneous writer in the sixteenth century, and a classical translator, was a native of London. In 1575 he published a version of the “Bucolics of Virgil,” with notes, a plain and literal translation verse for verse. In 589 he published a new version, both of the “Bucolics and Georgics” with notes, dedicated to John Whitgift, archbishop of Canterbury. This is in the regular Alexandrine verse, without rhyme. He supervised, corrected, and enlarged the second edition of Holinshed’s Chronicle in 1585. He translated “Ælian’s Various History” into English in 1576, which he dedicated to Goodman, dean of Westminster, und^r the title of “Ælian’s Registre of Hystories,” 4to. He published also “Certaine select Epistles of Cicero into English,” Lond. 1576, 4to; and in the same year he imparted to our countrymen a fuller idea of the elegance of the ancient epistle, by his “Panoplie of Epistles from Tully, Isocrates, Pliny, and others,” Lond. 4to. He translated Synesius’s Greek “Panegyric on Baldness,” which had been brought into vogue by Erasmus’s “Moriae Encomium,” Lond. 1579', 12mo; at the end is his “Fable of Hermes.” Among some other pieces he Englished many celebrated books written in Latin about the fifteenth century and at the restoration of learning, which was a frequent practice, after it became fashionable to compose in English, and our writers had begun to find the force and use of their own tongue. Among his original pieces are, 1. “A memorial of the charitable almes deedes of William Lambe, gentleman of the chapel under Henry VIII. and citizen of London,” Lond. 1580, 8vo. 2. “The Battel between the Virtues and Vices,” ibid. 1582, 8vo. 3. “The Diamant of Devotion, in six parts,” ibid. 1586, 12mo. 4. “The Cundyt of Comfort,” 1579, &c. Verses by him are prefixed to various works published in his time. Sir William Cordall, the queen’s solicitor-general, was his chief patron. He had a brother, Samuel, who assisted in compiling the index to Holinshed, and who wrote an elegant Latin life of queen Mary, never printed. He has also a Latin recommendatory poem to Edward Grant’s “Spicilegium of the Greek Tongue,” &c. Lond. 1575, 8vo.

, a dissenting minister, and zealous Socinian, was born at Nottingham in 1698, where he was educated and brought up to trade, after which he studied at Warrington, with a view to enter into the ministry among the dissenters. His proficiency and talents being known to Dr. Thomas, bishop of Winchester, he offered him a living to enter into the church, but this he declined, as inconsistent with the opinions he had formed, and was chosen preacher of a congregation in Bartholomew-close, London, where he continued until 1752. He then became assistant to Dr. James Foster, at Pinners’ -hall, whom he succeeded, and remained sole pastor of that congregation as long as he was able to execute the duties of his office. He died in 1779. Few people, says Dr. Kippis, have written a greater number of pamphlets, some of which being published without his name, were but little noticed by the world; and none of them, we may add, a're now in request. There are, says the same author, instances in which he was singular, not to say whimsical, in his positions. His writings might have been more generally acceptable and useful, if they had been free from a certain quaintness and obscurity of style. Aiming at originality and strength of expression, he often lost perspicuity, and never attained to elegance. The doctor adds, that he was a determined enemy to civil and ecclesiastical tyranny, and a very zealous Socinian.

, an Irish Roman ecclesiastic and writer, the son of capt. Garret Fleming, nearly related to the lords of Slane, was born in the county of Louth, April 17, 1599. Being dedicated by his parents to the church, they sent him at the age of thirteen to Flanders, and placed him under the care of his maternal uncle Christopher Cusack, who was president of the colleges of Doway, Tournay, and other seminaries, founded in those parts for the education of Irish youth in the popish, religion. Having' studied at Doway for some time, he removed to the college of St. Anthony, at Louvaine, where he became a Franciscan, and changed his baptismal name (Christopher) to Patrick, according to a custom then very frequent. In 1623, after completing his philosophical and theological studies, he removed to Rome, but in his way through Paris, happening to become acquainted with Hugh Ward, he prevailed on the latter to undertake writing the Lives of the Irish Saints, and when he arrived at Rome he made large collections from Mss. for the same purpose, which he sent to Ward. At Rome he continued his studies in the Irish college of St. Isidore, and both there and afterwards at Louvaine, was appointed to lecture on philosophy. From Louvaine, where he continued for some years, he removed to Prague, and was appointed first superior and lecturer of divinity, and here he remained until the city was besieged by the elector of Saxony in 1631, when he was obliged to fly with his companion Matthew Hoar; but they had scarcely escaped the Saxon forces, when they were met by some peasants in arms who murdered them, both, Nov. 7. A third companion, Francis Magenis, also a Franciscan, who made his escape on this occasion, wrote an account of Fleming, which is prefixed to his “Collectanea Sacra,” under the title “Historia Martyrii venerabilis fratris Patricii Fleming!,” &c.

Fleming’s chief work was his “Collectanea Sacra,” or Lives of Irish and Scotch Saints, with various tracts in illustration of their history, with notes, commentaries, &c. the whole comprized in a folio volume, printed at Louvaine in 1667. The works of the three abbots Columban, Aileran, and Cumean, which are extant in the “Bibl. Patrum,” are acknowledged to be taken from Fleming. He wrote also, “Vita rev. patris Hugonis Cavelli (Mac-Caghwell) 1626, and abridged a work entitled” Chronicon consecrati Petri Ratisbonoe."

, a Scotch presbyterian clergyman, whose works are still much esteemed in that country, was born at Bathens, or Easter, the seat of the earls of Tweedale, in 1630, where his father, James Fleming, was long a minister of the gospel. He was educated in classics^ philosophy, and divinity, at the universities of Edinburgh and St. Andrew’s, and at the latter studied divinity under the celebrated Samuel Rutherford. His natural parts, according to his biographer, were excellent; hjs understanding quick and penetrating, his judgment clear and profound, and his memory strong. These talents, which he employed in the course of his academical-studies, and especially in theology and ecclesiastical history, recommended hiai to ordination, when in his twenty-third year, and when the church of Scotland was purely presbyterian. His pastoral charge was Cambuslang, in Clydsdale, in which he remained highly venerated by his flock until th^ restoration; but an attempt being then made to establish episcopacy in Scotland, he and such of his brethren as adhered to the presbyterian form of government, were ejected from their livings. After this he resided mostly at Edinburgh, and in Fifeshire until September 1673, when he was apprehended for nonconformity, but was soon liberated, and went to Holland, where he officiated as minister to the Scotch congregation at Rotterdam. He died at this place July 15, 1694, deeply regretted by his flock, as well as by his brethren in Scotland, who considered him. in respect of piety and learning, as a great ornament to his profession. He published a few religious tracts of the practical kind, but is best known by his more elaborate work entitled “The Fulfilling of the Scriptures,” which is in fact, a view of the operations of providence in preserving the church through all the vicissitudes of ecclesiastical history. This was originally published in three parts, separately, which were printed together in a handsome manner, in 1726, folio, with a life prefixed, from which this article is chiefly taken.

, son of the preceding, was born and partly educated in Scotland, but studied afterwards at the universities of Leyden and Utrecht, where he prosecuted all those branches of learning which were deemed necessary to qualify him for the ministerial profession. His first settlement was with the English church at Leyden, whence he afterwards removed to become minister of the Scotch church of Amsterdam. In the course of a few years, he came over to London, and became pastor of a Scotch church in Lothbury, London; urged, as it is said, to make the exchange by king William, who often advised with him on the concerns of his own country, and frequently received him at court. His great learning and talents procured him much respect abroad, and also in this country, where he was esteemed by churchmen and dissenters, as well as by those belonging to the Scotch presbytery. He was on terms of friendship with the archbishop of Canterbury; and was chosen one of the preachers of the lecture, instituted by the merchants of London, at Salters’­hall, every Tuesday. From his early years he was eminently devout; and he xvas firmly attached to the British monarchy and constitution. He died May 24, 1716. His works were numerous, consisting of various sermons, and tracts; particularly, 1. “The History of Hereditary Right.” 2. “The Mirror of Divine Love,” in which is a dramatic poem, called the “Monarchical Image, or Nebuchadnezzar’s Dream.” 3. “Theocraty, or Divine Government of Nations.” 4. “A practical discourse on the death of king William.” 5. “Christology, or a discourse concerning Christ.” 6. “The Rod of the Sword.” 7. “Speculum Davidicum Redivivum, or the Divine right of the Revolution evinced and applied,” and “Discourses on several subjects, viz. the Rise and Fall of Papacy,” c. published in 1701. In the dedication of this last mentioned work to lord Carmichael, principal secretary of state for Scotland, and chancellor of the college of Glasgow, Mr. Fleming mentions his being related to his lordship, and acknowledges his obligations for the offer of so considerable au office as that of principal of the college of Glasgow; which very honourable and beneficial situation he declined, being a dissenter from the church of Scotland. This work, some years ago, was very much the subject of public attention, from the remarkable coincidence between Fleming’s conjectural interpretation of a prophecy in the Revelations, which he supposed to relate to the humbling of the French monarchy, about 1794, and the calamitous events which, within a year of that very period, befel the unhappy Louis XVI. There being at that time a very numerous party in this and other countries, whose object was the humbling of every monarchy and established government, this lucky conjecture of Mr. Fleming’s encouraged the appearance of various prophets (at the head of whom was a lunatic, still in confinement), and their publications for a considerable time agitated the public mind, and produced, in some degree, what was intended, a damp on the spirits of the credulous, and a reluctance to support the war. This, however, like every other popular delusion, was not of long duration, and more recent events have given a happier direction to public sentiment.

, an English prelate, and the founder of Lincoln college, Oxford, descended from an ancient family, was born at Crofton iti Yorkshire, and educated at University college, Oxford, where his extraordinary proficiency in logic and philosophy procured him higher degrees than were then usually conferred. In 1406 he was presented to the prebend of South Newbold, in the church of York, and next year served the office of proctor in the university. The copy of the statutes belonging to the duties of junior proctor, which he caused to be transcribed, is still preserved among the archives. Soon after taking his master’s degree, he professed a zealous attachment to the principles by which Wickliff was endeavouring to oppose the established religion, and argued with so much ability as to make many converts, some of whom were persons of high distinction. By what means he was induced to change His opinion, and display equal or greater zeal against the reformation, is not known. In 1396, when a student in theology, or scholar, we find his name among the other Oxford men who condemned Wicklif 's doctrines, and it is certain, that when he speculated on the foundation of a college, it was for the express purpose of educating divines who were to exert their talents against the heresy of that reformer.

In 1410, being then rector of Boston in Lincolnshire, he exchanged his prebend of South Newbold for that of Langford in the cathedral church of York, and on April 28, 1420, was promoted to the see of Lincoln. In 1424 he was sent to the council of Sienna, where, in a dispute about precedency, he vindicated the honour and superiority of his country, against the Spanish, French, and Scotch deputies. This council was called to continue the proceedings of that of Constance against the Hussites, and other continental reformers, and our prelate distinguished himself so much as to become a favourite with Pope Martin V. who would have promoted him to be archbishop of York, had not the king as well as the dean and chapter opposed his -election with such firmness as to oblige the pope to yield. Flemming consequently remained in his diocese of Lincoln. In 1428, he executed that decree of the council of Constance which ordered that the bones of Wicklilf should be taken up and burned; the harmless remains of a man whom he once honoured with the warmth of his zeal, and supported with the vigour of his talents.

Whatever disappointment he might feel in not succeeding to the archbishopric of York, it does not appear to have interfered with his generous design of founding a college; but his full intentions were frustrated by his death, which took place at Sleford, Jan. 25, 1430-31. He was interred in Lincoln cathedral, where a tomb was erected with a long epitaph in monkish rhime, some part of which was written by himself. The only information it conveys is, that the pr>pe consecrated him bishop of Lincoln with his own hand. In 1427 he obtained the royal licence to found a college or society of one warden or rector, seven, scholars, and two chaplains, in the church of All Saints in Oxford, which was then under his own patronage as bishop of Lincoln; and to unite, annex, and incorporate that church with the churches of St. Mildred and St. Michael, at the north-gate, which were likewise in his gift, and these churches, so united, were to be named the church of All Saints, and erected into a collegiate church or college. A certain chantry in the chapel of St. Anne, within the said church, was to be annexed, under thje patronage of the mayors of Oxford, provided that daily mass, &c. was duly performed in the chapel for the souls of the founder and others. There were also to be two chaplains, elected and removeable at the pleasure of the rector, who were to officiate in the said church with the cure of souls. The college was to be called, the College of the Blessed Virgin Mary and All Saints Lincoln, in the university of Oxford. The rector and scholars were also to be perpetual parsons of the said church, and were empowered to purchase lands, rents, and possessions, to the yearly value of ten pounds. This licence was dated Oct. 12, 1427. The founder then employed John Baysham, Nicholas Wynbush, and William Chamherlayn, clerks (who were intended to be of the number of his scholars), to purchase ground for the erection of buildings. The first purchase they made was a tenement called Deep Hall, situated in St. Mildred’s lane, between St. Mildred’s church on the west, and a garden on the east; but the founder’s death interrupting their progress, the society resided in Deep Hall, as it stood, maintained by the revenues of the churches above-mentioned, and the money left by the founder. They had as yet, however, no fixed statutes for their government, and were kept together merely at the discretion of the rectors, whose judicious conduct, joined to the utility of the institution, induced some benefactors to augment their revenues by gifts of lands and money. Among these were, John Forest, dean of Wells, who about 1437 built the chapel, library, hall, and kitchen, John Southam, archdeacon of Oxford, William Findarne,esq. cardinal Beaufort, and John Buketot; and these were followed by one who has been allowed to share the honours of foundership, Thomas Rotheram, bishop of Lincoln, of whom some account will be given, hereafter.

, nephew to the preceding, was educated at Oxford, and probably in Lincoln college, then newly founded by his uncle. On Jan. 21, 1451, he was admitted dean of Lincoln, being much admired for his learning. He afterwards went to Italy, and visited the principal universities; and among other eminent men, he attended the lectures of the celebrated orator and poet Baptista Guarini, professor of the Greek and Latin languages at Ferrara. From this place he went to Rome, >vhere he remained a year or two, and became acquainted with several learned men, particularly Earth. Platina, librarian of the Vatican. He became also known to pope Sixtus IV, in whose praise, during a summer’s recess at Tibur, or Tivoli, he composed a Latin poem in two books inscribed to his holiness; who was so pleased with it, that he made the author his protonotary. Of this poem, entitled “Lucubrationes Tiburtinae,” we have only a few verses quoted by Leland, and praised by him for the style. At his return from Italy, he brought over with him several books curiously illuminated, which he bequeathed to Lincoln college library, with some of his own composition, among which Leland, Bale, and Pits mention “Dictionarium Graeco-Latinum;” “Carolina diversi generis,” and “Epistolarum ad diversos, liber unus.” On Sept. 27, 1467, he was installed into the prebend of Leigh ton -man or, in the cathedral church of Lincoln, which he exchanged, Dec. 3, 1478, for that of Leighton-Bosard; and he fotmded in this cathedral, a chantry for two chaplains. This learned man died Aug. 12, 1483, and was buried near bishop Flemming, his relation.

, a man of some celebrity and talents, was born at Little Bronghton, in the parish of Bridekirk, Cumberland, in 1714. His father, who was a tobacco-pipe maker, had a small paternal estate; on which, with his trade, he was barely enabled to live, and bring up his family, without their becoming burthensome to their parish. It is not certain, that his son Abraham ever went to any school, although there is a tradition, that, very early in life, before he was able to do any work, his parents once spared him for three weeks, to attend a school in the village, where y^uth were taught at the rate of a shilling for the quarter. If this report be well-founded, all the education he ever had that was paid for, cost three-pence. By some means or other however he learned to read: and, before he haJ. arrived at manhood, he had also learned to write. With these humble attainments to set out with, it does him great honour that, at length by dint of industry alone, he became a man of science and a man of learning. He was of a thinking, inquisitive mind; and, having taught himself arithmetic, in preference to any other science, only because he met with a book of arithmetic and no other, for the same reason he applied himself to mathematical investigations. Whatever he attempted, he attempted with all hio might, and pursued with unwearied diligence. In the day-time, he was employed in husbandry, or in making pipes: and, at night, eagerly betook himself to work the theorems (which word he long used to pronounce theorems) on which, during the day, he had been intensely ruminating. Often has he sat up all night, delineating diagrams; to the serious grief of his parents, who considered only the apparent unprofitableness of such pursuits, and the certain loss of the lump or two of cannel-coal, incurred by his lucubrations. Hardly ever, even in the subsequent more prosperous periods of his life, did he aspire to any thing beyond a rush light. The parents, contented in their ignorance, felt no ambition to have their son pass through life otherwise than they had done, in the midst of hard work and hard fare. And, as his midnight studies, and abstractedness of mind, seemed not to them likely to qualify him either to work more, or to eat less, they thought it their duty, and for his interest, to discountenance and discourage his passion for theorems his books and his slate were hid and he was double-tasked with labour. It was this poor man’s fate to begin and continue through life his pursuit after knowledge, under almost every possible disadvantage: yet difficulties and discouragements seemed but to increase his ardour. He used to relate, with vast self-complacence and satisfaction, a device he had formed, by which he flattered himself he should be permitted to stick to his studies without interruption, at his few intervals of leisure. He married early; and his wife, adopting the opinions and maxims of his parents, was no friend to studies, which appeared to her little likely to lead to any thing that might help to feed and clothe themselves, or their children. Over his house of one room, there was a kind of loft, or hoarded floor, (in Cumberland called a banks), which, however, had neither door, window, nor stairs. Hither, by means of a single rope, which he always drew up after him, he mounted with his book and his slate; and here he went through Euclid. This anecdote (says his biographer) is but simple, yet it is not insignificant.

At about the age of thirty, even his wife began to be persuaded, that learning, according to the old saw, may sometimes be a substitute for house and land, and consented to his relinquishing his manual labours, and setting up as a schoolmaster. For several years, he was a teacher of mathematics of considerable reputation; and many respectable yoimg men were his pupils. Still pursuing knowledge wherever knowledge was to be found, Abraham (now Mr.) Fletcher, became a botanist, as well as a mathematician: but he studied the properties, rather than the classification of plants; and made many experiments to ascertain their medical virtues. Few men, it is believed, have lately made a greater proficiency than he did, in this (now perhaps too much neglected) department of science: and he was soon qualified to commence doctor, as well as schoolmaster. It is true, indeed, he practised chiefly, if not solely, with decoctions, or diet-drinks: yet with these, he either performed, or got the reputation of performing, many extraordinary cures; and had no small practice. Doctor Fletcher was particularly famed for his skill and success in hypochondriacal cases; and, had he been as able to describe, as he was to relieve and cure such cases, many things in this way occurred in his practice, to which even the most learned might have attended with advantage. He was also deeply versant in astrological predictions, and is said to have foretold the time of his own death, within a few days. We have more pleasure, however, in adding that Mr. Fletcher, with all his attention to intellectual attainments, never was inattentive to the duties of his relative station. He was both industrious and economical, and was enabled to leave his large family the sum of 4000l. three-fourths of which were of his own earning. He died Jan. 1, 1793. In 1762 he published a large mathematical work, in 8vo, called “The Universal Measurer,” which, as a collection of mathematical knowledge, is said to possess very great merit.

, an eminent Scotch politician, and ranked among the patriots of that country, was the son of sir Robert Fletcher of Saltown, in Scotland, and was born in 16S3. Being left fatherless while he was a child, he was placed under the tuition of Dr. Gilbert Bunu-t, then rector of Saltown, from whom he is supposed to have imbibed some of those political principles which he afterwards carried to a high degree of enthusiasm. He then spent some years of his youth in foreign travel, and first appeared as a public character in the station of a commissioner for East Lothian in the Scotch parliament, but his opposition to the arbitrary measures of the court, rendered it necessary to withdraw to Holland; and upon being cited to appear by a summons from the lords of the council, which it was known he could not obey, he was outlawed, and his estate confiscated. In 1683 he came over to England to assist, with his friend Mr. Baillie of Jerviswood, in the consultations held among the friends of liberty in England and Scotland, to concert measures for their common security; and by his prudence and address he avoided giving any pretext to the ministry for his apprehension. He returned to the continent, and in 1685 engaged in the enterprise of the duke of Monmouth. He landed in the west of England, but was obliged to quit the country again on account of a dispute which he had with a man who insulted him, and whom he shot dead, his temper being at all times most irascible. From England he went to Spain, and afterwards passed into Hungary, where he engaged in the war with the Turks, and distinguished himself by his valour and skill. The interest which he took in the fate of his country soon brought him back to join in the conferences which were held among the Scotch refugees in Holland, for the purpose of effecting a revolution; and upon that event taking place, he returned to Scotland, and resumed the possession of his estate. He was a member of the convention for the settlement of the new government in Scotland, and in all his political conduct he shewed himself the zealous asserter of the liberties of the people, without any regard to party distinction, and free from all views of his own interest. In 1698 he printed “A Discourse of Government with relation to Militias.” Also “Two Discourses concerning the Affairs of Scotland.” In one of these he suggests a plan for providing for the poor by domestic slavery, a most preposterous plan to be proposed by a friend to liberty. When a bill was brought into the parliament of Scotland for a supply to the crowq, in 1703, he moved that, previously to this, or to any other business, the house should consider what acts were necessary to secure their religion and liberties in case of the queen’s death, and he proposed various limitations of the prerogative, which were received in the “Act of Security,” passed through his exertions into a law, but rendered ineffectual by the subsequent union, to which he was a determined enemy. He died at London in 1716. His publications, and some of his speeches, were collected in one volume octavo, entitled, “The Political Works of Andrew Fletcher, Ksquire,” and his Life was lately published by the earl of Burhan, with a very high panegyric on his political virtues. Another very high character of him may be seen in our authority.

, bishop of Bristol, Worcester, and London, is generally said to have been a native of Kent, and as such is placed by Fuller among the Worthies of that county, where that name has been very common; otherwise, as he was one of the first fellows of Bene‘t college, Cambridge, upon archbishop Parker’s foundation, there would have been reason to suppose him a native either of Norwich or Norfolk, the Parker fellowships being appropriated to the natives of those places. He was, however, a scholar of Trinity college in 1563, where (as he proceeded M. A. and removed to Bene’t college in 1569) he had probably been admitted the year before. On his removing to Bene't, he entered upon the business of pupils, and other offices of the college; and in 1572 went to Oxford, where he was incorporated A. M. In September of that year, he was instituted to the prebend of Islington in th church of St. Paul, London, upon the presentation of Matthew Parker, gent, son to the archbishop, who probably had the patronage of that turn made over to him by bishop Grindal, in order to carry on his father’s scheme of annexing prebends to the fellowships he had founded. Accordingly he held this with his fellowship; and was made president upon Mr. Norgate’s promotion to the mastership the year following, but seems to have left the college soon after, with a testimonial of his learning and good behaviour, as well as of his having acquitted himself with credit in the offices of the college, in the public schools, and in the pulpit. In 1581 he proceeded D. D. and became chaplain to the queen, to whom he had been rero.nmcMiJed by archbishop Whitgift for the deanry of Windsor, but she chose rather to bestow on him that of Peterborough in 1583. In 1585, the prebend of SuttonLonga in the church of Lincoln was given to him, and he was likewise parson of Aidcrkirke in that diocese, and was presented by sir Thomas Cecil to the church of Barnack. Soon after this, he was appointed to attend upon the execution of Mary queen of Scots, at Fotheringhay castle, in which office some biographers have censured him for his endeavouring to bring that unhappy princess over to the protestant religion. In his speech, however, to her, as preserved by Strype, we see nothing more than an honest zeal, which perhaps men of cautious tempers would have reserved for a more promising opportunity.

In 1589, queen Elizabeth, with whom he was in high favour, promoted him to the bishopric of Bristol, and about the same time made him her almoner. Sir John Harrington says that he took this see on condition to lease out the revenues to courtiers, an accusation to which Browne Willis seems inclined to give credit. He was, however, translated to Worcester in 1592, and about two years after that to London, in consequence of his particular solicitation to the lord treasurer. Soon after he was promoted to the see of London, he gave out twenty-seven articles of inquiry to the churchwardens upon his primary visitation; and by these means, according to Neal, many of the nonconformists, or rather puritans, as they were at this time called, suffered imprisonment. But he was soon interrupted in these proceedings, by marrying, for his second wife, the widow of sir John Baker, of Sisingherst in Kent, a very handsome woman. Queen Elizabeth, who had an extreme aversion to the clergy’s marrying, was highly offended at the bishop. She thought it very indecent for an elderly clergyman, a bishop, and one that had already had one wife, to marry a second: and gave such a loose to her indignation, that, not content with forbidding him her presence, she ordered archbishop Whitgift to suspend him from the exercise of his episcopal function, which was accordingly done. He was afterwards restored to his bishopric, and in some measure to the queen’s favour: yet the disgrace sat so heavy on his mind, that it is thought to have hastened his end. He died suddenly in his chair, at his house in London, June 15, 1596; being, to all appearance, well, sick, and dead, in a quarter of an hour. He was an immoderate taker of tobacco; the qualities of which being then not well known, and supposed to have something poisonous in them, occasioned Camden to impute his death to it, as he does in his Annals of Elizabeth’s reign. He was buried in his cathedral, near bishop Aylmer, but without any monument. Of his character it is not easy to form a very favourable judgment, nor does it appear that he is censurable for any great errors, except that he was perhaps too compliant with some of the caprices of his royal mUiress His appearance and person wr re stately, which made him be called Prcsul spttndidus, hut this did not arise from pride, as those who were most intimate with him commended his modesty and humility. There are no works ascribed to his pen, except some regulations for the better government or his diocese, and the reformation of his spiritual courts, which are printed among the records in Collier’s “Ecclesiastical History.” By his first wife, whose name is not known, he had the more celebrated subject of the following article.

, an English dramatic writer, the son of the preceding, is said to have been born in Northamptonshire, in 1576, while his father was dean of Peterborough, but as this does not correspond with his age at the time of his death, it is more probable he was a native of London, a person of that name and place being admitted pensioner of Bene't college, Oct. 15, 1591, when he must have been about fifteen, the usual age of admission in those days. He was made one of the bible clerks in 15i>3, but his further progress in the university cannot be traced, nor how long he remained in it. On his arrival in London he became acquainted, and wrote plays jointly with Beaumont; and Wood says that he assisted Ben Jouson in a comedy called “The Widow.” After Beaumont’s death, which happened in 1615, he is said to have consulted Shirley, in forming the plots of several of nis plays; but which those were, we have no means of discovering. Beaumont and Fletcher, however, wrote plays in concert, though it is not known what share each bore in forming the plots, writing the scenes, &c. and the general opinion is, that Beaumont’s judgment was usually employed in correcting and retrenching the superfluities of Fletcher’s wit. Yet, if Winstanley may be credited, the former had his share likewise in the drama, in forming the plots, and writing the scenes: for that author relates, that these poets meeting once at a tavern, in order to form the rude draught of a tragedy, Fletcher undertook to kill the king; and that his words being overheard by a waiter, they were seized and charged with high treason: till the mistake soon appearing, and that the plot was only against a theatrical king, the affair ended in mirth. Some farther, and perhaps preferable, remarks on their respective shares may be seen in our account of Beaumont (vol. IV.) Fletcher survived Beaumont some years, but died of the plague at London in 1625, and was interred in St. Mary Overy’s church in Southwark . Sir Aston Cockaine among his poems has an epitaph on Fletcher and Massinger, who, he, tells us, he both buried there in one grave though Wood informs us, from the parish-register there, that Massinger was buried, not in the church, but in one of the four yards belonging to it For a judgment upon this author, Edward Philips observes, that “he was one of the happy triumvirate of the chief dramatic poets of our nation in the last foregoing age, among whom there might be said to be a symmetry of perfection, while each excelled in his peculiar way Ben Jonson in his elaborate pains and knowledge of authors Shakspeare in his pure vein of wit and natural poetic height and Fletcher in a courtly elegance and genteel familiarity of style, and withal a wit and invention so overflowing, that the luxuriant branches thereof were fre^ quently thought convenient to be lopped off by his almost inseparable companion Francis Beaumont.” Dryden tells us, that Beaumont and Fletcher’s plays in his time were the most pleasing and frequent entertainments, two of theirs being acted through the year for one of Shakspeare’s or Jonson’s; and the reason he assigns is, because there is a certain gaiety in their comedies, and a pathos in their most serious plays, which suits generally with all men’s humours. The case, however, is now reversed, for Beaumont and Fletcher are not acted above once for fifty times that the plays of Shakspeare are represented. Their merit, however, is undoubted; and though it could not avert the censure of the cynical Rymer, has been acknowledged by our greatest poets. Their dramas are full of fancy and variety, interspersed with beautiful passages of genuine poetry; but there is not the nice discrimination of character, nor the strict adherence to nature, that we justly admire in Shakspeare. Some of Beaumont and Fletcher’s plays were printed in 4to, during the lives of their authors; and in 1645, twenty years after Fletcher’s death, there was published a folio collection of them. The first edition of all their plays, amounting to upwards of fifty, was published in 1679, folio. Another edition was published in 1711, in seven volumes, 8vo. Another in 1751, in ten volumes, 8vo. Another by Colman, also in ten volumes, in 1778.

, brother to bishop Fletcher, and a native of the same county, was a very ingenious man. He received his education at Eton; and, in 1565, was elected thence to KingVcollege in Cambridge, where he took a bachelor’s of arts degree in 1596, a master’s in 1573, and that of LL. D. in 1581. He was, says Wood, an excellent poet, and a very accomplished man; and his abilities recommending him to queen Elizabeth, he was employed by her as a commissioner into Scotland, Germany, and the Low Countries. Of his poetical talent, however, no proofs are known to be extant. In 1588, he was sent ambassador to Russia; not only to conclude a league with the emperor there, but also to re-establish and put into good order the decayed trade of our Russia company. He met, at first, with a cold reception, and even rough usage: for the Dutch, envying the exclusive privilege which the Russia company enjoyed of trading thither, had excited prejudices against them: and a false rumour then spread, of our fleet being totally destroyed by the Spanish armada, had created in the czar a contempt for the English, and a presumption that he might safely injure those who were not in a capacity to take revenge. But the ambassador soon effaced those impressions; and having obtained advantageous conditions, returned to England with safety and honour. Fuller says, that upon his arrival at London, “he sent for an intimate friend, with whom he heartily expressed his thankfulness to God for his safe return from so great a danger. For the poets cannot fancy Ulysses more glad to be come out of the den of Polyphemus, than he was to be rid of the power of such a barbarous prince: who counting himself, by a proud and voluntary mistake, emperor of all nations, cared not for the law of all nations; and who was so habited in blood, that, had he cut off this ambassador’s head, he and his friends might have sought their own amends, but the question is, where they would have found it.” Shortly after his return, he was made secretary to the city of London, and a master of the Court of Requests: and, in June 1597, treasurer of St. Paul’s. This worthy person died in 1610, in the parish of St. Catherine Colman, Fenchurch-street; and was probably buried in that church. From the observations he had made during his embassy into Russia, he drew up a curious account, “Of the Russe Commonwealth: or manner of Government by the Russe Emperor, commonly called the Emperor of Moskovia, with the manners and fashions of the people of that country,” 1590, 8vo. This work was quickly suppressed, lest it might give offence to a prince in amity with England: but it was reprinted in 1643, 12mo, and is inserted in Hakluyt’s “Navigations, Voyages,” &c. vol. I. only a little contracted. Camden, speaking of this book, styles it “libellum in quo plurima observanda.” Dr. Fletcher also wrote, “A Discourse concerning the Tartars,” the object of which was to prove that they are the Israelites, or ten tribes, which being captivated by Salmanasser, were transplanted into Media. This opinion was afterwards adopted by Whiston, who printed the discourse in the first volume of his curious “Memoirs.”

Dr. Fletcher left two sons, Giles and Phineas. The eldest, Giles, born, according to Mr. Ellis’ s conjecture, in 1588, was educated at Trinity college, Cambridge, where he took the degree of bachelor of divinity, and died at his living of Alderton, in Suffolk, in 1623. His widow married afterwards the rev. Ramsay, minister of Rougham, Norfolk. Winstanley and Jacob, who in this case have robbed one another, instead of better authorities, divide the two brothers into three, and assign Giles’s Poem of “Christ’s Victory” to two authors.

Phineas was educated at Eton, and admitted a scholar of King’s-college, Cambridge, in 1600, where, in 1604, he frook his bachelor’s degree, and his master’s in 1608. After going into the church, he was presented, in 1621, to the living of Hilgay, in Norfolk, by sir Henry Willoughby, bart. and according to Elomefield, the historian of Norfolk, he held this living twenty-nine years. Mr. Ellis conjectures that he was born in 1584, and died about 1650. Besides the poems which are added to the last edition of the “English Poets,” he was the author of a dramatic piece, entitled “Sicelides,” which was performed at King’s college, Cambridge, and printed in 1631. A manuscript copy is in the British Museum. The editor of the Biographm Dramatica informs us, that “it was intended originally to be performed before king James the First, on the thirteenth of March, 1614; but his majesty leaving the university sooner, it was net then represented. The serious parts of it are mostly written in rhyme, with choruses between the acts. Some of the incidents are borrowed from Ovid, and some from the Orlando Furioso.” He published also, at Cambridge, in 1632, some account of the lives of the founders and other learned men of that university, under the title of “De Literatis antique Britanniae, praesertim qui doctrina claruerunt, quique collegia Cantabrigise fundarunt.”

The only production we have of Giles Fletcher is entitled “Christ’s Victory and Triumph in Heaven and Earth over and after Death,” Cambridge, 1610, 4to, in four parts, and written in stanzas of eight lines. It was reprinted in 1632, again in 1640, and in 1783, along with Phineas Fletcher’s “Purple Island;” but many unwarrantable liberties have been taken in modernizing the language of this last edition. Mr. Headley, who has bestowed more attention than any modern critic on the works of the Fletchers, pronounces the “Christ’s Victory” to be a rich and picturesque poem, and on a much happier subject than the “Purple Island,” yet unenlivened by personification. He has also very ingeniously pointed out some resemblances which prove that Milton owed considerable obligations to the Fletchers.

The works of Phineas Fletcher, including the “Purple Island, or the Isle of Man;” the * Piscatory Eclogues;“and Miscellanies, were published at Cambridge in 1633, 4to. The only part that has been correctly reprinted is the” Piscatory Eclogues,“published at Edinburgh in 1771, by an anonymous editor. There are few of the old poets whom Mr. Headley seems more anxious to revive than Phinean Fletcher, and he has examined his claims to lasting fame with much acuteness, yet, perhaps, not without bomewhat of that peculiar prejudice which seems to pervade many of the critical essays of this truly ingenious and amiable young man. Having at a very early period of life commenced the perusal of the ancient English poets, his enthusiasm carried him back to their times, their imbits, and their language. Froai pardoning their quaintnesses, he proceeded to admire them, and has in some instances placed among the most striking proofs of invention, many of those antitheses and conceits which modern refinement does not easily tolerate. Stiil, taste and judgment are generally predominant in the following criticism.” Were the celebrated Mr. Pott compelled to read a lecture upon the anatomy of the human frame at large, in a regular set of stanzas, it is much to be questioned whether he could make himself understood by the most apprehensive author, without the advantage of professional knowledge. FJetrher seems to have undertaken a nearly similar task, as the rive first cantos of The Purple Island are almost entirely taken up with an explanation of the title; in the course of which the reader forgets the poet, and is sickened' with the anatomist. Such minute attention to this part of the subject was a material error in judgment; for which, however, ample amends is made in what follows. Nor is Fletcher wholly undeserving of praise for the intelligibility with which he has struggled through his difficulties, for his uncommon command of words, and facility of metre. After describing the body, he proceeds to personify the passions and intellectual faculties. Here fatigued attention is not merely relieved, but fascinated and enraptured; and notwithstanding his figures, in many instances, are too arbitrary and fantastic in their habiliments, often disproportioned and over-done, sometimes lost in a superfluity of glaring colours, and the several characters, in general, by no means sufficiently kept apart; yet, amid such a profusion of images, many are distinguished by a boldness of outline, a majesty of manner, a brilliancy of colouring, a distinctness and propriety of attribute, and an air of life, that we look for in vain in modern productions, and that rival, if not surpass, what we meet with of the kind even in Spenser, from whom our author caught his inspiration. After exerting his creative powers on this department of his subject, the virtues and better qualities of the heart, under their leader Eclecta, or Intellect, are attacked by the vices: a battle ensues, and the latter are vanquished, after a vigorous opposition, through the interference of an angel, who appears at the prayers of Eclecta. The poet here abruptly takes an opportunity of paying a fulsome, and unpardonable compliment to James the First (stanza 55, canto 12), on that account perhaps the most unpalatable passage in the book. From Fletcher’s dedication of this his poem, with the Piscatory Eclogues and Miscellanies, to his friend Edmund Beniowes, it seems that they were written very early? as he calls them ' raw essays of ray very unripe years, and almost childhood.* It is to his honour that Milton read and imitated him, as every attentive reader or* both poets must soon discover. He is eminently entitled to a very high rank among our old English classics. Quarles, in his verses prefixed to The Purple Island, hints that he had a poem on a similar subject in agitation, but was prevented from pursuing it by finding it had got into other hands. In a map to one of his Emblems are these names of places, London, Finchfield, Roxwell, and Httgay: edit. 1669."

, zm evninmt French hydrographer, was born at Lyons in 1738, of a fatally distinguished in the profession of the law, but devoted his attention from his infancy to marine studies. He arrived at the rank of a naval captain in the French service, and was employed many years before the revolution in the office of their marine, under the title of director of the ports and arsenals. His countrymen impute to his labours and skill the figure which the French navy was enabled to make in the American war. In 1790 he was appointed minister of the marine, and filled that important situation with great integrity; but dreading the influence of popular opinion, he gave in his resignation in 1791, when the mob were gaining a fatal ascendancy. He had before requested of the king to separate the colonial department of the marine from the other, and make it a distinct office, with which his majesty did not at that time think it necessary to comply. During his administration he published a work to illustrate the history of navigation, entitled “Decouvertes des Francois en 1768 et 1769, dans le sud-est de la Nouvelle-Guine,” Paris, 1790, 4to; the professed object of which is to restore to the French navigators, and particularly to Bougainville, the merit of those discoveries of which the English have endeavoured to deprive them.

Fleurieu’s retirement from public life did not last long, as the king, who had a high opinion not only of his talents, but of his moral character, appointed him, in April 1792, tutor to the dauphin. In 1793, however, he was arrested by the revolutionary party, and imprisoned in the Madelonettes. By what means he escaped the general murder of all men of talents and worth we are not told. In 1797 he was again appointed to his old post of minister of marine, and was at the same time chosen deputy of the department of the Seine in the council of ancients, to which he was also secretary, but lost both of these offices in September following by a new turn of public arrangements. In 1799 Bonaparte appointed him a member of the council of state, of the section of the marine, in tend ant-general of his horse, and grand officer of the legion of honour. In July 1805 he resigned the office of intendant, and was made governor of the Thuilleries, having also just before been chosen member of the institute, and of the board of longitude. The improvements which his country men say he?, made in this last research, and the obligations the English owe to him, are detailed in a Voyage which he printed in 1774, 2 vols. 8vo, which he performed in 1768 and by order of the king, in order to prove some time-pieces invented by Berthoud. In 1800 he was the editor of Marchand’s < Voyage autour du monde.“His latter years were employed in completing a grand” Hydrographic Atlas," which was to have been published in 1811, but this was prevented by his death, Aug. 18, 1810. He had expended above 200,000 franks on this work. His countrymen speak of his talents with profound regard, and his private character appears to have been equally praiseworthy.

, the celebrated cardinal of that name, was born in 1653, at Lodeve in Languedoc, but was brought to Paris at the age of six, and there educated for the church. He distinguished himself in the progress of his studies; and when he began to mix with the world, appeared there with the natural advantages of a handsome figure, pleasing address, and wellmanaged wit. His first preferment was that of a canon of Montpellier; he was also a doctor of the Sorbonne. But his friends becoming numerous, much interest was made for him, and in 1698, Louis XIV. named him bishop of Frejus. “I have made you wait a long time,” said the king, “but you have so many friends, that I was determined to stay till I could have the sole merit of preferring you.” Louis XIV. a little before he died, appointed him preceptor to his grandson, in which office he succeeded Bossuet and Fenelon. In 1726 he was made cardinal, and soon after advanced to the place of prime-minister. He was then turned seventy. Yet the weight of this active: post did not alarm him; and, to the age of ninety, he manifested a mind in full vigour, and capable of conducting affairs. From 1726 to 1740, every thing prospered. He commenced and brought to a glorious conclusion for his country, the war for the succession in Spain; and he added Lorraine to the French territory. In the war which commenced in 174-0 he was not so fortunate; and in 1743 he died, full of grief for a succession of misfortunes, of which the nation reproached him as the author. A too rigid attention to economy had led him to neglect the marine of his country; and the successes of England by sea completed the evil which had been thus begun. We was of a mild and tranquil character, a lover of peace, and not a man to make himself feared. He governed, says Millot, if not like a sublime genius who executes great things, at least like a prudent man, who accommodates his plans to circumstances, prefers essential to specious adVantages, and regards tranquillity and order as the foundation of public happiness. He had neither the pride of Richelieu, nor the avarice of Mazarin. No minister could be less costly to the state; his income did not amount tq five thousand pounds sterling a year, one half of which was employed in secret acts of benevolence. In the state of disorder to which the profusion of Louis XIV. had reduced the finances of France, it was happy for that country to have such a minister as Fleury, whose pacific turn counterbalanced the impetuosity of Villars, which would continually have plunged the country in new wars.

, a celebrated French ecclesiastical historian, was the son of an advocate, and born at Paris. Dec. 6, 1640. He discovered early a strong inclination, for letters, but applied himself particularly to the law, in. consequence of which he was made advocate for the parliament of Paris in 1658, and attended the bar nine years. He then took orders, for which he was more eagerly disposed, and more highly qualified by virtues as well as learning; and in 1672 was made preceptor to the princes of Conti. In 1680 he had the care of the education of the count de Vermandois, admiral of France. After the death of this prince, which happened in about four years, the king preferred him to the abbey of Loc-Dieu, belonging; to the Cistercians, and in the diocese of Rhodez. In 1689 the king made him sub-preceptor to the dukes of Burgundy, Anjou, and Berri, in which important employment he acted under the celebrated Fenelon. In 1696 he was admitted a member of the French academy. In 1706, when the education of the three princes was finished, the king gave him the rich priory of Argenteuil, belonging to the Benedictines, in the diocese of Paris, upon which promotion he resigned the abbey of Loc-Dieu. If he had possessed ambition to solicit the greatest situations, he would have obtained them, but his disinterestedness was equal to his other virtues. He was a hermit in the midst of the court. In 1716 he was chosen confessor to Louis XV. in which situation it was said of him that his only fault wati that of being seventy-five years old; and on July 14, 1725, he died, in his eighty-third year.

Fleury, though a zealous divine of the Romish church, was by no means a bigot. He has the reputation of a philosopher as well as a divine, and a philosopher in practice as well as speculation. He is said to have taken an extreme delight in reading Plato; and, after the example of this great ancient, would often have private conferences with societies of the learned, which chiefly turned on the illustration of the scriptures. He was a great lover of solitude, yet was not reserved, but would speak his mind freely upon the most important and even delicate subjects. Constantly attentive to, and punctual in the discharge of his duty, he took no steps to be rich or great, cherished no principles of ambition, but preferred the glory of doing useful services to his country, to any honours which his uncommon talents and merit might justly have claimed.

His works were numerous, and all excellent in their kinds. He wrote, I. “Mceurs des Israelites,” “Manners of the Israelites,” a masterly picture of the lives of holy men under the first covenant, which has been published in English. This was followed by, 2. “Mceurs des Chretiens,” “Manners of Christians,” since united with the other in a single volume; and as excellent an introduction to ecclesiastical, as the other is to sacred history. 3. “Ecclesiastical History,” in 13 vols. 4to, or 20 vols. 12mo, containing an account of the Christian church from the earliest times to the council of Constance in 1414, a very elaborate and valuable work, but written in a negligent style, mixed with Greek and Latin idioms. The most valuable part (for the facts may be met with elsewhere) is the preliminary dissertations, which contain the result of profound meditation, on the most important subjects connected with church history. These have been printed separately in one volume, 12mo. 4. “Institution of Ecclesiastical Law,” 2 vols. 12mo, a work, to which it has been chiefly objected that it is too concise. 5. te Historical Catechism,“one vol. 12mo, an excellent introduction for children 5 with a preliminary discourse fit to rank with those in the ecclesiastical history. 6.” A Treatise on the choice and method of Studies.“7.” Duties of Masters and Servants.“8.” The Life of La Mere d'Arbouse,“who reformed the convent of Val-de-Grace, 12mo. 9. ”Portrait of the duke of Burgundy,“1714, 12mo. 10.” Treatise on Public Law,“a posthumous work, in 2 vols. 12mo, important and excellent in its matter, but not completed by the la^t touches of the author. An edition of his works, except the ecclesiastical history, was published at Ntsmes, in 1781, in 5 vols. 8vo. There was another learned Fleury, who published the Delphin edition of Apuleius, in two volumes, quarto, under the name of” Julian us Floridus," his real name being Julian Fleury. He began Ausomus also, but it was not completed. He died Sept. 13, 1725.

, a dissenting clergyman of considerable learning and industry, was born Feb. 22, 1707-8, at Great Torrington, in Devonshire, where his father was a manufacturer. He discovered a very early inclination for the ministry, and such was his proficiency in classical learning, that, at the age of fifteen he was admitted into the academy at Tiverton, under the rev. John Moore, who, on finishing his studies, solicited his assistance in the conduct of that institution. This, however, he declined, and in pursuance of his original intentions, was ordained in 1730 at Modbury, whence he soon removed to Crediton, and afterwards to Chard, and in 1739 to Bradford, Wilts. In 1747 he arrived in the metropolis, and became the pastor of a congregation at Rotherhithe, in which station he continued until his hearers, by death, or otherwise, declined so much in numbers, that he thought proper to resign in 17S3. He continued, however, for time time to preach occasionally at a morning lecture in St. Helen’s, Bishojisgate-street, and eisewh^re; but in his latter years his health and faculties were so much impaired as to render the performance of his public duties no longer possible. He died June 14, 1795, at the very advanced age of eighty-eight.

Of his mental talents and literary acquirements, those who knew him before the infirmities of age came on, entertained a high opinion. Few persons possessed a' more., extensive and accurate acquaintance with English history. His memory was so retentive as to supersede recourse to written authorities; and it served him for the recital of dau s an i minute circumstances, which the most laborious researches can scarcely ascertain. This rendered him capable of communicating important information on various occasions, and he was often consulted by men of the first rank and character. In discussions of a political as well as literary kind, his knowledge was of considerable service; and it gave him access to many members of both houses of parliament, who availed themselves of hints and references with which he supplied them. In 1770 he was appointed one of the compilers of the “General Index to the Journals of the house of commons.” The interesting period of parliamentary proceedings from 1660 to 1697, comprehending vol. VIII, XI. was assigned to him. His plan was submitted to a committee of the house, soon after his appointment: and the execution of this elaborate work, begun in 1776, and completed in 1780, was much approved and liberally rewarded. He was frequently employed on making Indexes to inferior works; and among others that to the Rambler. Dr. Johnson, who sometimes founded his dislikes on very slender circumstances, on hearing Dr. Flexman’s name mentioned, exclaimed, “Let me hear no more of him, sir. That is the fellow who made the Index to my Ramblers, and set down the name of Milton thus; Milton, Mr. John.” Dr. Flexman was rather more creditably employed in superintending by far the best edition of Burnet’s “Own Times,” published in 1753, 4 vols. 8vo. His original works consist of a few occasional seripons and tracts. Among the latter are: 1. “The plan of divine worship in the churches of Dissenters justified,” 1754. 2. “Critical, historical, and political miscellanies; remarks on various authors, Potter, Seeker, Sherlock, &c.” 1752 1762. He wrote also the lives of the rev. S. Bourn, and of Dr. Chandler, prefixed to their respective works. In religious opinions he was a strenuous advocate for the pre-existent dignity of Christ, and the personality of the Holy Spirit. He maintained also the essential distinction between the soul and body, and the liberty of the human will, in opposition to Materialists and Necessarians. But whatever ardour he might show in maintaining his opinions, it was united with the most comprehensive charity and good will nor was his integrity less laudable.

, a German artist, was born in 1616, at Cloves, and by the appointment of his father was to have been bred up as a merchant; but neither the influence of his friends, nor the prospect of making an immense fortune, could prevail with him to abandon the art of painting, to which from his earliest youth he felt an invincible inclination. He was first placed with Lambert Jacobs; under whom he made extraordinary proficiency, by capacity, diligence, and emulation, to excel Backer, who was then a disciple of Jacobs. When he quitted his master, he went to Amsterdam, and entered himself in the school of Rembrandt, and became so captivated with the excellences of that great artist, that he studied his style of composition, manner of colouring, and penciling, incessantly; and at last shewed himself not only a good imitator of him, but in some respects his equal, and in freedom of hand rather his superior. Such talents being soon noticed, he was almost continually employed in painting the portraits of princes and illustrious personages, although his genius was abundantly more inclined to paint historical subjects; and several of his performances in that style were admired for the goodness of the design, and the beauty of the colouring. He remarkably excelled in imitating the manner of Rembrandt, and many of his paintings are sold at this day for the work of his master. But as the Italian taste began to be more esteemed after the death of Rembrandt, Flink took great pains to alter his first manner. For this purpose he made a large collection of the finest casts that could be procured from Rome of the best drawings and designs of the artists of Italy as also of several of their paintings and those he made his principal studies. When he imagined himself to be competently improved, he finished a noble design for the great hall of the senate-house at Amsterdam, representing Solomon praying for wisdom; in which his disposition and manner of grouping the figures appear excellent, and the tone of the colouring is strong and livety, He likewise painted a grand historical composition for the artillery company at Amsterdam, consisting of portraits of the most distinguished persons of that body. The figures were well disposed, and every part of the picture was painted by Flink, except the faces, which are by Vander Heist. He died in 1660, much regretted, and his collection of prints and drawings were sold for twelve thousand florins.

, or Frodoard, a French historian, was born in the year 894, at Epernai, and afterwards had preferment in the church of Rheims, where he wrote a chronicle, which extends from the year 919 to 966, and a history of the church of Rheims, regularly continued from its foundation to the year 949. The best edition is tij.it of 1617. Flodoard was also a poet. He composed in verse the history of the popes, as far as Leo VII. and the triumphs of Jesus Christ and the saints, in nineteen bonks. He was once near being promoted to be bishop of Noyon, but was disappointed. He died in the year 966, at the age of seventy-three.

, a Spanish Augustine, and one of the most learned Spaniards of the eighteenth century, who died at Madrid about 1772, was the author of a most elaborate collection of ecclesiastical history, in 34 vols. 4to, printed from 1747 to 1784, entitled “L'Espana sagrada, theatro geographico-historico de la Iglesia de Espana,” which, say the editors of the “Diet. Historique,” answers to the French collection entitled “Gallia Christiana.” About 1743 he also published a “Clave historial,” which answers to their “Art de verifier les dates;” and as the latter did not appear until 1750, they do not refuse Florez the merit of the original plan. Another very valuable publication by Florez affords the most complete knowledge we have of the ancient coins of Spain. It is entitled “Meclallas de las Colonias municipios, y pueblos antiguos de Espana,” Madrid, 1757 and 1758, 2 vols. 4to, to which the author added a third, which was published after his death. The merit of this work procured his being elected an associate correspondent of the French academy. He is said also to have been the editor of some Spanish authors; but their names, except that of Ambrosio Moralcz, are not given in our authority.

, a very popular French writer, was born in 1755, at the chateau de Flonan, in the province of Languedoc. His father, Charles Claris, was a gentleman of small fortune, who, being by no means of an enterprising disposition, died poor. His mother was Gillette de Sulgue, a Castilian Spaniard; and it may be presumed that in this circumstance originated that high esteem and peculiar affection which Florian has since expressed for that sensible, generous, and highspirited nation. This affectionate mother dying in childfred, the care of young Florian devolved wholly on his father, who obtained for him the best masters, and spared no expence nor trouble in the superintendance of his education, and the cultivation of his mind. In his earliest days young Florian displayed that love of his fellow-creatures’which ever after so strongly marked his character; and he evinced even in infancy that suavity of manners and benevolence of disposition which afterwards rendered him so universally esteemed. Even his childhood was marked by acts of benevolence, and many instances of his sensibility and benevolence have been mentioned by his biographers. His occupations and amusements too were always of a nature much superior to those of other children of the same age. He employed much of his time in the cultivation of flowers, and in learning the art of gardening; and agriculture also engaged his attention, and gave him a taste for rural pleasures, to which his countrymen owe Jiis pastorals.

His father sent him to his near kinsman Voltaire for his education, who afterwards placed him in the rank of page to the duke de Penthievre. The duke soon distinguished his talents, bestowed many favours on him, and although, he at one time gave him a commission in the army, on observing the success of his first publication, the duke determined that he should confine himself to literature, and furnished him with a library. His first production was his “Gaiathee,” which appeared in 1782, and was followed by the first two volumes of his “Theatre,” containing “Les deux Billets,” “Le bon Menage,” “Le bon Pere,” <? La bonne Mere,“and” Le bon Fils.“Notwithstanding the success of these, the duke so reproved him for writing on profane subjects, that he chose his next subject” Ruth" from the sacred history, which completely reconciled him to his patron, and was followed hy a succession of dramas and novels which placed him in the first rank of popularity as a sentimental writer.

Though Florian was reared in the very bosom of nobility, he never sacrificed to adulation the dignity of a man. Esteemed and patronised by a benevolent and sensible prince, he became the active agent of his bounty; and the orphan and the poor, especially the unfortunate man of letters, ever found in Florian a zealous advocate and an active protector.

It is mentioned by one of his biographers, as an instance of his weakness, that he had a great desire to obtain a seat in the French academy, and we are told that the force of this ambition imperceptibly undermined his constitution, and changed the natural suavity of his temper to a restless fretfulness. It was not a sufficient gratification of this passion, that he was already a member of the academies of Madrid, Lyons, and Florence; nothing short of a seat in the academy of Paris seemed to him capable of satisfying that ambition, which was gratified on the death of cardinal de Luines. He never was present at the admission of a new member into the academy, without experiencing a most singular agitation, and a violent oppression of the heart, which he was unable to conceal from observation. It is added, however, that notwithstanding the violence of this passion, Florian never so far yielded to its influence as to sacrifice to it those principles of honour and liberality which were the constant motives of his actions.

When the revolution took place, Florian retired to Seaux, hoping that in that retreat, as he confined himself entirely to his studies, he would be overlooked in the general proscription of men of talents; but he was known to have been the intimate of a nobleman, and upon the simple niandat of the infamous Robespierre, he was arrested. His judges reproached him with having prefixed to his “Numa” some verses in praise of the queen; and upon this accusation, he was dragged to prison. Here he began the first book of his “Guillaume Tell,” a poem, the admirers of which must regret that it was not completed. In this prison, also Florian finished his poem entitled “Kbrahim,” in four cantos; a work replete with beauties, in which are depicted with the pencil of Fenelon, fraternal affection, patriarchal virtue, noble jealousy, and the passion of love in all its strength and delicacy. This Hebrew poem was among all his productions the favourite work of Florian; and that which, at the same time that it afforded him the most pleasure in composing it, was also written with the greatest facility. At length, however, the overthrow of Robespierre renovated the hopes, and re-animated the courage of his victims. Among the rest, Florian, who had long considered himself devoted to death, was released, and again retired to the country; but whether from the agitation of his mind in prison, or from the confinement and unwholesome food, he soon fell into a decline, which proved fatal Sept. 13, 1794. Florian’s works consist of short dramas, novels, and pastorals, written witb. great attention to nature and simplicity, butupon the whole, we think better adapted to afford pleasure to his countrymen, than to those who look for more vigour of genius, and less of the sickly sentimental style. So many of them, however, have been introduced to the knowledge of the English reader by translations, that it is not necessary to enlargemuch on their beauties or defects. His pastoral romances, “Estelle,” “Galathea,” &c. are unquestionably the most favourable specimens of his genius; but we doubt the perpetuity of their popularity without those peculiar charms which can be conveyed only in their original language. His “Fahles” have been much admired in France, and esteemed the best since the days, of Fontaine. In all his works he preserves that attention to benevolence and moral feeling which distinguished him in his life.

, the Resolute, as he used to style himself, was born in London in the reign of Henry VIII. and descended from the Florii of Sienna, in Tuscany. A little before that time his father and mother, who were Waldenses, had fled from the Valtoline into England, from the persecutions of popery; but when Edward the Sixth died, and the protestant religion became oppressed under Mary, they left England, and went to some other country, where John Florio received his juvenile literature. Upon the re-establishment of protestantism by Elizabeth, they returned; and Florio for a time lived in Oxford. About 1576, Barnes bishop of Durham, sending his son to Magdalencollege, Florio was appointed to attend him as preceptor in French, and Italian; at which time he was admitted a member of that college, and became a teacher of those languages in the university. After James came to the cvown, he was appointed tutor to prince Henry in those languages; and at length made one of the privychamber, and clerk of the closet to queen Anne, to whom he was also tutor. He was a very useful man in his profession, zealous for the protestant religion, and much devoted to the English nation. Retiring to Fulham in Middlesex, to avoid the plague which was then in London, he was seized and carried off by it in 1625, aged about eighty.

He was the author of several works: 1. “First Fruits, which yield familiar speech, merry proverbs, witty sentences, and golden sayings,” 1578, 4to, and 1591, 8vo. 2. “Perfect Introduction to the Italian and English Tongues.” Printed with the former, and both dedicated to Robert earl of Leicester. 3. “Second Fruits to be gathered of twelve trees, of divers but delightsome tastes to the tongues of Italian and English men,” 151H, 8vo. 4. “Garden of Recreation, yielding six thousand Italian Proverbs;” printed with the former. 5. “Dictionary, Italian and English,” 1597, folio. It was after* ards augmented by him, and published in 1611, in folio, by way of compliment to his royal mistress, under this title, “Queen Anna’s New World of Words.” This was a work of great merit, being at that time by far the most perfect of the kind. The author, however, laboured to make it still more perfect, by collecting many thousand words and phrases, to be added to the next edition; but, not living to complete this, the care of it fell to one Gio. Torriano, an Italian, and professor of the Italian tongue in London; who, after revising, correcting, and supplying many more materials out of the Dictionary of the Academy della Crusca, printed them in 1659, folio, all in their proper places. 6. “The Essays of Montaigne,” translated into English, and dedicated to queen Anna, 1603, 1613, 1632, folio. Prefixed to this work we find rather a long copy of verses, addressed to him by Samuel Daniel, the poet and historiographer, whose sister Florio had married. Wood says, that he wrote other things, but he had not seen them.

, a painter of history, was born at Antwerp in 1520, but practised the art of sculpture till he was twenty years of age, when he changed his profession, and studied painting under Lambert Lombard. He afterwards went to Rome, and copied the works of the ancients; but was particularly struck with the works of Michel Angelo Buonaroti, which he imitated with great zeal, particularly his Last Judgment; but, probably from want of a comprehensive genius, attended more to the parts than die whole. Such was his success, however, in his general improved style of painting on his return to his native city, that it acquired for him the honourable appellation of the “Raphael of Flanders,” though his style of design is certainly more in imitation of M. Angelo than of Raphael. He painted for the contrafestivity hail of St. Michael, at Antwerp, a large picture, now at the Louvre, at Paris. The subject is, " The Fall of Lucifer and his Angels/' It is highly celebrated for the goodness of the composition and handling, for the variety of attitudes in the fallen angels, and for the strong expression of the muscles in the naked figures. In fact it is a very curious picture, painted with great capacity, and exhibits a powerful, though eccentric, imagination. The fiends in M. Angelo’s Last Judgment are not more horrible, or nearly so grotesque. The power of colour also is admirable, and in some parts has been rarely surpassed. He had a strong and bold manner, and, like his great model Buonaroti, marked the muscular parts too full for a just imitation of nature. He invented and composed with ease, but in a dry and gothic manner; and though sometimes his figures have an agreeable air, yet in general they possess a reprehensible degree of the stiffness and formality peculiar to the age and country he lived in. There are some etchings by him, which, though slight, are bold and spirited. He died in 1570, aged 50.

There have been several editions of this author. Madame Dacier, then M. le Fevre, published him in 4to, for the use of the dauphin, at Paris, in 1674. Graevius gave another edition in 1680, 8vo, which was afterwards republished at Amsterdam, in 1702, with great improvements and ornaments, in 2 vols. 8vo. The best edition is that of Duker, 2 vols. 8vo, printed in 1722, and again in 1744, or perhaps that of Fischer, printed at Leipsic, 1760, 8vo. To most of the editions of Florus since the Elzevir of 1638, has been added Ampelius’s “Liber Memorialist Of this author we have no information. Respecting the first edition of Florus, bibliographers are very much at variance. There are five editions, all without dates, but the majority of bibliographers have determined in favour of the edition in 4to, printed at Paris by Gering, Crantz, and Friburger, between the years 1470 and 1472, which, as well as the other four early editions, being in lord Spencer’s library, we can refer the reader with some confidence, to Mr. Dibdin’s magnificent” Bibliotheca Spenceriana," now in the press, where they are minutely and accurately described.

, an English Jesuit, who merits some notice from his controversial connections, was born in Cambridgeshire, and going abroad, became a Jesuit in 1593, and returned to England as a missionary. After some years spent in this employment, he was apprehended and banished; but his sufferings and his talents procured him great respect in France, where he was employed by his superiors to teach humanity and divinity at St. Omer’s and Louvaine. He was alive at St. Omer’s in 1641, but the time of his death is not on record. In his publications, written in controversy with Chillingworth, Antonius de Dominis, Crashaw, sir Edward Hobby, and other learned protestants, he assumed the fictitious names of Daniel a Jesu, Hermannus Loemelius, and Annosus Fidelis Verimontanus. Under these he wrote, 1. “Synopsis Apostasiæ M. A. de Dominis,” Antw. 1617, 8vo. 2. “Detectio hypocrisis M. A. de Dominis,” ibid. 1619, 8vo. 3. “Censura decem Lib. de republica ecclesiast. M. A. de Dominis,” Cologne, 1621, 8vo. 4. “Apologia sedis Apostolicæ,” &c. Rothomag. 1631, 8vo. 5. “The church conquerant over human wit,” against Chillingworth, St. Omer’s, 1631, 4to. 6. “The Total Sum,” against the same, ibid. 1639, 4to. 7. “Answer to William Crashaw,” ibid. 1612, 4to. 8. “A treatise of Purgatory, in answer to sir Edward Hobby,” ibid. 1613. 9. “Answer to Francis White’s Reply concerning Nine Articles offered by king James I. to F. John Fisher (See Fisher), ibid. 1626. 10.” Spongia,“against the bishops of France, and the censure of the Sorbonne. 11.” Answer to a book entitled `Instructions for the Catholics of England'," with several other small treatises relative to the bishop of Chalcedon’s case; which attack of his on that bishop, and on the clergy of France, was repelled in various pamphlets by his brethren, who took part with the bishop. Floyd also published a translation of St. Augustine’s Meditations, and of some other religious works.

, an eminent physician, was born at Hinters, in Staffordshire, about 1649, and received his education at the university of Oxford, where the degree of doctor of physic was conferred upon him, on the 8th of July, 1680. He settled himself in the practice of his profession at Litchfield, in his native county; where his indefatigable attention to the sick, and the consequent practical skill which he attained, not only procured for him the confidence of the inhabitants, but gained him a reputation so extensive, that his sovereign honoured him with knighthood, as a reward for his talents. He was a great friend to the use of cold bathing, and left no means untried, by which he might disseminate the knowledge of its utility and safety, and bring the practice into general vogue: he particularly recommended it in chronic rheumatisms, and in nervous disorders, and he maintained that consumptions had prevailed extensively in England only since the practice of baptizing children by immersion had been relinquished. This recommended his work in a very particular manner to the attention of the Baptists, whose historian, Crosby, has made some extracts from it in corroboration of the propriety of baptism by immersion. It appears to have been by sir John’s advice, that Dr. Johnson, when an infant, was sent up to London to be touched by queen Anne for the evil; a proof that he had not surmounted the prejudices of his age. Sir John died Feb. 1, 1734. The following are the titles of his different publications: 1. “The Touchstone of Medicines,” London, 1687, 8vo. 2. “The Preternatural state of the Animal Humours described by their sensible qualities,” London, 1696, 8vo, in which he maintained the doctrine of fermentation. 3; “An Enquiry into the right use of Baths,” London, 1697, 8vo. This work afterwards appeared under different titles, such as “Ancient Psychrolusy revived,” London, 1702 and the subject was more amply treated in another edition “History of hot and cold Bathing, ancient and modern, with an Appendix by Dr. Baynard,” London, 1709, and again in 1715, and 1722. It was also in some measure renewed in his “Essay to restore the dipping of infants in their baptism,” 1721. 4. His next work was “A Treatise on the Asthma,” first published in 1698, and re-published in 1717 and 1726. He was himself the subject of asthma from the age of puberty, yet lived to be an old man. 5. “The Physicians’ Pulsewatch,” 1707 and 1710, in 2 vols. 8vo. Sir John Floyer was one of the first to count the pulsations of the arteries; for although the pulse had been the subject of observation from ancient times, the number of beats in a given time had not been attended to. 6. “Medici na Geronomica; of preserving old men’s health; with an appendix concerning the use of oil and unction, and a letter on the regimen of younger years,” Lond. 1724. Several of these treatises were translated into the continental languages.

, or de Fluctibus, an English philosopher, was the son of sir Thomas Fludd, knight, sometime treasurer of war to queen Elizabeth in France and the Low Countries; and was born at Milgate, in the parish of Bearsted, in Kent, in 1574. He was admitted of St. John’s-college, Oxford, in 1591; and having taken both the degrees in arts, applied himself to physic. He then spent six years in travelling through France, Spain, Italy, and Germany: in most of which countries he not only became acquainted with several of the nobility, but read lectures to them. After his return, being in high repute for his chemical knowledge, he accumulated the degrees of bachelor and doctor of physic. This was in 1605; about which time he practised in London, and became fellow of the college of physicians. He did not begin to publish till 1616, but afterwards became a voluminous writer, being the author of about twenty works, mostly written in Latin, and as dark and mysterious in their language, as in their matter. Some of his productions were aimed against Kepler and Mersennus; and he had the honour of replies from both those philosophers. He wrote two books against Mersennus; the first entitled “Sophias cum Moria certamen, in quo lapis Lydius, a falso structore Patre Marino Mersenno Monacho reprobatus, celeberrima voluminis sui Babylonici in Genesim figmenta accuratæ examinat.” Franc. 1629, folio. The second, “Summum Bonorum, quod est verum Magiae, Cabalae, Alchymije, Fratrum Roseug Crucis Verorum, subjectum: in dictarum scientiarum laudem, in insignis calumniatoris Fr. Mar. Mersenni dedecus publicatum, per Joachim. Frizium,” 1629, folio. Mersennus desiring Gassendus to give his judgment on these two books of Fludd against him, that great man drew up an answer divided into three parts: the first of which sifts the principles of Fludd’s whimsical philosophy, as they lie scattered throughout his works the second is against “Sophiae cum Moria certamen” and the third against “Summum Bonorum,” &c. This answer, called “Examen Fluddanae Philosophise,” is dated Feb. 4, 1629, and is printed in the third volume of Gassendus’s works in folio. In the dedication to Merseniius, this antagonist fairly allows Fludd the merit of extensive learning. His other works were: 1. “Utriusque Cosmi, majoris et minoris, Technica Historia,” Oppenheim, 1617, in two volumes foiio. 2. “Tractatus Apologeticus integritatena societatis de Rosea cruce defendens,” Leyden, 1617. 3. “Monochordon mundi symphoniacum, eu Replicatio ad Apologiam Joannis Kepleri,” Francfort, 1620. 4. “Anatomise Theatrum triplici effigie designatum,” ibid. 1623. 5. “Philosophia Sacra et vere Christiana, seu Meteorologia Cosmica,” ibid, 1626. 6, “Mediclna Cathotica, sen, Mysticum artis Medicandi Sacrarium,” ibid. 1626. 7. “Integrum Morborum Mysterium,” ibid. 1631. 8. “De Morborum Signis,” ibid. 1631. These two treatises are a part of the Medicina Catholica. 9. “Clavis Philosophise et Alchyrniae Fluddanse,” ibid. 1633. 10. “Philosophia Mosa'ica,” Goudae, 1638. 11. “Pathologia Daemoniaca,” ibid. 1640.

So peculiar was this philosopher’s turn of mind, that there was nothing which ancient or modern times could afford, under the notion of occult wisdom, which he did not eagerly gather into his magazine of science. All the mysterious and incomprehensible dreams of the Cabbalists and Paracelsians, he compounded into a new mass of absurdity. In hopes of improving the medical and chemical arts, he devised a new system of physics, loaded with wonderful hypothesis, and mystical fictions. He supposed two universal principles, the northern or condensing power, and the southern, or rarefying power. Over these he placed innumerable intelligences and geniuses, and called together whole troops of spirits from the four winds, to whom he committed the charge of diseases. He applied his thermometer to discover the harmony between the macrocosm and the microcosm, or the world of nature and of man he introduced many marvellous fictions into natural philosophy and medicine he attempted to explain the Mosaic cosmogony, in a work entitled “Philosophia Mosaica,” wherein he speaks of three first principles, darkness, as the first matter; water, as the second matter; and the divine light, as the most central essence, creating, informing, vivifying all things of secondary principles, two active, cold and heat and two passive, moisture and dryness and describes the whole mystery of production and corruption, of regeneration and resurrection, with such vague conceptions and obscure language, as leaves the subject involved in impenetrable darkness. Some of his ideas, such as they were, appear to have been borrowed from the Cabbalists and Alexandrian Platonists. The reader will easily judge, what kind of light may be expected from the writings of Robert Fludd, when he is informed that he ascribes the magnetic virtue to the irradiation of angels. Fludd died at his house in Coleman-street, London, in 1637, and was sent to Bearsted for interment.

, a celebrated physician, was bofti at Mentz, in 1528, and educated at Paris, where he acquired a taste for the works of the Greek physicians, under ins preceptors Houllier and Goupile, who facilitated his progress in that course of study, by procuring books and Mss. for his perusal and under whose direction he copied some very ancient manuscripts of Hippocrates from the library of Fontainbleau and the Vatican, but his narrow circumstances obliged him to return for practice to Mentz about 1556 or 7, where his reputation became so great, even in distant provinces, that several princes endeavoured by promises of great honour and emolument, to draw him from his native place; but his attachment to it was immoveable. During his practice, he found leisure to peruse the works of Hippocrates, in which he thought he discovered the most important observations relative to diseases, and the most correct delineation of their nature and progress. This produced his first work, printed at Basil in 1650, entitled “Hippocratis Coi Liber secundus de morbis vulgaribus, difficillimus et pulcherrimus: olim a Galeno Commentariis illustratus qui temporis injurid, interciderunt; nunc vero pene in integrum restitutus Commentariis sex, et Latinitate donatus,” 8vo. In the following year he published a “Pharmacopeia medicamentorum omnium, quie hodie ad publica medentium munia in officinis extant, tractationem et usum ex antiquorum Medicorum pnescripto continens,” Basilea), 1561, 8vo. His constant meditations on the works of Hippocrates again produced “GEconomia Hippocratis alphabet! serie distincta, in qua dictionum apud Hippocratem omnium, pra?­jsertim obscurionnn, usus explicatur, et velut ex amplissimo penu depromitur: ita ut Lexicon Hippocraticum merito dici possit,” Francofurti, 1588, folio; Geneva, 1662, folio. Afterwards, at the request of his learned contemporaries, he published a complete and correct edition of the whole works of Hippocrates, entitled “Magni Hippocratis, Medicorum omnium facile Principis, Opera omnia Cjiub extant, in octo sectiones ex Erotiani uiente distributa: nunc recens Latina interpretatione et aiinotationibus iliustrata,” folio, Francofurti, 1593, &c. Geneva;, 1657. Foesius did not long survive this laborious undertaking: he died in 1595, and his talents were inherited by his son and grandson, who successively filled his station as physician at Metz.

, a learned Italian ecclesiastic, was born at Florence in 1713, and went through his principal courses of study in that city, and evinced so much fitness for the office, that his superiors appointed him their librarian. This society, of which he became a member in 1737, was composed of the theologians of Florence, and he made his first public display in some historical and polemical theses respecting what were called the four articles of the clergy of France, agreed upon in 1682; but his subsequent writings have consigned these to oblivion. In 1741 he published a dissertation “de primisFlorentinorum apostolis,” a work much praised by Manni and Lami. The same year appeared another “against the reveries of certain Protestants;” but what procured him more reputation, was his edition of “Virgil,” published at Florence, 1741, 4to. This is a fac-simile of the Codex Mediceus, on which Heinsius had written a learned dissertation, inserted by JBurman in the first volume of his own edition of Virgil. The original manuscript is conceived to be more ancient than the Vatican one. It appears to have formerly belonged to Rodolphus Pius, a cardinal in the time of pope Paul III. who bequeathed it to the Vatican, from which it is supposed to have been fraudulently conveyed to the Medicean.

In 1742, Foggini refused the professorship of ecclesiastical history at Pisa, which was then vacant; but accepted an invitation from Bottari, second librarian of the Vatican, to come to Rome; where his merit being known to pope Benedict XIV. he gave him a place in the pontifical academy of history. Instead, however, of employing himself on the history of the popes, he devoted his time to a careful examination of the most valuable Mss. and had thus an opportunity of furnishing the editors of classics with much important assistance. The same researches enabled him to publish a Latin translation of a book of St. Epiphanius, addressed to Diodorus, which was printed in 1743, with a preface and notes; the subject is the twelve precious stones on the breast-plate of the high-priest of the Hebrews. About this time the pope appointed him coadjutor to Bottari; and in 1750 he drew up the form of prayers and instructions for the Jubilee. The same year he printed his Latin translation of St. Epiphnnius’s commentary on the Canticles. In 1752 he published a collection of passages from the Fathers, occasioned by a homily of the archbishop of Fermo, on the saying of Jesus Christ, respecting the small number of the elect. The following year he published the opinions of St. Charles Borromeo, and others on the theatre. In 1754 he published the first of eight volumes of writings of the fathers on the subject of grace; and in 1758 “The Works of St. Prosper,” 8vo, and separately, a poem by that saint, on ingratitude, with notes. These were followed by his “Treatise on the clergy of St. John de Lateran,” and in 1760, by an edition of the works of St. Fulgentius. The same year pope Ganganelli made him chamberlain of honour. He afterwards published some ecclesiastical pieces, and some on antiquities, among which was, “Fastorum Anni Ronaani Verrio Flacco ordinatorum reliquiae,” &c. Rome, 1780, fol. Verrius Flaccus composed a series of the Romania**!, which was engraved on tables of marble, and exposed to the view of the public at Praeneste. To recover these marbles, cardinal Stoppani, bishop of Praeneste, at the request of Foggini, ordered several excavations to be made, by which the fragments of four tables were discovered in 1774, and of these Foggini has given a description in this work. The last work by Foggini, noticed in our authority, is an appendix to the Byzantine history, published in 1777. When Pius VI. became pope, he promoted him to the charge of the secret chamber, and in 1775 he succeeded Bottari, as first librarian, but on account of his age, he was excused from the duties of the place, while he enjoyed the title and emoluments. He died May 31, 1783, regretted as a scholar of great accomplishments, and an amiable man.

, a learned Genoese, was born in that city in 1518, and descended from a noble family. Some writers have styled him a priest, but we do not find him in any of his writings assuming any other title than that of a Genoese noble. The troubles which agitated his country induced him to write a work by which they might be quieted, the subject of which was the distinction between noble and plebeian families; but he took so many liberties with the characters of the nobles, that they procured his banishment, a treatment which suggested to him as his future device, a lighted tiambeau with the inscription “Officio mihi officio.” Moreri says that he took an active part in the troubles at Genoa, which was the cause of his banishment, but this does not appear to have been the case. He submitted, however, to his sentence, like a philosopher, and applied his leisure to the cultivation of his mind. He chose Rome as the place of his retirement, and there acquired the patronage of Hippolyto cardinal d'Este, who received him into his house, where he died in 1581. His works were numerous, of which the following are the chief: 1. “Historia Genuensium, lib. 12.” L535, folio; diffuse, but faithful and elegant; translated into Italian by Francesco Sardonati. 2i “De ratione scribendae HistQrise.” 3. “Conjuratio Johannis Ludovici Flisci,” Neapoli, 1571, 4to, a very rare edition. 4. “Elogia clarorurn Ligurum,” 1574, 4to. 5. “De Linguae Latinae usu et prsestantia,” Romse, 1574, repubiished by Mosheim, 1723, with a life of the anthor. 6. “De causis magnitudinis Turcarum imperil.” 7. “Delia Republica di Genoa,” 8vo. 8. “Opuscula nonnulla,” 1574, 4to. Most of these works are scarce. His Latin style was peculiar, elegant, and pure, and his judgment at once accurate and sound.

, the first king of China, is said to have founded this empire about two hundred years after the deluge. He was originally of the province of Xen Si, whence he removed the seat of empire to Chin Cheu. He was the first who taught the Chinese the advantages of civil society. He invented instruments of music, and established laws and ordinances. He regulated the commerce between male and female, which before was promiscuous, and suffered none of the same name and family to intermarry, which custom is observed to this day. He instituted religious services and sacrifices, some of which were dedicated to the sovereign spirit, who governs heaven and earth, others to inferior spirits, whom he supposed to preside over mountains, rivers, and particular countries. This prince is said to have reigned no less than a hundred and fifteen years. The Chinese impute to him the invention of several things, which at this day -ire much revered among them: but there is probably much fable in the history of this prince. An ancient book, called “Yekin,” which is still preserved in China, is ascribed to Fohi; written in hieroglyphics, of which no one has been able to give a satisfactory explanation. The most probable conjecture is that of Leibnitz, that it was intended to teach the art of numeration. Fohi was succeeded by several emperors, who carried forward the work of civilization, particularly by means of moral allegories, fables, and poems. Mr. Bryant supposes Fohi to have been Adam, and his successors Sim Noo, or Sin Nura, and Hoam Ti, to have been Noah and Ham.

, an eminent French officer and author, famous for his skill and knowledge in the military art, was born at Avignon, in 1669, of a noble but not a rich family. He discovered early a happy turn for the sciences, and a strong passion for arms; which last was so inflamed by reading Cxsar’s Commentaries, that he actifally enlisted at sixteen years of age, and although his father obtained his discharge, and shut him up in a monastery, he made his escape in about two years after, and entered himself a second time in quality of cadet. His inclination for military affairs, and the great pains he took to accomplish himself in every branch of the art, recommended him to notice; and he was admitted into the friendship of the first-rate officers. M. de Vendome, who commanded in Italy in 1720, made him his aid-de-camp, having conceived the highest regard for him; and soon after sent him with part of his forces into Lombardy. He was entirely trusted by the commander of that army; and no measures were concerted, or steps taken, without consulting him. By pursuing his plans, many places were taken, and advantages gained; and his services were remunerated by a pension of four hundred livres, and the cross of St. Lewis. He distinguished himself greatly, Aug. 15, 1705, at the battle of Cassano; where he received such a wound upon his left hand, as entirely deprived him of the use of it. M. de Vendome, to make him some amends, tried to have him made a colonel, but did not succeed. It was at this battle, that Folard conceived the first idea of that system of columns, which he afterwards prefixed to his Commentaries upon Poly bins.

The duke of Orleai6 sending de Vendome again into Italy in 1706, Folard had orders to throw himself into Modena, to defend it against prince Eugene; where he acquitted himself with his usual skill, but was very near being assassinated. The description which he has given of the conduct and character of the governor of this town, may be found in his “Treatise of the Defence of Places,” and deserves to be read. He received a dangerous wound on the thigh at the battle of Blenheim, or Malplaquet, and was some time after made prisoner by prince Eugene. Being exchanged in 1711, he was made governor of Bourbourg. In 1714, he went to Malta, to assist in defending that island against the Turks. Upon his return to France, he embarked for Sweden, having a passionate desire to see Charles XII. He acquired the esteem and confidence of that celebrated monarch, who sent him to France to negociate the reestablishment of Jarnes II. upon the throne of England; but, that project being dropped, he returned to Sweden, followed Charles XII. in his expedition to Norway, and served under him at the siege of Frederickshall, where that prince was killed, Dec. 11, 1718. Folard then returned to France, and made his last campaign in 1719, under the duke of Berwick, in quality of colonel. From that time he applied himself intensely to the study of the art military, as far as it could be studied at home; and built his theories upon the foundation of his experience and observations. He contracted an intimacy with count Saxe, who, he then declared, would one day prove a very great general. He was chosen a fellow of the royal society at London, in 1749; and in 1751, made a journey to Avignon, where he died in 1752, aged eighty-three years. He was the author of several works, the principal of which are, 1. “Commentaries upon Polybius,” in 6 vols. 4to. 2. “A Book of new Discoveries in War.” 3. “A Treatise concerning the Defence of Places, &c.” in French. Those who would know more of this eminent soldier, may consult a French work entitled, “Memoires pour servir a THistoire de M. de Chevalier de Folard. Ratisbone, 1753,” 12mo. As a man of letters, he drew his knowledge from ancient authors, which as a military man he explains with great clearness. The form of his writings is not so pleasing as the matter. The abundance of his ideas led him into too great a profusion of words. His style is negligent, his reflections detached, and his digressions either useless, or too long; but he was undoubtedly a man of genius.

, was born at Mantua in 1490, and at the age of sixteen he entered into a Benedictine monastery in his native city, where his talents and industry obtained for him a high reputation for proficiency in literature and sacred criticism, while the excellence of his disposition rendered him an object of general esteem. He was selected to fill the most important and distinguished stations in his order, and he was afterwards chosen by pope Paul IV. as visitor of the Benedictine foundations in Spain. When he had performed this task, he had returned to his native country, and devoted himself almost wholly to theological studies, in the course of which he conceived the hopeless project of uniting Catholics and Protestants in one communion. After a life spent in the service of his fellow creatures, he died in 1559, in his seventieth year. He left behind him many theological works, of which the principal were “Commentaries upon the Epistles of St. James, St. Peter, and the first Epistle of St. John,” published in 1551, in 8vo; also a “Commentary upon the Psalms.” These works must have had more than common merit in respect to liberality of sentiment, as they were prohibited by his church. His “Commentary on the Psalms” indeed was reprinted in 1585, but revised and curtailed. Dupin says that he “writes purely and nobly” and Thuanus had reason to say, “that no man will ever repent the reading of his Commentaries.”

, more known by his assumed name of Merlin Coccaio, was born Nov. 8, 1491, of a noble family at Mantua studied the languages under Virago Coccaio and then went to Bologna, where he cultivated philosophy under Peter Pomponatius. His preceptor, Coceaio, accompanied him there, but his taste and vivacity of genius led him to poetry, and defeated the endeavours of ins master to fix him to serious studies. His first work was a poem, entitled, “Orlandino,” in which he took the name of Limerno Pictoco. It displays considerable vigour of imagination, and may be read with pleasure. He afierwards was obliged, as well as his master, to quit Bologna precipitately, to avoid being apprehended, but what was the subject of the proceeding against him is not known. His father not leceiving him kindly, he entered into the army, but grew tired of it, and became a Benedictine in the monastery of St. Euphemia, where healready had a brother. Folengo here indulged his vein for satire and burlesque, by which he attracted the enmity of his brethren, who would have made him feel their resentment had he not been very powerfully protected. He died in 1544, aged fifty-one, at his priory, della Santa Croc e, near Bassano. The most known among his works is, 1. the “Opus Macaronicum,” printed at Venice in 1651, &c. written in that kind of mock Latin, made up of vernacular words and expressions, which has since been called from this original, macaronic. It is, however, an easy species of wit, and in a man of any abilities requires only that he should condescend to attempt it to ensure tfce greatest degree of success. He named it macaronic, from Maccherone, a gross feeder, or buffoon; a violent eater of macaroni. His poem was received with abundant ap plause, in an age much addicted to pedantic buffoonery. It must be confessed, that he sometimes rises a little above his burlesque style, to intersperse moral and characteristic reflections. A few more of his productions are also known. 52. “Caos del Tri per uno;” a poem on the three ages of man, and including much of his own history, but in a style more extravagant than his “Orlandino, 1527. 3.” La Humanita del Figlio di Dio, in ottava rima," Vinegia, 1533. This was written as some atonement for the licentiousness of his former writings, but probably had fewer readers. Many other works by him are mentioned by his, biographers, which are now confined to the libraries of the curious.

, an Italian prelate and poet, was born at Foligno, in the fourteenth century, but the year is not known. He became a Dominican, and after some inferior preferments, was in 1403 appointed bishop of Foligno. He was afterwards called, both as a theologian and a bishop, to the council of Pisa, and was also made one of the fathers of the grand council of Constance, where he died in 1416. No other work of his is fcnown but his great poem entitled “Quadriregio,” in which he describes the four reigns of Love, Satan, the Vices and the Virtues. The morality of this poem was probably its greatest recommendation; but the author, who was an admirer of Dante, has endeavoured to imitate him, and in some respects, not unsuccessfully. The first edition of the “Quadriregio” was published at Perugia, in 1481, fol. and the second at Bologna, in 1494; but the best is that published by the academicians of Foligno, 2 vols. 4to, 1725.

, an eminent English scholar and antiquary, was the eldest son of Martin Folkes, esq. counsellor at law, and one of the benchers of Gray’s Inn, and was born in Queen-street, Lincoln’s-hm-fields, Oct. 29, 1690. From the age of nine to that of sixteen, he was under the tuition of the learned Mr. Cappel, son and successor to Mr. Lewis Cappel, Hebrew professor at Saumur, in France, which he quitted when that university was suppressed in 1695. After making great proficiency in the Greek and Roman classics under this master, Mr. Folkes was in 1707 entered of Clare-hall, Cambridge, where his progress in all branches of learning, and particularly in mathematics and philosophy, was such, that when he was scarcely more than twenty-three years of age, he was in 1714 admitted a fellow of the royal society, and two years afterwards had so distinguished himself as to be chosen one of the council. About this time he made his first communication to the society, relative to the eclipse of a fixed star in Gemini by the body of Jupiter. This was followed at various times by other papers, for which it may be sufficient to refer to the Philosophical Transactions. In Oct. 1717 he had the degree of M. A. conferred on him by the university of Cambridge, when that learned body had the honour of a visit from king George I. He was chosen a second time of the council of the royal society, December 14, 1718, and continued to be re-chosen every year till 1727; and in Jan. 1723, had the farther distinction of being appointed by their illustrious president, sir Isaac Newton, one of his vice-presidents nor were these honours unjustly bestowed for Mr. Folkes was not only indefatigable himself in observing the secret operations and astonishing objects of nature, but also studious to excite the same vigilance in others. In February 1720, he was elected a fellow of the society of antiquaries.

At the first anniversary election of the roval society after the death of sir Isaac Newton, in 1727, Mr. Folkes was competitor with sir Hans Sloane for the office of president, find his interest was supported by a great number of members, though the choice was determined in favour of sir Hans. He was, however, again chosen of the council in 1729, and continued in it till he was advanced to the president’s chair twelve years after. In the mean time he was, in 1733, appointed one of the vice-presidents by sir Hans Sloane. In this year he set out with his whole family on a tour to Italy, and after residing a considerable time both at Rome and Florence, returned to England in September 1735. The opportunities which he had of consulting the best-furnished cabinets of Italy, enabled him to compose there an excellent “Dissertation on the weights and values of ancient coins.” This was read in the society of antiquaries, who requested that a copy of it might be registered in their books, which he promised to give, after he had revised and enlarged it; but, for whatever reason, this was never done. In the same year, however, 1736, his “Observations on the Trajan and Antonine Pillars at Rome” were read in this society, and afterwards printed in the first vol. of their “Archajologia,” where is another paper by him on the brass equestrian statue at Rome, occasioned by a small brass model of it being found near London. In April he also communicated to them “A Table of English Gold Coins, from the 18th of Edward III. when gold was first coined in England, to the present time, with their weights and intrinsic values,” which, at their desire, he printed the same year in 4to, and afterwards with additions in 1745, but far more complete, by the society, in 1763, 2 vols.

His ingenious friend, Dr. Robert Smith, then Plumian professor of mathematics in Cambridge, and afterwards master of Trinity college there, being engaged in composing “A complete system of Optics,” Mr. Folkes furnished him with several curious remarks, for vhich. he received the acknowledgments of the professor in the preface to that work, published in 1738, 4to. As he had not seen France in his travels to Italy, he made a tour to Paris in May 1739, chiefly with a view of seeing the academies there, and conversing with the learned men who do honour to that city and the republic of letters, and by whom he was received with all the testimonies of reciprocal regard. Sir Huns Sloane having, on account of his advanced age and growing infirmities, resigned the office of president of the royal society, at tlje annual election in 1741, Mr, Folkes was unanimously chosen to fill that honourable post, which he did with the highest reputation to the society and himself, and soon after his election he presented the society with 100l. The following year he was chosen to succeed Dr. Halley, as a memher of the royal academy of sciences at Paris. The university of Oxford also, being desirous of having a gentleman of his eminence in the learned world a member of their body, conferred on him in the year 1746, the degree of LL. D. upon receiving whick be returned them a compliment in a Latin speech, admired for its propriety and elegance. He was afterwards admitted to the same degree at Cambridge.

On the death of Algernon, duke of Somerset, president of the society of antiquaries, in Feb. 1750, Mr. Folkes, then one of the vice-presidents, was immediately chosen to succeed his grace in that office, in which he was continued by the charter of incorporation of that society, Nov. 2, 1751. But he was soon disabled from presiding in person, either in that or the royal society, being seized on Sept. 26th of the same year, with a palsy, which deprived him of the use of his left side. In this unhappy situation he languished nearly three years, till a second stroke put an end to his life, June 28, 1754, and was buried near his father and mother at Hillington church, under a black marble slab, with no inscription but his name and the date, pursuant to the express direction of his last will. By his wife, Lucretia Bradshaw, an actress on the stage before he married her, he left issue two daughters.

Mr. Folkes was a man of great modesty, affability, and integrity; a friend to merit, and an ornament to literature among others whom he zealously patronized, were Edwards the ornithologist, and Norden the Danish traveller. His library was large and well-chosen, and his cabinet enriched with a collection of English coins, of great extent and value. The manuscripts of his composition, which were not a few, and upon points of great curiosity and importance, not having received from him that revision and completion which he was capable of giving them, were expressly directed by him to be suppressed, an injunction which the public has probably great reason to regret. His knowledge was very extensive, his judgment exact and accurate, and the precision of his ideas appeared from the perspicuity and conciseness of his style on abstruse and difficult topics, and especially in his speeches at the. anniversary elections of the royal society on the delivery of the prize medals, in which he always traced out the rise and progress of the several inventions for which they were assigned as a reward. He had turned his thoughts to the study of antiquity and the polite arts with a philosophical spirit, which he hid contracted by the cultivation of the mathematical sciences in his youth. His talents appeared to greatest advantage upon the subjects of coins, weights, and measures, which had been extremely perplexed by other writers, for wan-t of a moderate share of arithmetic; in the prosecution of which he produced many arguments and proofs, which were the results of his own experiments and observations on common things, not sufficiently attended to, or seen with less distinguishing and penetrating eyes by others. He had a striking resemblance to Peiresk, particularly in some parts of his character represented by the elegant writer of that great man’s life. The generosity of his temper was no less remarkable than the politeness and vivacity of his conversation. His love of a studious and contemplative life, amidst a circle of friends of the same disposition, disinclined him in a very high degree to the business and hurry of a public one; and his only ambition was to distinguish himself by his zeal and activity for the promotion of science and literature. The sale of his library, prints, coins, &c. in 1756, lasted fifty-six days, and produced the sum of 3090l. 5s. A fine monument was erected (in 1792) to his memory in Westminster Abbey, in a window on the south side of the choir, opposite to Thynne’s monument

, a learned Dominican of Lisbon, who studied at Paris, was admitted doctor of the Sorbonne in 1542. Returning to Portugal, he was appointed professor of divinity at Coimbra, and preacher to the king. He left “Remarks on cardinal Cajetan’s Commentaries on the Bible,” Paris, 1539, fol.; “de Epidemia Febrili,” 4to, and other works. We find no account of the time of his death.

, a celebrated Portuguese Jesuit, was born about 1528, at Cortisada. He taught philosophy at Coimbra, and theology at Evora, where he took a doctor’s degree, 1570, held several important offices in his order, and laboured zealously fora reformation of manners in Portugal. He died November 4, 1599, at Lisbon, aged seventy-one, or, as others say, in 1619, He left various philosophical works and his “Metaphysics,” 4 torn. fol. claims the glory of having first invented the opinion of the Middle Science, which being afterwards adopted by Molina, excited a violent controversy between his followers and the Dominicans and Jansenists, who maintained the doctrine of St. Augustine relative to the divine prescience.

, a celebrated French poet, was born at Chatteau-Thierry, July 8, 1621, a year after the birth of Moltere. He was liberally educated, and at nineteen admitted among the fathers of the oratory, but left them in a little time. His father, who was supervisor of the water-courses and forests in this dutchy, put his sou into the place as soon as he appeared capable of managing it: but Fontaine had no taste for business, his talents being formed altogether for poetry. It is very remarkable, however, that he did not make this discovery in himself till he had commenced his 22d year; when, hearing accidentally the famous ode of Malherbe, on the assassination of Henry IV. he found himself affected with surprise and transport; and the poetic fire, which had lain concealed in him, was kindled into ablaze. He immediately applied to the study of this poet, and at length imitated him. The first froits of his pen he usually communicated to a near relation, who encouraged him, and frequently read with him the best Latin poets and critics, as Horace, Virgil, Terence, Quintilian, &c. He passed from thence to such French and Italian writers as excelled in the manner and style to which his genius led him particularly Rabelais, Marot, Ariosto, Boccace, &,c. Rabelais was uniformly his favourite and idol. He had recourse also to the Greek authors, and especially to Plato and Plutarch; from whom he drew those fine moral maxims with which he has enriched his fables.

Though his disposition was exceedingly averse to confinement, or restraint of any kind, yet, to oblige his parents, he consented to marry; and, though the most unfeeling and insensible of mortals, was yet so far captivated by the wit and beauty of his \\ne, that he entertained a high opinion of her judgment, and never undertook any considerable work without consulting her. The dutchess of Bouillon, however, niece to cardinal Mazarine, being banished to Chateau-Thierry, Fontaine was presented to her, and had the happiness to please her; and this, added to a desire of conversing with the wits, tempted him to follow her when she was recalled to Paris. Here the intendant Fouquet soon procured him a pension, which he enjoyed in great comfort without troubling himself at all about his wife, or, perhaps, even reflecting that he had one. Upon the disgrace of this minister, he was admitted as gentleman to Henrietta of England; but the death of this princess put an end to all his court hopes, if, indeed, he was susceptible of hope. After this, among other favours from the most illustrious persons in the kingdom, the generous and witty madam de la Sabliere furnished him with an apartment and all necessaries in her house; who, one day, having hastily turned away all her servants, declared that she had kept but three animals in her house, which were her dog, her cat, and La Fontaine. In this situation he continued twenty years, during which time he became perfectly acquainted with all the wits of his time, with Moliere, Racine, Boileau, Chapelle, &c.

The delights of Paris, and the conversation of thess friends, did not hinder him from paying a visit to his wife every September; but that these visits might be of some use, he never failed to sell a house, or piece of land, so that, with his wife’s expences and his own, a handsome family estate was nearly consumed. His Parisian friends urged him frequently to go and live with his wife, saying, that it was a shame to separate himself from a woman of her merit and accomplishments and, accordingly, he set out with a purpose of reconciling himself to her and, arriving at the town, inquired at his house for her. The servant, not knowing him, said, “She was gone to church;” upon which he immediately returned to Paris; and, when his friends inquired about his reconciliation, answered, that “he had been to see his wife, but was told she was at church.” Upon the death of madam de la Sabliere, he was invited to England by the dutchess of Mazarine, and the celebrated St. Evremond, who promised him all the comforts and sweets of life: but the difficulty of learning the English language, together with the liberality of some great persons at home, made him lay aside all thoughts of this journey. In 1692 he was seized with a dangerous illness: and when the priest came to talk to him about religion, concerning which he had lived in an extreme carelessness, though without being actually an infidel or a libertine, Fontaine told him that ' he had lately bestowed some hours in reading the New Testament, which he thought a very good book.“Being brought to a clearer knowledge of ivligions truths, the priest represented to him, that he lia.l intelligence of a certain dramatic piece of his, which was soon to be acted; but that Ik-could not be admitted to the sacraments of the church i.nless he suppressed it. This appeared too rigid, and Font.iinc appealed to the Soi bonne; who confirming what the priest had said, Fontaine threw the piece into the fire, without keeping even a copy. The priest then laid before him the evil tendency of his Tales, which are written in a loose and wanton manner; told him, that while the French language subsisted, they would be a most dangerous sedueement to vice; and further added, that he could not administer the sacraments tu him unless he would promise to make a public acknowledgment of his fault at the time of receiving, a public acknowledgment before the academy, of which he was a member, in case he recovered, and to suppress the book to the utmost of his power. Fontaine thought these terms very hard, but at length yielded to them all. On these accounts some have compared him to Peter Aretin, who, though the most libertine of all writers, became at last a very saint, and wrote nothing but books of piety. But it is certain that Fontaine did not resemble Aretin in writing pious books; and many, among whom is Baillet in particular, doubt the truth of those stories which are related concerning his repentance. He affected, indeed, some degree of repentance, and vowed to renounce his libertine manner in a dedication to his patroness, madam de la Sabliere but, notwithstanding this, he relapsed again, writing tales with his usual gaiety and the excuse he makes” for this inconstancy, when he calls himself “Tho Butterfly of Parn-.issus,” savours more of the poet than the Christian. He did not die till April 13, 1695; when, if we believe some, he was found with that implement of superstitious mortification, an hair-shirt on.

Beside “Tales,” he was the author of “Fables;” and in both he has merited the title of an original writer, who is, and probably will ever be, single in his kind. In his subjects indeed, he has made great use of the Greek, and Larin, and French, and Italian authors; but he is truly original in his manner, which is so easy, so natural, so simple, so delicate, that it does not seem possible to exceed it. His compositions have much nature, entirely devoid of affectation: his wit seems unstudied, and so much pleasantry is hardly to be met with. He never grows languid or heavy, but is always new and surprising*. His Tales are said to have been a great while the cause of his exclusion from the French academy; but at last, upon his writing a letter to a prelate of that society, wherein he declared his dissatisfaction for the liberties he had taken, and his resolution that his pen should never relapse, he was received into that body with marks of esteem. His first Fables are more valued than his last he seems to have thrown the best of his fire and force into them and both the one and the other have more sobriety and correctness than his Tales.

His life had as little of affectation in it as his writings: he was all nature, approaching to the extreme of simplicity or even stupidity, without a grain of art. He had a son, whom, after keeping a short time at. home, he recommended to the patronage of the president Harlay. Fontaine, being one day at a house where this son was come, did not know him again, but observed to the company, that he thought him a boy of parts and spirit. Being told that this promising youth was no other than his own son, he answered very unconcernedly, “Ha truly I am glad on't.” This apathy, which so many philosophers have vainly affected, was perfectly natural to Fontaine; it ran through every part of his behaviour, and seemed to render him insensible to every thing without. As he had a wonderful facility in composing, so he had no particular apartment for that purpose, but went to work wherever the humour came upon him. One morning, madam de Bouillon going to Versailles, spied him deep in thought under a tree; and, when she returned in the evening, there was Fontaine in the same place and attitude, though the day had been cold, and much rain fallen. Whether from the same simplicity, or rather, we think, absolute stupidity, we are told that he did not perceive the evil tendency of his writings, not even of his Tales; for being once exhorted by his confessor in a severe illness to prayer and almsgiving, he replied, “I can give no alms for I have nothing to give: but there is a new edition of my Tales in the press, of which the bookseller is to let me have a hundred copies; I will give them to you, that you may sell them for the benefit of the poor.” Another time having written a Tale, in which he made a very profane application of these words of the gospel “Lord, thou deliveredst unto me five talents” he addressed it to the celebrated M. Arnauld, in a very ingenious prologue, “wishing,.” he said, “to show posterity his great esteem for this learned doctor;” nor did he perceive the indecency of the application of scripture, or of his dedication, till Boileau and Kacine made him sensible of it. Notwithstanding their advice, the same is said to have been his design agairr, with respect to another Tale, which he was going to dedicate to M. Harlai, archbishop of Paris.

It has been observed, that the finest writers, and the deepest thinkers, have frequently been but indifferent companions. This was Fontaine’s case: for, having once been invited to dine at the house of a person of distinction, for the more elegant entertainment of the guests, though he ate very heartily, yet not a word could be got from him; and when, rising soon after from the table, on pretence of going to the Academy, he was told he would be too soon, “Oh then,” said he, “I'll take the longest way.” Kacine once carried him to the Tenebrae, which is a service in the church of Rome, in representation of our Saviour’s agony in the garden; and, perceiving it too long for him, put a Bible into his hands. Fontaine, happening to open it at the prayer of the Jews in Baruch, read it over and over with such admiration, that he could net forbear whispering to Racine, “This Baruch is a fine writer do you know any thing of him” and for some days after, if he chanced to meet with any person of letters, when the usual compliments were over, his question was, “Have you ever read Barnch there’s a lirst-rate genius” and this so loud, that every body might hear him. This is of a piece with another anecdote. Being one day with Boileau, Racine, and other eminent men, among whom were some ecclesiastics, St. Austin was talked of for a long time, and with the highest commendations. Fontaine listened with his natural air; and at last, after a profound silence, asked one of the ecclesiastics with the most unaffected seriousness, “Whether he thought St. Austin had more wit than Rabelais?” The doctor, eyeing Fontaine from head to foot, answered only by observing, that “he had put on one of his stockings the wrong side outward;” which happened to be the case.

The nurse who attended him in his illness, observing the fervor of the priest in his exhortations, said to him, “Ah, good sir, don't disturb him so; he is rather stupid than wicked.” These, and many other stories are told of him, which either are, or might have been true. One thing, however, must be mentioned as an honour shewn to him; his widow being molested about the payment of some public money, the intendant gaveorders, that no tax or impost should be. levied upon his family nor was this distinguishing favour ever revoked by any succeeding intendants while any of the family remained.

His principal works are, I. “Tales,” Amsterdam, 1G85, 2 vols. 8vo, with plates by Remain de Hooge. To distinguish the original of this edition from the counterfeits, it is necessary to observe that the word Kalverstraat on the title pagre is put with a little s; in the other the S is a capital; but this edition has been eclipsed by one with engravings from Eisen’s designs, and vignettes by Choffort, 1762, 2 vols. 8vo. This also has been counterfeited in Holland, in. 1764, but the plates are so much inferior, that the genuine edition may be easily distinguished. In the copies which have the best proofs of the plates, the criterion is, there should be no drapery on the woman’s thigh who is speaking to the devil of Papefiguiere; nor any branch of a tree on the young man in the “Cas de Conscienca.” 2. “Fables,” of which a very elegant edition was published, 1757, with short notes by M. Coste there are editions with plates in 5 and in 2 vols. 12mo; but nothing equals the magnificent one of 1755, 4 vols. fol. It is 'a masterpiece of typography, and the borders are in a new style of engraving in wood. A moderate edition has since appeared, the whole of it engraved, the subject and the figures, 6 vols. 8vo. 3. “CEuvres diverses,” reprinted at Paris, 1758, 4 vols. 12mo. All La Fontaine’s works were collected, 1726, 3 vols. 4to; an elegant edition, bordered. The principal of them, besides the Fables and Tales, are, “Les Amours de Pysche et de Cupidon,” in verse and in prose; “L'Eunuque,” a comedy; the poem “Du Quinquina,” and other poetical pieces.

, a voluminous French writer, the son of a scrivener at Paris, was born in 1625, and received at the age of twenty into the: society of the celebrated solitaries of Port Royal, in a subordinate office, but in the course of time obtained the^ chief superintendance of the young men who were sent there for education; He employed his leisure hours in severe literary labours, such as transcribing the works of several of these solitaries. He followed Nicole and Arnauld, to whom he had been a kind of secretary, into their different places of retreat; in 1664 he was shut up in the Bastille with Sacy, and came out of it with him in 16f>8. After the death of Sacy, in 1684, he frequently changed his retreat, but established himself finally at Mel un, where he died in 1709, at the age of eighty-four. His works are principally, 1. “Lives of the Saints of the Old Testament,” 4 torn. 8vo. 2. “Lives of the Saints” in general, the same number of volumes, or 1 in folio. 3. “Les figures de Bible,” or a history of tha Bible, in short chapters, which has often been printed under the title of “Bible de Royaumont,” and there is an English edition in 4to, with above 300 prints. 4. “Memoirs of the Solitaries of Port Royal,” 2 vols. 12mo. 5. “Translation of St.' ChrysostonVs Homilies on St. Paul’s Epistles,” 7 vols. 8vo. His versions are written with fidelity, but not always with vigour. He was far inferior to Arnauld and Nicole, whom he admired; but his piety was worthy of Port Royal. He was distinguished for innocence of manners, laborious, edifying simplicity of life, sincere modesty, unparalleled disinterestedness, and a steadiness of faith superior to all trials. A man of so many virtues deserves to be recorded, though not among the first class of authors. It remains to be added that his translation of Chrysostom involved him in trouble. Father Daniel, a Jesuit, accused him of Nestorianism, and denounced, him in a letter to the Sorbonne. Fontaine made a very humble and respectful retraction, and substituted several new pages in those parts which had been found reprehensible; but, as this did not prevent M. de Harlai from condemning his translation, he undertook its defence in a work where he asserts, that he has faithfully translated St. Chrysostom, and not fallen into heresies.

, a French critic, was born of a good family at Rouen, in 1685. At fifteen, he entered into the society of the Jesuits; and, at thirty, quitted it for the sake of returning to the world. He was a pnest, and had a cure in Normandy; but left it, and resided for some time in the character of a man of wit and letters, with the cardinal d'Auvergne. Having obtained some reputation at Paris by certain critical productions, the abbe“Bignon, in 1724, committed to him the editorship of the” Journal des Scavans.“He acquitted himself well in this department, and was peaceably enjoying the applauses of the public, when in 1725 the enemies whom by critical strictures in his Journal he had created, formed an accusation against him of a most abominable crime, and procured him to be imprisoned. By the credit of powerful friends, he was set at liberty in fifteen days; the magistrate of the police took himself the trouble of justifying him in a letter to the abbe Bignon; and this letter having been read amidst his fellow-labourers in the Journal, he was unanimously re-established in his former credit. But with whatever reputation he might acquit himself in his Journal, his frequent quarrels interrupted his labours, which, however, he employed on some newperiodical works, from which he derived his greatest fame. In 1731, he began one under the title of” Nouveliiste du Parnasse, ou Reflexions sur les ouvrages nouveanx,“but proceeded only to two volumes; the work having been suppressed by authority, from the incessant complaints of authors who were there ridiculed. About three years after, in 1735, he obtained a new privilege for a periodical production, entitled” Observations sur les Ecrits Modernes;“whk:h, after being continued to thirty-three volumes, was suppressed also in 1743. Yet the year following, 1744, he published another weekly paper, called” Jugemens sur les ouvrages nouveaux,“and proceeded to eleven volumes; the two last being done by other hands. Fontaines could go no farther: for, in 1745, he was attacked with a disorder in the breast, which ended in a dropsy, and this in five weeks’ time carried him oHF.” He was,“says M. Freron,” born a sentimental person; a philosopher in conduct as well as in principle; exempt from ambitton and of a noble firm spirit, which would not submit to sue for preferments or titles. In common conversation he appeared only an ordinary man, but when subjects of literature or any thing out of the common way were agitated, he discovered great force of imagination and wit."

Besides the periodical works mentioned above, he was the author of many others; many of them critical, some historical, and some translations from English writers, chiefly from Pope, Swift, &c. The abbe“de la Porte published in 1757,” L‘Esprit de i’Abbe des Fontaines," 4 vols. 12mo; at the head of which is the life of Fontaines, a catalogue of his works, amounting to forty-seven articles, and another catalogue of writings against him, amounting to thirty-three. He translated Virgil also, and some other classics.

, an eminent Italian architect, but perhaps more justly celebrated for his knowledge of mechanics, was born at Mili, on the lake of Lugano, in 1543, and came to Rome in his twentieth year, to study architecture. Sixtus V. to whom his merits were known when he was cardinal Montalti, was no sooner raised to the tiara, than he made him his architect. Among other great designs for ornamenting the city of Rome, this pontiff had conceived the project of digging out and re-erecting the famous obelisk, formed of one entire piece of granite, originally from Egypt, which had formerly decorated the circus of Nero, but was now partly buried near the wall of the sacristy of St. Peter’s. For this purpose he called together the ablest artists, engineers, and mathematicians, to consider of the means by which this vast relic of Roman grandeur, which was thirty-six feet high, and weighed above a million of pounds, could be removed, and placed on its pedestal in the front of the piazza of St. Peter’s. The machinery employed by the Egyptians in preparing this obelisk, or of conveying il to Rome, were so forgotten, that even tradition preserved no probable conjecture; but the ingenuity of Fontana was completely successful. He first produced before the pope a model of the machinery to be employed, and demonstrated the practicability of the operation; and having made all the necessary erections, the obelisk was raised and safely transported to the piazza, about 150 yards distance, and placed on its pedestal amidst the acclamations of the astonished populace of Rome, on Sept. 10, 1586, the same day that the duke of Luxembourg, ambassador from Henry IV. made his entry into the city. It is said that Fontana undertook this work with the alternative of losing his head if it did not succeed, and that he had provided horses at every gate at Rome, to aid his escape, in case of any accident. Be this as it may, the pope revyarded him munificently. He created him a knight of the golden spur, gave him titles of nobility, and caused medals to be struck to his honour. To all this he added a pension of 2000 crowns, with reversion to his heirs; 3000 crowns as a gift, and all the materials employed on the undertaking, the value of which was computed at 20,000 crowns. Besides the erection of this obelisk, on which Fontana’s fame chiefly rests, he constructed three others, and built for the pope a superb palace near St. John of Lateran, and the library of the Vatican, and repaired some of the ancient monuments of art in Rome. His forte, indeed, was rather in mechanics than in original architecture, in which last he is said to have committed many mistakes; and either this, or the envy which his great enterprize created, is supposed to have raised him enemies, who at length persuaded pope Clement VIII. to dismiss him from his office of pontifical architect. In 1592, however, he was invited to Naples by the viceroy, the count Miranda, who made him royal architect and chief engineer. In that city he built the royal palace and some other considerable edifices, and died there in 1607. He published an account of the removal of the obelisk, entitled “Delia transportatione dell' Obelisco Vaticano e delle fabriche Sixto V.” Rome, 1590, fol. reprinted at Naples in 1603. He had a brother, John, who assisted him in his works at Rome, but who excelled chiefly in hydraulic machinery. He died at Rome in the year 1614.

, a learned archbishop of Ancyra, was born in 1666, in the duchy of Friouli; and died at Rome in 1736. He was a man greatly distinguished, and held a correspondence with all the learned. There are many works of his; the principal of which are, 1. “Biblioteca della Eloquenza Italiana,” often primed; but the best edition is that of Venice, 1753, in 2 vols. 4to, with the remarks of Apostolo Zeno. 2. “A Literary History of Aquileia, in Latin,” Rome, 1742, 4to, a posthu­Hjous work, but full of good criticism and of learning, sacred and profane, &c. 3. “A collection of Bulls of Canonization from John XV. to Benedict XIII.”

, is the assumed name of a celebrated Venetian lady, whose real name was Modesta Pozzo, and who was born at Venice in 1555, and lost her father and mother the first year of her life. In her younger days, she was put into the monastery of the nuns of Martha of Venice; but afterwards quitted it, and was married. She lived twenty years with her husband in great union, and then died in childbed in 1592. She learned poetry and the Latin tongue with the utmost ease; and is said to have had so prodigious a memory, that, having heard a sermon but once, she could repeat it word for word. She was the author of a poem entitled “11 Kloridoro,” and of another on the “Passion and Resurrection of Jesus Christ.” Besides these and other poems, she published a prose work “Dei Meriti delle Donne,” in which she maintains, that the female sex is not inferior in understanding and merit to the male. This was printed immediately after her death. Father Ribera has made an eulogium of this learned heroine, in his “Theatre of Learned Women” and Doglioni wrote her life in Italian, in 1593.

, a French Jesuit, was born at Paris in 1683, and entered on his noviciate in the order whcn he was fifteen years of age. Having completed his initiatory studies, he was employed some time to furnish extracts and remarks on books relating to religion and ecclesiastical history in the “Journal de Trevoux.” He was engaged for some years in collecting materials for writing a history of the popes, in which, however, he made but small progress; and what he left was too imperfect for publication. Having a turn for polite literature, he published various small poems in the collections of the day. His talents and learning pointed him out as a fit person for rector of the Jesuits’ college at Orleans, win-re he continued till 1735, when he was recalled to Paris, and appointed to continue Longueval’s “History of the Gallican church,” of which he wrote the 9th, 10th, and part of the 11th volumes. He was then interrupted by a paralytic stroke, and died at the college La Fleche, in 1742, in the fifty-sixth year of his age.

, the son of Frangois le Bovier de Fonienelle, advocate in the parliament of Rouen, and of Martha Corneiile, sister to the great dramatic poet Corneille, was born at Rouen Feb. 11, 1657, and lived to the age of an hundred, though so weak at his birth, that his life was not expected. Voltaire declares him to have been the most universal genius the age of Louis the Fourteenth produced; and compares him to lands situated in so happy a climate as to produce all sorts of fruits. Before he was twenty, he had written a great part of Bellerophon,“a tragic opera; and some time after his opera of” Thetis and Peleus“appeared, in which he had closely imitated Quinault, and met with great success. That of” yneas and Lavinia“did not succeed so well. He tried his genius in writing tragedy; and assisted mademoiselle Bernard in some of her dramatic pieces. Two he wrote himself, one of which was acted in 1680, but never printed. He was too long and too unjustly censured on account of this piece; for he had the merit to discover, that though his genius was unconfined, yet he did not possess those talents which so greatly distinguished his uncle, Peter Corneille, in the tragic drama. He wrote several smaller compositions, in which that delicacy of wit and profoundness of thought, which promise greater efforts, might already be discovered. In his poetical performances, and” Dialogues of the Dead,“the spirit of Voiture was displayed, though more extended and more philosophical. His” Plurality of Worlds“is a work singular in its kind; his design in it was to present that part of philosophy to view in a gay and pleasing dress; for which purpose he has introduced a lady, and drawn up the whole in a most agreeable as well as instructing dialogue. In the same manner he made an entertaining book from” Van Dale’s Oracles." The controversial matters treated of in this work (for he went upon Van Dale’s scheme of exploding the Oracles as human impostures) raised him secret enemies, whose malice he had the good fortune to disappoint. He found, says Voltaire, how dangerous it is for a man, though in the right, to differ in opinion from those whose judgment receives a sanction from authority.

He now applied himself to geometry and natural philosophy; nor was he less successful in the study of these sciences, than he had been in that of polite literature. Having been appointed perpetual secretary to the academy of sciences, he discharged that trust for more than forty years. so as to meet with universal applause. His “History of the Academy of Sciences” often throws great light upon their memoirs, where they are obscure. He was the first that introduced elegance into the sciences. If he should sometimes be thought to have interwoven more beauties than the nature of the subject would properly admit, we must regard his composition as on a plentiful crop, where flowers grow naturally among the corn. His “History of the Academy” would be no less useful, than it is well performed, had it given us an account of truths discovered: but he was obligod to explain opinions raised to overthrow one another, most of which are now thought erroneous.

The “Eloges,” which he spoke on the deceased members of the academy, have this peculiar merit, that they excite a respect for the sciences, as well as for the author. In vain did Des Fontaines, and other censorious writers, endeavour to blemish his reputation. In his more advanced years he published “Comedies,” which, though they shewed the elegance of Fontenelle, were little fit for the stage; and “An Apology for Des Cartes’ s Vortices.” Voltaire says, we must excuse his comedies, in consideration of his great age and his Cartesian opinions, as they were those of his youth, which were at that time almost universally received in Europe. Upon the whole, he was regarded as the great master of a new art; that of treating abstruse sciences in a manner which made the study of them at once easy and agreeable; nor are any of his works of other kinds void of merit. His natural talents were assisted by a knowledge of the languages and history; and he certainly surpasses all men of learning who have not had the gift of invention. This account of Fontenelle, which is critical as well as historical, is taken chiefly from Voltaire’s “Age of Louis XIV.”

This great author died in January 1757, without ever having had any violent disorder, or felt any of the maladies of age till he was turned of ninety, after which he was a little deaf, and his eyes in some degree failed. The tranquil ease Of his temper is thought to have contributed to extend his life to this unusual period. A fuller account of hi* works will doubtless be required, which we shall give in chronological order. I. Letters of “the Chav. d'Horny”[??] 1685; a work of wit and fancy. 2. “Discourses on the Plurality of Worlds,” 1686; the character of this performance has been already sketched, as well as that of his, 3. “History of Oracles,” 1687. 4. “Pastoral Poems, with a Discourse on the Eclogue, and a digression on the ancients and moderns,” 1688. It seems to he agreed, that if these are not good eclogues, they are at least elegant poems. It was in the dissertation annexed to these that he made his first attempt to depreciate the ancients, whose merit compared with that of the moderns, was then the subject of a well-known controversy. Among his papers after his death, was found a discourse on the Greek tragedians, which was given to Diderot for insertion in the Encyclopedic, but he said he could not possibly insert in that work, a treatise tending to prove that Æschylus was a madman. 5, Several volumes of “Memoirs of the Academy of Sciences,” to which society he was secretary fortytwo years, from 1699. The general preface to this work is highly excellent; it contains also his “Eloges,” or Eulogies on the academicians, which have been published separately. 6. “History of the French Theatre, to Corneille,” with the life of that great Dramatist. 7. “Reflections on theatrical poetry, particularly Tragedy:” this is reckoned one of the most profound and judicious works of Fontenelle. 8. “Elements of the Geometry of Infinites,” 1727; not much esteemed by mathematicians. 9. “A Tragedy,” in prose, and “Six Comedies,” none of them calculated for theatrical effect. Warburton, it appears by his letters to bishop Hurd, entertained a high opinion of these comedies, and of Fontenelle’s preface to them. 10. “Theory of the Cartesian Vortices.” He remained unfortunately attached to the system of Descartes to the end of his life, having imbibed it very early. 11.“Endymion,” and some other pastoral lyric dramas. 12. “Moral Discourses,” and fugitive pieces. All these, except those on geometry and natural history, were collected in 11 vols, 12mo, under the title “Œuvres Diverses.” Other editions have since been published in folio and quarto. The style of this author is in general elegant and clear, but not altogether free from defects. It is often too negligent and familiar. He betrays at some times an affectation of giving great matters in a small compass; at others he der scends to puerile details unworthy of a philosopher. Ke displays occasionally too much refinement in his ideas; and, at times, is too elaborate in his ornaments. These defects are less offensive in the writings of Fontenelle, than they would be in any others; not only because they are overpowered by many striking beauties of various kinds, but because it is easy to perceive that they are truly natural to the author.

Perhaps no other man of letters ever enjoyed so universal an esteem as Fontenelle, which advantage he owed not only to his works, but to the prudence of his conduct, and the sweetness of his manners. His conversation was lively though placid, and his politeness was equal to his wit. Though he was superior to most other men, he did not make them feel it; but bore with their defects, and conversed as an equal. “Men,” he said, “are foolish and wicked; but such as they are, I must live among them; and this I settled with myself very early in life.” He was accused of want of feeling: and certainly he had not all the warmth which some require in a friend; but his friendship had more constancy and equality than that has in general which is more tender or more lively. He rendered services without the smallest ostentation. When the duke of Orleans proposed to him to be made perpetual president of the academy of sciences, his -reply was, “Take not from me, my lord, the delight of living with my equals.” He was ready always to listen as well as to talk; but when be had delivered his opinion, he studiously avoided dispute, pretending that his lungs were not equal to it. Though poor originally, he became rich for a literary man, by the royal bounty, and by an oeconomy free from all tincture of avarice. He was sparing only to himself; to others he was ready at all times to give or leur, and frequently to persons unknown to him. One of his maxims was, “that a man should be sparing in superfluities to himself, that he may supply necessaries to others;” a sublime and truly Christian saying, which with the rest of his excellent character, may discharge us from the necessity of entering into the dispute concerning his religious faith; which, probably, has been by some estimated too low, because he was superior to many of the superstitious opinions thought essential to it in his time.

, of Florence, son of John Peter Fontius, born in 1445, was a historian, an orator, and a grammarian, and in high esteem with Picus Mirandula, Marsilius Ficinus, Jerome Donatus, and all the literati of his age and country. He had the care of collecting books for the library of Matthew Corvinus, king of Hungary at Buda. He wrote a commentary on Persius, printed at Venice in 1491, and some orations, which were republishecl together at Frankfort, in 1621, 8vo; and died in 1513.

, esq. called the English Aristophanes, a distinguished writer and actor in comedy, was of a good family, and born at Truro, in Cornwall, about 1720. His father, John Foote, esq. enjoyed the offices of commissioner of the prize-office and line contract, and was finally member of parliament for Tiverton, in Devonshire. His mother, by an unhappy quarrel between her two brothers, sir John Dinely Goodere, bart. and sir Samuel Goodere, captain of the Ruby man of war, became heiress of the Goodere family. The quarrel alluded to, after subsisting for some years, ended in the murder of sir John by his brother, and the subsequent execution of the latter, in 1741. Foote received his education at Worcester-college, Oxford; and was thence removed to the Temple, as designed for the law. The dry ness and gravity of this study, however, not suiting the vivacity and volatility of Foote' s spirit, and his fortune, whatever it was, being soon dissipated, he left the law, and had recourse to the stage. He appeared first in Othello; but whether he discovered that his forte did not lie in tragedy, or that the language of other writers would not serve sufficiently to display his humour, he soon struck out into a new and untrodden path, by taking upon himself the double character of author and performer. In this double capacity, in 1747, he opened the little theatre in the Haymarket with a sort of drama of his own, called “The Diversions of the Morning,” This piece was nothing more than the introduction of well-known characters in real life; whose manner of conversing and expressing themselves he had a most amazing talent at imitating, copying not only the manner and voice, but in some degree, even the persons of those he ridiculed.

This performance at first, met with some little opposition from the Westminster justices; but the author beirag warmly patronized, their opposition was over-ruled, and, by only altering the title of his piece to “Mr. Foote’s giving Tea to his Friends,” he proceeded without farther molestation, and represented it for upwards of forty mornings to crowded and splendid audiences. The ensuing season he produced another piece of the same kind, called, “An Auction of Pictures;” in which he introduced several new characters, all, howerer, popular, anct extremely well known particularly sir Thomas de Veil, then the leading justice of peace for Westminster Mr. Cock, the celebrated auctioneer and the no less celebrated orator Henley. This piece had also a very great run, nor were any pains spared to procure this success, for it is to be noted, that he himself represented all the principal characters of each piece, where his great mimic powers were necessary, shifting from one to another with all the dexterity of a Proteus.

Foote was now in much prosperity he acquired a great deal of money; and he seems to have set mankind at defiance for he cared not whom he offended, and seldom considered whether they were subjects proper for ridicule. In 1776, he drew a character for the late duchess of Kingston, who was at that time the subject of much conversation; whose influence, however, prevailed so far as to prevent the representation of his play. In the course of this conflict, certain imputations were thrown out against him, which ripened at length into a legal charge. He was accused of unnatural practices, and though the accusation was supposed to have originated from malice, and he was acquitted, agreeably to the sentiments of the judge who tried him, yet the shock he received from this disgracing situation is believed to have had a fatal effect upon him. A few months afterwards he was struck, while on the stage, with a paralytic fit; from which he recovered sufficiently to spend the summer at Brighthelmstone. On the approach of winter, he was advised to remove to France; and arrived at Dover, Oct. 20, 1777; intending immediately to proceed to Calais; but, being seized with a shivering fit the next morning, he died in a few hours, and was buried in Westminster-abbey.

The wit and humour of Foote in private conversation, were equal to his comic powers on the stage, of which the following account, given by Mr. Boswell in the Life of Johnson, affords a striking instance. Dr. Johnson is said to have related it himself: “The first time I was in company with Foote was at Fitzherbert’s. Having no good opinion of the fellow, I was resolved not to be pleased; and it is very difficult to please a man against his will. I went on eating my dinner pretty sullenly, affecting not to mind him; but the dog was so very comical, that I was obliged to lay down my knife and fork, throw myself back in my chair, and fairly laugh it out. Sir, he was irresistible.” Innumerable other stories are circulated, all proving the lively and ready wit of this eccentric genius, as well as the general tinge of licentiousness which was visible in his conduct as well as conversation. His “Memoirs,” indeed, lately published by Mr. Cooke, prove that his mind “was not overcharged with the impressions of religious or moral duties.” It has, however, been reported on the testimony of some who knew him intimately, that he was a man of competent classical learning, and much various reading, and no less a rational and instructive companion in a serious hour with a single friend, than an entertaining one in mixed society.

His published dramas are twenty in number, and were written in the following order: 1. “Taste, a comedy,” 1752. 2. “The Englishman in Paris,” 1753. 3. “The Knights,” 1754. 4. “The Englishman returned from Paris,” 1756. 5. “The Author,” 1757. 6. “The Minor,” 1760. 7. “The Lyar,” 1761; not printed till 1764. 2. “The Orators,” 1762. 9. “The Mayor of Garrat,” 1763. 10. “The Patron,” 1764. 11. “The Commissary.” 12. “Prelude on opening the Theatre,” 176T. 13. “Tho Devil upon Two Sticks,” 1768, printed in 1778. 1 k “The Lame Lover,” 1770. 15. The Maid of Bath,' 1 1771, printed 1778. 16. “The Nabpb,” 1772, primed 1778. 17. “The Bankrupt,” 1772. 18. “The Cozeners,” 1771, printed 1778. 19. “A Trip to Calais, 1776, printed 1778. 20.” The Capuchin.“The lattur of these uas altered from the former, which was prohibited. A trifling piece called” Piety io Pattens,“awl” The Diversions of the Morning,“altered from Taste, were never published. The anonymous mock Tragedy of” The Tailors," is usually printed with. Foote’s works, and is very generally thought to he his. It was acted in 1767, printed in 1778. Most of these are formed upon temporary topics, and full of personalities, the objects of which are still generally recollected, and therefore do not require to be specified; but they are replete with vivacity and humour, and though composed with little care, or attention to plot, are very entertaining even in the closet. Foote borrowed liberally from Moliere and others; but made what he took his own by an originality in his manner of employing it; and his personal humour was so peculiar, that it has been hardly possible for any other player to give equal effect to the parts he acted himself.

, an eminent historian and biographer, was professor of divinity at Louvaine, and canon and archdeacon of Mechlin, where he died July 16 1761, highly respected as a man of learning and virtue, but of his private history we have no further particulars. His first publication appears to have been “Batavia Sacra, sive res gestae Apostolicorum virorum,” fol. 1714. He then published, 2. “Historia Episcopatus Antverpiensis,” Brussels, 1717, 4to. 3. “Historia Episcopatus Sylvicducensis,” ibid. 1721. 4. A new edition of “Auberti Minci Opera Diplomatics et Historica,” with large additions, ibid, 1723, 2 vols. fol. 5. “Diplomatum Belgicorum novu collectio,” being a supplement to the former, 1734 and 1748, 2 vols. foi. 6. “Chronologia sacra Episcoporum Belgii, ab anno 1561 ad annum 1761,” 12mo, a work in verse, with prose notes. He also published a new edition of the “Basilica Bruxellensis” of J. B. Christian, at Mechlin in 1743, 2 vols. 8vo, but is best known by his “Bibliotheca Belgica,” or lives of the Belgic authors, 1739, 2 vols. 4to, being a continuation of Miraeus, Sweert, and Valerius Andreas, ornamented with near 150 portraits, not half of which are to be found in the most complete copies. We lie under too many obligations to this work to examine it with the rigour which Marchand has employed, and for which we refer to his “Dictionnaire Historique.” The inaccuracies, as far as we have examined the work, are few, and for an occasional want of liberality, we must seek an apology in his religion. He has, however, taken some credit to himself, for not omitting those epitaphs on protestant writers in which their principles are commended and of this merit he ought not to be deprived.

, a very eminent Scottish lawyer, was born at Culloden, in the county of Inverness, in 1685, and educated in the university of Edinburgh, whence he removed to Utrecht, and afterwards to Paris, where he studied the civil law. He returned, in 1710, to Scotland, and was called to the bar in the court of session. His abilities as an advocate were soon noticed, and he obtained great practice. In 1717, he was appointed solicitor-general of Scotland. In 1722, he was returned member for the county of Inverness; and in 1725, was promoted to the dignity of lord-advocate. He was further advanced in 1742, to be lord-president of the court of session, in which high station he acted with such integrity, that he was esteemed and honoured by his country. During the rebellion in 1745 and 6, he used the utmost of his power to oppose the pretender, and mortgaged his estate to support the government. With great reason he applied to the ministry for a repayment of those expences which he had incurred by his loyalty, and their refusal, undoubtedly a stain on the history of the times, is said to have operated so strongly upon his mind, as to produce a fever, of which he died in 1747, at the age of 62. His writings were chiefly on theological subjects, without any reference to his profession; they are, 1. “Thoughts on Religion.” 2. “A Letter to a Bishop.” 3. “Reflections on Incredulity,” 1750, in 2 vols. 12mo. Father Houbigant translated the two former of these works into French, but they were not greatly admired in that country; the solidity of the Scottish lawyer could not be expected to suit with the vivacity of French reasoners. Duncan Forbes of Culloden, says a recent biographer, was in all respects one of the most eminent men of his time. His learning was extensive and profound, reaching even to the oriental languages; and he had that acuteness and subtlety of parts, which is peculiarly fitted for the nice discriminations of the law; but which was always regulated in him by the prevailing principles of his nature, probity, candour, and a strong sense of the beauty of virtue and moral excellence. In the eloquence of the bar, he outshone all his contemporaries; for he united to great knowledge of jurisprudence, a quickness of comprehension that discovered to him at once the strong ground of argument which he was to press, or the weakness of the doctrine he wished to assail. When raised to the presidency of the court, the vigour of his intellect, his patience in the hearing of causes, his promptitude in the dispatch of business, the dignity, of his deportment, and above all, the known probity and integrity of his mind, gave the highest weight to the decisions of that tribunal over which he presided.

Of his religious sentiments this biographer, the late lord Woodhouselee, speaks with less approbation. He allows that his piety was fervent and habitual, but seems to refer it to warmth of heart, and feelings naturally ardent, and that all this co-operating with a lively imagination, led him to become an admirer and disciple of the Hutchinsonian scheme of theology; and he adds that he had not enough of physical science to detect the absurdities with which the scheme of his favourite author abounds. It does not appear, however, that he adopted the whole scheme of Hutchinson, or that he was more absurd in what he did adopt than bishop Home, Parkhurst, and some other men of equal talents and celebrity. Warburton in one of his “Letters” lately published, after recommending the lord president’s “Reflections on Incredulity,” which was a posthumous work, adds, “It is a little jewel. I knew and venerated the man; one of the greatest that ever Scotland bred, both as a judge, a patriot, and a Christian.”

, an eminent Scotsman, was born in 1564, when the affairs of the church of Scotland were in great confusion. He was distinguished by his family, an well as by his uncommon merit, being himself lord of Corse, and baron of O'Neil, in the shire of Aberdeen. He was liberally educated both at Aberdeen and St. Andrew’s; and having a plentiful estate, a noble alliance, and great credit in his country, he contributed much towards restoring order, by encouraging pious and peaceable ministers, and by instructing the people in set conferences as well as occasional discourses; especially the papists, who would hear nothing from the pulpit. In this laudable manner he acted as a layman; and his abilities became so conspicuous, that he was often solicited to enter into the ministry by eminent persons both in church and state. He at length submitted to their judgment, and was ordained a presbyter at the age of 28. He was admitted minister of Keith, where he continued with the highest applause till 1618; and then, at the earnest desire of the clergy and laity of the diocese of Aberdeen, as well as at the express command of the king, was promoted to the bishopric of Aberdeen, which he had held about seventeen years. “It was,” says Burnet, “with great difficulty, that king James made him accept that dignity; and for several months he refused it, having proposed to himself to live in a less conspicuous state. It was soon seen, how much, he deserved to be a bishop; and that his refusal was not counterfeit, but the real effect of his humility. In all his behaviour he has displayed the character of a truly apostolic man. He visited his diocese without pomp and noise, attended only by one servant, that he might more easily be informed of what belonged to his care, &c.”

This excellent man died in 1635, aged seventy-one, after having two days before sent for all the clergy in Aberdeen to receive the sacrament with him. His “Commentary upon the Revelations,” was printed at London in 1613. He was a great promoter and guardian of learning as well as of religion. “He took so much care of the two colleges he had in his diocese, that,” as Burnet says, “they soon distinguished themselves, and became famous all over Scotland.” As he was chancellor of the university of Aberdeen, he improved that seat of learning, by repairing the fabric, augmenting the library, reviving the professions of divinity, canon-law, and physic, and procuring another professorship in divinity to be added.

, of Corse, second son to the preceding, was born May 2, 1593, and after his school education, was sent to the university of King’s college, Aberdeen, in 1607. After a course of philosophy and theology here, he went to Heidelberg, where he attended the lectures of Paraeus, and afterwards spent some time at the other universities of Germany. With theology he applied vigorously to the study of the Hebrew language, and according to Pictet, maintained, in 1608, a public dispute against the archbishop and the Lutherans of Upsal. If there be no mistake in this date, he could now have been only fifteen or sixteen yeajs of age. He pursued his studies, however, abroad until 1619, when returning to Aberdeen, he gave such proofs of extensive knowledge and talents, that he was immediately appointed professor of divinity and ecclesiastical history in King’s college. How well he was qualified for the office appears from his “Historicotheological Institutions,” a work universally admired, even by those who differed from him with regard to matters of church-government. Having, however, subscribed the Perth articles, as they were called, proposed by the synod of Perth, as an introduction to episcopacy in Scotland, the favourite measure of James I. which Dr. Forbes ably defended, and having refused to subscribe to the national league and covenant, he was ejected from his professorial chair in 1640. He had before this made an ineffectual. attempt to compose the religious dissentions in Scotland, by publishing a work written with great moderation of sentiment, entitled “Irenicam,” dedicated to the lovers of truth and peace. This was printed at Aberdeen in 1629, 4to. In 1642 he went to Holland, where he remained a few years, and revising the lectures he had delivered when professor, he compiled from them the excellent work abovementioned, which he published at Amsterdam in 1645, fol. under the title of “Institutiones historico-theologicæ.” This was so much admired, and considered indeed as one of the best works of the kind that had ever appeared, as to pass through three editions in a very short time. In 1646 he published, at the same place, his father’s “Commentary Oh the Apocalypse,” 4to, translated into Latin. Returning then to Scotland, he spent the short remainder of his life in retirement on his estate of Corse, where he died April 29, 1648. Those who had ejected him from his professorship added two instances of persecution which are peculiarly disgraceful. While professor, he had purchased a house at Old Aherdeen, where King’s college is situated, and made it over for the use of his successors; but having forgot to secure his life-rent in it, the prevailing party actually turned him out of it; and now, when dead, they would not allow him to be buried beside his father, though earnestly requested by many of his friends. The body was afterwards carried to the church-yard of Leuchil, where it lies without any monument. In 1703, a very elegant edition of all his works, in 2 vols. fol. was printed by the Wetsteins at Amsterdam, under the care partly of Mr. George Garden of Aberdeen, but principally of professor Gurtler of Deventer. The whole indicates great learning, and his “Exercitia Spiritualia,” a kind of Diary, shows no less piety.

, bishop of Edinburgh, was born in 1585, at Aberdeen, where he went through the courses of classical learning and philosophy. He was admitted master of arts at sixteen, and immediately afterwards made professor of logic: he applied himself to support Aristotle’s logic against the Ramists. Afterwards he went to travel, and made a great progress in divinity and the Hebrew language, in the universities of Germ-ant, during the four years he passed in that country. He then visited the university of Leyden, where he was greatly esteemed. His ill state of health not permitting him to undertake a journey into France and Italy, as he would willingly have done, he went over to England. The fame of his learning soon proclaimed him there, so that the university of Oxford offered him a professorship of Hebrew; which, however, he did not accept, because the physicians advised him to return to his native country. The magistrates of Aberdeen expressed a particular esteem for him. He recovered his health, and accepted at first a private cure; but afterwards, being strongly solicited by the inhabitants, went to be preacher in his native city. He was admitted doctor of divinity, when king James, among other regulations, had settled it with the deputies of the clergy, that the academical degrees and dignities should be restored to their ancient course. The labour of preaching hurting his health, they gave him a less painful employment, making hint principal of Markchal-college. He was afterwards dean of the faculty of divinity, and then rector of the university; a post immediately under the chancellor. Then he became pastor at Edinburgh, and was received there with every mark of friendship; but people’s dispositions being changed, from their warm attachment to the antiepiscopal discipline of Geneva, he withdrew himself, and retired to his own country. He was sent for some years after by Charles I. who had caused himself to be crowned at Edinburgh in 1633; and he preached before the monarch with great eloquence and learning. That prince, having founded an episcopal church at Edinburgh, knew of none more worthy to fill the new see than Dr. Forbes. He was consecrated with the usual ceremonies, and applied himself wholly to the functions of his dignity: but fell sick soon after, and died in 1634, after having enjoyed his bishopric only three months.

Though able and learned, he had published nothing, and composed very little. He wrote a treatise tending to pacify controversies, which was printed at London in 1658, with this title, “Considerationes modestae et pacificae controversiarum de justificatione, purgatorio, invocatione Sanctorum, Christo Mediatore, Kucharistia.” “This posthumous work,” says ttoe author of his life, “is a signal specimen and proof of a pacific temper, and a moderate mind: wherein, like a second Cassander, and catholic moderator, he endeavours to compose, or at least to mitigate, the rigid and austere opinions, in certain points of religious controversy, both of the reformed and of the popish party. How greatly he regarded moderation, appears from that usual saying of his, that, if there had been more Cassanders and Wiceliuses, there would have been no occasion for a Luther, or a Calvin.” He had another saying concerning letters, as good as this concerning religion: it was, “Lege plura, et scribe pauciora,” “Read more, and write less.” It was a piece of advice he gave to one, who used a great deal of paper; and the result of a resolution, which he himself had made, not to write much.

, a French naval officer of great repute, was born in 1656, and bred to the sea-service under a: relation, who was a sea-captain, named Korbin-Gardane. In 1636, he was left by his commander the chevalier de Chaumont, in the service of the king of Siam, to whom he was some time chief admiral. He afterwards distinguished himself on the coast of Spain, where, in 1703, he displayed his generosity no less than he had before proved his valour, by giving up to the owner a French prize, which the governor of Barcelona had ceded to him. In 1708 he was intrusted with conveying the pretender to Scotland, but was so closely watched by admiral Byng, that he was happy in returning his charge to Dunkirk. Louis XIV. admired and esteemed his greatness of soul, and frequently discoursed with him on the subject of his engagements, the recital of which he heard with great satisfaction. Once, when the king had given him some recompence for his services, at the time of going to court to return thanks, his zeal for a brother seaman of great merit, named John Bart, whom he considered as neglected, burst forth in remonstrances for him. The king was pleased with this generous disinterestedness, and remarked to his minister Louvois, that he saw few such examples at his court. But though Forbin was favoured by the king, he was not equally in the good graces of the ministers; and, after he had distinguished himself highly in many engagements against various enemies, his infirmities and his discontent caused him to retire from the service in 1710. He died in 17:53, at the age of 77.

Some maxims were found in his Memoirs published in 1749, by Reboulet, in two volumes, which ought to have made him more acceptable to ministers: unless, perhaps, as is highly probable, his experience of the bad effects of the contrary conduct, was the cause of committing them to paper. They are directed to persons who desire to rise in the sea service; and are to this effect: 1. “Never to. interfere in any thing which did not strictly belong to their employment.” 2. “To pay a blind obedience to the or^ ders they received, however repugnant to their private opinions; trusting that ministers have more extended views, than individuals in the service can develope.”

, an eminent political and financial writer of France, was born at Mans, Oct. 2, 1722. His father, Francis, Louis Veron Duverger, was a merchant of that city. Having finished his education at the college of Beauvais, i,Ek Paris, he left it in the sixteenth year of his age, to followthe tarn my trade, which had long been carried on by his family; his great grandfather having established at Mans a, manufactory of tammies, which, from that circumstance, in Spain were called Verones. In 1741 he was sent by his father to Spain and Italy, whence he returned to Mans in 1743. His grandfather by the mother’s side, having soon after retired from business, he was thereby enabled to trade on his own account; but declining, from motives of delicacy, to carry on at Mans the same trade as his father, he Avent to Nantes, where his uncle was established as a shipowner, to obtain a knowledge of the mercantile concerns and transactions of that city. Having spent several years at Nantes, and collected much valuable information on maritime and colonial trade, he entered in 1752 upon a speculation, which induced him to go to Paris. Confined to a small circle of friends and acquaintance, he lived there in great privacy, yet presented to government several memoirs, which experiencing a very cool reception, he resolved to write in future, not for administration, but the public. He published accordingly in 1753, his “ThtJorie et pratique du Commerce et de la Marine,” a free translation from the Spanish of Dr. Geron. de Votariz, which was soon followed by the “Considerations sur les Finances d'Espagne relativement a eel les de France,” a work in which he displayed such intimate acquaintance with the Spanish system of finance, that the Spanish ambassador at the court of Versailles proposed him to marshal cle Noailles, as consul-general of Spain; but the former being soon after recalled by his court, the appointment did not take place. About the same time he published, in 1754, his “Essai sur la partie politique du commerce de terre et de mer, de Pagriculture et des finances,” which within three weeks passed through two editions; the third edition was published in 1766, and the fourth in 1796, considerably improved and enlarged. From his profound knowledge in matters relative to money and coinage, he was appointed in 1755, to examine into the enormous abuses which had crept into the administration <yf the French mint. He immediately proposed a new coinage, but his plan was not carried into execution until 1771; he was, however, in the meanwhile, appointed inspectorgeneral of the mint, a new office expressly established for him. Having obtained free admittance to the library of the family of Noailles, rich in manuscripts relative to the administration of the finances of France, he conceived the idea of composing his “Recherches et considerations sur les finances de France depuis 1595 jusqu'a 1721,” printed at Basle, 1758, in 2 vols. 4to, and reprinted the same, year at Liege, in 6 vols. 8vo. This valuable work expeperienced the most distinguished reception both in France and other countries, and supplied Thomas with matter for his observations on the true principles of financial administration in his eulogy of Suny. The duke de Choiseuil being appointed prime minister, he endeavoured to place Forbonnois in the department for foreign affairs; but the latter declining the appointment, Choiseuil requested he would apply himself to lay down a general system of trade, and to comment on all commercial treaties concluded by France, in order that certain and uniform principles might be introduced into that important department of political economy. While he was making the necessary preparations for executing that commission, the abandoned state of the French finances in 1759, occasioned the appointment of the noted Sithonette to the office of comptroller-general or minister of finances. Without being in the least connected with that minister, Forbonnois received an offer of the place of principal clerk of the department of finance, which being declined, the minister requested he would at least privately lend him his assistance in projecting the first financial operations necessary for opening the war both by sea and land, at a time when 1,500,000 livres only were left in the treasury. Eight days after, Forbonnois brought him all the plans and draughts of edicts for the first operations. They were approved by the minister, and laid before Louis XV. who in consequence thereof appointed Forbonnois inspector of the depot of the general financial comptrol, a title which he himself suggested, in order to avoid the eclat of a more brilliant appointment. However, Forbonnois’ acknowledged superiority as a financier, which proved exceedingly offensive to the minister’s lady, soon brought on a coolness between her husband and him, which induced Forbonnois to retire into the country until Sithonette’s disgrace and dismission. He might have succeeded him as comptroller-general, had he been willing to consent to sacrifices which he could not reconcile with his honesty and candour. While he held the place of inspector of the depot of the general financial comptrol, he published his “Lettre d'un Banquier a son correspondent cle province;” chiefly intended to give a favourable account of the minister’s operation. In 1760 he pointed out to the Duke de Choiseuil the perilous situation of France, and suggested the plan of a treaty of peace, calculated to tempt the ambition of Great Britain, and at the same time to save resources for France. This plan met with so much applause, that Don de Fuentes, at that lime Spanish ambassador at Paris, who was admitted to the conferences, offered an armed neutrality on the part of his court to tacilitate its execution. Forbonnois was charged to draw up the necessary acts and plans, and to elucidate a great variety of points respecting the fisheries, the means of enlarging them, the sacrifices to be made to England, &c. nay, he was offered the appointment of plenipotentiary to conclude the treaty; but having executed his charge, and demanded a conference, he received no answer. Being entrusted with the secrets of the state, he began to entertain strong apprehensions for his personal safety, and took refuge in a glass-manufactory in the mountains of Burgundy, in which he was concerned. He returned, however, afterwards to Paris, and in order to render both the minister and the financiers perfectly easy on his account, he purchased the place of a counsellor or member of the parliament of Metz.

In 1757 he married miss Leray de Charmont, an accomplished and higlily amiable lady, who by the mildness of her character brightened the evening of his meritorious life, and in some measure indemnified him for the disappointments he had experienced in what is called “le grand monde.” The leisure he enjoyed in his peaceful retreat was employed in agricultural and literary pursuits. To the journal edited by Dupontof Nemours, he contributed several interesting memoirs signed The Old Man of the Sarthe. He also published, in 1789, “Prospectus sur les Finances, dedie” aux bons Francois,“and some time after his” Observations succintes sur remission de deux milliards d'assignats." At the beginning of the revolution he performed the functions of president of the district of Mamers, and also obtained the distinction of his name being inserted in the list of candidates for the office of tutor to the prince royal, son of Louis XVI.

In April 1799, the disturbances which prevailed in the department of the Sarthe, and several anonymous threatening letters he received, induced him at his advanced age to leave his country seat, and take refuge in Paris. Finding in the metropolis but few of his former acquaintance, he formed new connections, and became a frequent visitor of the national institute, of which he was a member. One of his last works is his “Analyse des principes sur la circulation des Denrees, et Pinfluence du numeraire sur cette circulation.” At the time he composed this valuable publication, he was already afflicted with a chronical disease, which put a period to his existence on the 25th of September, 1800. In 1801 M. de L'Isle de Salle published a very curious literary life of Forbonnois, who left a great many unpublished treatises, among which are eight on legislation, ten on diplomacy, seven on the marine and the colonies, eleven on finances, &c. Some of these were probably the collections he made previous to the publicacation of some of his works.

, an eminent lexicographer, was born in a small village of Treviso in the Venetian territories, August 16, 1688. His family was obscure, and scarcely wealthy enough to afford him a literary education. He went through his studies in the seminary of Padua, where his principal instructor was the celebrated philologist Facciolati, then professor in that place, and only six years older than himself. Evincing an early predilection for the church, he was at a proper age ordained a priest, soon after which he was appointed spiritual director to the seminary in which he had been educated. After having filled that station for nine years, he removed, in 1724, to Ceneda, in the same capacity; but in 1731 he was recalled to Padua, and remained there till 1765, when be retired to his native place, with the design of passing his last years in the bosom of his family.

He was at first employed by Facciolati in the corrections and additions to the famous dictionary of Calepini, which the latter published at Padua, in 1718, and which, owing to its superior merit, justly superseded all the preceding works of the same kind in Italy. He was likewise employed by Facciolati in the compilation of the famous dictionary entitled “Ortografia Italiana,” which has already gone through many editions, and which is absolutely necessary to all who wish to write Italian with orthographical accuracy. So great was Forcellini’s modesty, that the public would not have been informed of the assistance he rendered in these two excellent works, had not Facciolati himself declared, in his preface to the last, “that he had the satisfaction of bringing up a pupil of singular abilities, the abbe” Forcellini, who was afterwards his assistant in the im^ proved edition of Calepini, and in the compilation of the Ortografia."

It was greatly advantageous to the cause of letters that Mr. Forcellini, being introduced to the notice of cardinal Cornaro, bishop of Padua, received from that prelate an order to compile a new Latin Dictionary, in which all the deficiencies of the preceding edition of Calepini’s performance, for the Latin department, should be supplied. Perhaps no person was better qualified for such an undertaking, or was possessed of more steadiness, patience, and perseverance; an almost incredible proof of which is, that he employed in it in-aHy forty years of his life He ransacked not only all the Latin writers of the several ages of Roman literature, but all the ancient grammarians, and every collection of inscriptions which had been published to his time. To each of the Latin words inserted in this new Dictionary he affixed the corresponding Italian and Greek, and, to render the work still more complete, he subjoined to u a copious list of barbarous words, and a numerous catalogue of the writers whose works he had investigated. The performance was soon considered classical and unrivalled. Besides the intimate friendship of Facciolati, his preceptor and benefactor, the abbe Forceliini was highly esteemed by Morgagni, Pontedera, Valsecchi, and other eminent professors in the university of Padua. His learning and his merit would have advanced him to high literary honours, had he been less modest and unassuming. He was regular in his domestic life, candid, disinterested, and exemplary; and as a literary character, he was satisfied that his memory would be dear to and respected by posterity. He died April 4, 1768.

His great dictionary is entitled “Totius Latinitatis Lexicon, consilio et cura Jacobi Facciolati, opera et studio Ægidii Forceliini, alumni seminarii Patavini, lucubratum” and the edition of it which we have seen was published at Padua in 1771, 4 vols. in folio.

, an ingenious gentleman of the seventeenth century, was the son of sir John Ford, knt. and was born at Up-park in the parish of Harting in Sussex, in 1605. He became a gentleman commoner of Trinity college, Oxford, in 1621, but left it without taking a degree, after which Wood has not been able to trace his history, until he served the office of high sheriff for Sussex, and demonstrated his loyalty to Charles I. who conferred on him the honour of knighthood at Oxford, Oct. 4, 1643. About that time he bore a colonel’s commission in the army, or, according to Clarendon, had a regiment of horse in lord Hopton’s troops, and was afterwards a considerable sufferer for his adherence to the royal cause. In 1647, he and Dr. Stephen Goffe were imprisoned on. suspicion of being accessary to his majesty’s escape from Hampton court. How or when he was released we are not told, but as he had married general Ireton’s sister, he might owe his release to the influence of his brother-inlaw with the parliamentary party. In 1656 we find him employed in certain mechanical inventions of considerable importance. With Cromwell’s encouragement, and at the request of the citizens of London, he contrived machinery for raising the Thames water into all the higher streets of the city, a height of ninety-three feet. This he is said to have accomplished in a year’s time, and at his own expence; and the same machinery was afterwards employed in other parts of the kingdom for draining mines and lands, which it performed better and cheaper than any former contrivance. He also constructed the great water engine at Somerset-house, for supplying the Strand, &c. but this obstructing the prospect from the windows, queen Catherine, the consort of Charles II. caused it to be pulled clown. After the restoration he invented a mode of coining copper money (Wood says, farthings) which could not possibly be counterfeited, as each piece was made to differ from another in some minute circumstance. He failed in procuring a patent for these for England, but obtained one for Ireland. He went over accordingly to carry his design into execution there, but died before he could accomplish it, on Sept. 3, 1670, and his body being brought over, was interred in the family buriai place at Harting. Wood speaks of him as a man who might have done great things if he had met with proper encouragement. He published, 1. “A Design for bringing a River from Rickmansworth in Hertfordshire to St. Giles’s in the Fields, near London; the benefits of it declared, and the objections against it answered,” Lond. 1641, 4to. 2. “Experimental Proposals how the king may have money to pay and maintain his fleets, with ease to the people London may be re-built, and all proprietors satisfied money may be lent at six per cent, on pawns and the fishing trade set up, and all without straining or thwarting any of our laws or customs,” ibid. 1666, 4to. To this last was added a “Defence of Bill Credit.” About 1663 he had printed a proposal fur the raising of money by bills of exchange, which should pass current instead of money, to prevent robbery.

, an early English dramatic author, the second son of Thomas Ford, esq. a gentleman in the commission of the peace, was a native of Ilsington in Devonshire, where he was born in 158G, probably in the beginning of April, as he was baptised on the 17th of that month at Ilsington. It does not appear where he was educated, but on Nov. 16, 1602, he entered as a member of the Middle Temple, for the purpose of studying law. While there he published, in 1606, “Fame’s Memoriall, on the earle of Devonshire deceased; with his honourable life, peaceful end, and solemne funerall,” a small quarto of twenty-eight leaves. This poem, considered as the production of a youth, is creditable to the talents of Ford, as it exhibits a freedom of thought and command of language, of which there are few contemporaneous examples. At this time Ford was in his twenty-first year, and deeply engaged, but unfortunate, in an affair of the heart; and being disappointed also by the death of lord Mountjoy, the liberal friend of the poet Daniel, to whom he was about to look up as a patron, he determined to seek relief in travel. Whether he actually went abroad, or finding a nymph less cruel, and an avenue to fame without individual patronage, remained in England, is matter of conjecture: but we next hear of him on the stage. With a forbearance, however, unusual with those who have once adventured before the public, Ford abstained from the press from 1606 to 1629, when he printed his tragicomedy of the “Lover’s Melancholy.” But this was not his first attempt on the stage, as his play entitled “A bad beginning makes a good ending,” was acted at court as early as 1613. He wrote at least eleven dramas, and such as were printed appeared from 1629 to 1639. The greater part of those were entirely of his own composition, but in some he wrote conjointly, probably with Decker, Drayton, Hatherewaye, or some of the numerous retainers of the stage. It has been asserted that Jonson was jealous of Ford, and that Ford was frequently pitted against Jonson, as the champion of his antagonists. But Mr. Gilchrist, in, “A Letter to William Gifford, esq.” 1811, has most satisfactorily proved that there is no foundation for either of these assertions. The date of Ford’s death is unknown; he wrote nothing for the stage after 1639, and it is probable that he did not long survive that period. A writer in the “Censura Literaria,” has attributed to him an excellent little manual, entitled “A Line of Life, pointing at the immortalitie of a vertuous name,” 1620, 12mo.

As a dramatic writer, his merit has been thus appreciated by one admirably qualified for the task. Reversing the observation of Dry den on Shakspeare, it may be said of Ford, that “he wrote laboriously, not luckily;” always elegant, often elevated, never sublime, he accomplished by patient and careful industry what Shakspeare and Fletcher produced by the spontaneous exuberance of native genius. He seems to have acquired early in life, and to have retained to the last, a softness of versification peculiar to himself. Without the majestic march of verse which distinguishes the poetry of Massinger, and with none of that playful gaiety which characterizes the dialogue of Fletcher, he is still easy and harmonious. There is, however, a monotony in his poetry, which those who have perused his scenes long together must have inevitably perceived. His dialogue is declamatory and formal, and wants that quick chace of replication and rejoinder so necessary to effect in representation. His genius was mostly inclined to tragedy. In his plots he is far from judicious; they are for the most part too full of the horrible, and he seems to have had recourse to an accumulation of terrific incidents to obtain that effect which he despairs of producing by pathos of language. Another defect in Ford’s poetry, proceeding from the same source, is the alloy of pedantry which pervades his scenes, at one time exhibited in the composition of uncooth phrases, at another in perplexity of language; and he frequently labours with a remote idea, which, rather than throw it away, he obtrudes upon his reader involved in inextricable obscurity. For this opinion of Ford’s merits, as well as for the particulars of his life, we are indebted to an elaborate and comprehensive article in the “Quarterly Review,” occasioned by an edition of “The Dramatic Works of John Ford; with an introduction and explanatory notes, by Henry Weber, esq.” 1811, 2 vols. 8vo. In this article the reader will also find a masterly delineation of the principal plays of Ford.

, a man of learning, and an elegant Latin poet, was the son of Richard Ford, of East Ogwell, a small parish near Newton-Bushell, in that part of Devonshire called the South-Hams, and was born there in 1619. By the Worths, his mother’s family, he was descended from the founder of Wadham college, Oxford. He was some time at the high-school at Exeter, but finished his education at the free-school of Dorchester, in Dorsetshire, under Gabriel Reeve, fellow of New College. He was admitted of Magdalen Hall, Oxford, in 1636, and in the next year was candidate for a scholarship at Wadham college, probably as a founder’s kinsman, but was unsuccessful. In 1641, being then B. A. he retired to London, and during the rebellion joined the disaffected party. At the close of the war he returned to the university, and took his master’s degree in 1648; in which year, by the favour of Dr. Edward Reynolds, dean of Christ Church, one of the visitors of the university appointed by parliament, he became a student of that house, and distinguished himself as a tutor. He was created B. D. Feb. 16, 1649, by dispensation of the delegates, who had before decreed, that, having been “expelled the university with great injury, he should be restored with all academical honour imaginable.” He then became a frequent preacher at the university; but, for preaching at St. Mary’s against the oath of the Independents called the engagement, as he himself informed Anthony Wood, he was expelled from his studentship.

About this time he became lecturer of Newington-green, and in 1651, vicar of St. Lawrence’s, Reading, where he was considered as an eminent preacher. In 1653 he married Mrs. Anne Thackham. In July 1659 he was chosen by the corporation of Northampton, the patrons, vicar of All Saints; and, in 1665, he took the degree of D. D. and was appointed chaplain to his majesty. In 1670 he removed to London, became minister of Bridewell chapel, and rector of St. Mary Aldermanbury but finding his health impaired by the air of London, he accepted, in 1677, the rectory of Old Swinford, near Sturbridge, in Worcestershire, on the presentation of Thomas Foley, of Kidderminster. Here he died April 7, 1699, and was buried in the church near his (we presume second) wife, Martha Stampe, who died in 1684. He was accounted an able scholar, an elegant Latin poet, and a preacher of great eminence.

His works are, 1. “Ambitio sacra. Conciones duae Latine habitae ad academicos,” Oxon. 1650, 4to. 2. Several Latin poems, published separately in 1666, and the following years, and afterwards collected into one volume, entitled “Poemata Londinensia, &c.” 3. “Carmen funebre, ex occasione Northampton^ conflagrate,” Lond. 1676, 4to. This was translated, or rather imitated by F. A. (Fernando Archer) 4to. 4. “A Panegyric on Charles I.” 5. “Christ’s Innocency pleaded against the cry of the chief priests,” Lond. 1656, 4to. 6. “The Spirit of Bondage and Adoption largely and practically handled,” ibid. 1655, 8vo, with a sermon and tract added. 7. “Anew version of the Psalms of David,” 1668, 8vo. 8. “Two Dialogues concerning the practical use of Infant Baptism,” Lond. 1654 and 1656, 8vo. 9. “A short Catechism, ibid. 1657, 8vo. 10.” A plain and profitable exposition of, and enlargement upon, the Church Catechism,“ibid. 16S4, 1686, 8vo. 11.” A Discourse concerning God’s Judgments,“prefixed to” A just Narrative, or account of a man whose hands and legs rotted off, in the parish of King’s Swinford, in Staffordshire, where he died June 21, 1677,“ibid. 1678, 8vo. The narrative itself was written by James Illingworth, B. D. Dr. Ford published also several occasional sermons, and was one of the translators of” Plutarch’s Morals," published in 1684.

, was a Scottish historian, whose time and place of birth are uncertain. It is most generally agreed that he was a priest in the church of Fordun in 1377, because he dedicated his history of Scotland to cardinal Wardlaw, who at that time was bishop of Glasgow. The time of his death is equally obscure, but may with probability be conjectured to have been soon after he finished his “Scoti-chronicon.” In this history there are some traditions that seem not sufficiently authenticated, and many legendary tales, too gross for belief, yet some curious and valuable particulars are also contained in it; among which may be reckoned the oration of a highland bard, delivered at the coronation of Alexander III. in 1249, a piece peculiar in its kind. Every convent in Scotland, and some in England, transcribed copies of this history; and two editions of it have been printed; one by Hearne at Oxford, 1722, in 5 vols. 8vo; the other by Mr. Goodall at Edinburgh, in a single volume, folio. ms copies are to be found in great plenty in the Bodleian library, in the British Museum, and at Edinburgh.

, professor of philosophy in the Marischal college, Aberdeen, and author of several valuable works, was born in that city, in 1711, probably in March, as we find he was baptized on April 1. His father was an eminent merchant, who had a family of twenty children by his wife, a sister to Dr. Thomas Blackwell, of whom we have already given an account. This, their second son, after being educated at the grammar school of his native city, was entered of Marischal college in 1724, where he went through a course of philosophy under professor Daniel Garden, and of mathematics under Mr. John Stewart. He took his degree of M. A. in 1728, when he was but little more than seventeen years old. Being intended for the church, his next application was to the study of divinity, under the professor of that branch, Mr. James Chalmers, a man of great learning and piety, whom the editor of this Dictionary is proud to record as his grandfather. Mr. Fordyce studied divinity with great ardour, the utmost of his ambition being ordination in a church that affords her sons but a moderate emolument. Circumstances with which we are unacquainted, appear to have prevented his full intention, as he never became a settled minister in the establishment of his native country. He was admitted, however, to what may be termed the first degree of orders in the church of Scotland, that is, he was licensed to preach, and continued to preach occasionally for some time. He is said, indeed, to have been once domestic chaplain to John Hopkins, esq. of Bretons, near Rumford, in Essex, who had a regular service every Sunday in the chapel of the house; but there is reason to think he did not continue long in this situation, and that he returned home, as in Sept. 1742 he was appointed one of the professors of philosophy in the Marischal college. The duties of the philosophic professorship at that time included natural history, chronology, Greek and Roman antiquities, mechanics, optics, and astronomy, which were taught during three sessions, or years, to the same pupils. This system is now altered, but that My. Fordyce was well qualified for the above-mentioned laborious task was universally acknowledged.

When Dodsley formed the design of that useful book “The Preceptor, 11 Mr. Fordyce wa one of the ingenious men of whose assistance he availed himself, and who wrote the ninth division of the work, on moral philosophy, which attracted so much attention, that a separate publication was soon called for, and appeared in 1754 under the title of” The Elements of Moral Philosophy, 17 and has gone through various editions. It is undoubtedly one of the best compendiums of ethics that had then appeared, being both elegant and entertaining, as well as instructive. Previously to this, however, Mr. Fordyce had attracted some notice as an author, though without his name, in “Dialogues concerning Education,” the first volume of which was published in 1745, and the second in 1748. It is a work of very considerable merit, but somewhat tinged with the fopperies of the school of Shaftesbury, although entirely free from its more injurious notions. He Was engaged in other literary designs, and afforded the promise of rising to great eminence in the world, when he was cut off by a premature death. In 1750 he made a tour through France, Italy, and other countries, with a particular view to visit Rome, and was returning home in 1751, when he unhappily lost his life, in the forty-first year of his age, by a storm on the coast of Holland.

Early in 1752 was published, from a finished manuscript of our author, “Theodorus: a Dialogue concerning the art of Preaching,” 12mo, which is a work of considerable utility to young divines, and has been repeatedly printed along with his brother Dr. James Fordyce’s sermon on “The Eloquence of the Pulpit.” Mr. David Fordyce’s last production was left by him in an unfinished state, but not so incomplete as to be unworthy of publication. It was entitled “The Temple of Virtue, a Dream,” and was given to the world in 1757, by his brother James, who added to the descriptive part of the temple twelve characters that had a claim to a place in it, in the drawing of which several living characters were intended, particularly the late earl of Chatham. Mr. Fordyce left several other brothers, of whom the youngest, Alexander, attained an unhappy celebrity by his ruinous speculations as a banker, but James and William deserve some notice on a better account.

, D.D. a dissenting clergyman of considerable eminence, was born about 1720, in the city of Aberdeen, and was brother to the preceding David Fordyce. Having acquired the foundation of classical knowledge at the grammar school of his native place, and completed the usual course of study in philosophy and divinity at the Marischal college, Mr. Fordyce was licensed, when very young, according to the forms of the church of Scotland, and was settled soon after as one of the ministers of Brechin, in the county of Angus. He was removed from this, after some years, to the parish of Alloa near Stirling, where at first he had many prejudices to encounter; but the amiableness of his manners, his affectionate temper, and the assiduous discharge of his parochial duties, not only by preaching, but by visiting, catechizing, &c. his parishioners, as is the custom in Scotland, soon enabled him to overcome their dislike, and their attachment became so unbounded, that, when he afterwards left them to settle in London, his departure occasioned universal regret. During his residence at Alloa, he printed three occasional sermons, which attracted much notice; and he still farther increased his fame by publishing, in 1760, a sermon preached before the general assembly of the church of Scotland, “On the folly, infamy, and misery of Unlawful Pleasures.” The delivery of this sermon entitled him to rank among the most popular orators of his country, and the style and sentiments, when it came to be examined in the closet, claimed the admiration not only of general readers, but of the best judges. It struck also with all the force of novelty, for nothing of that kind had hitherto been heard from the pulpits of Scotland.

About this time he received the degree of D. D. from the university of Glasgow, and was invited by the society of protestant dissenters in Monkwell-street, London, to be co-pastor with Dr. Lawrence, then aged and infirm. This invitation he accepted, and upon Dr. Lawrence’s death, which happened soon after, he became sole pastor, and continued to discharge the duties of that office till 1782, when his health, which had long been declining, rendered it necessary to discontinue his public services. But during his ministry in this place he acquired a higher degree of popularity than probably ever was, or will be attained by the same means. It was the strong force of his eloquence, which drew men of all ranks and all persuasions to hear him. His action and elocution were original, and peculiarly striking, and not a little assisted by his figure, which was tali beyond the common standard, and by a set of features which in preaching displayed great variety of expression and animation. Besides his regular attendants who subscribed to his support, his meeting was frequented by men curious in eloquence; and it is said that the celebrated David Garrick was more than once a hearer, and spoke of Dr. Fordyce’s skill in oratory with great approbation. With respect to his theological sentiments, he appears to have possessed that general liberality which is civil to all systems, without being attached to any. From his printed works, it would be easier to prove that he belonged to no sect, than that he held the principles of any. As to the matter, morality appears to have been his chief object; and as to the manner, he evidently studied a polish and a spirit which is seldom met with in English pulpits, although it has not been unusual in those of France. In private life his piety was so conspicuous as to be universally acknowledged, and there was a fervour in his language and expression when he conversed on religious subjects of the general kind, which procured him the highest respect. During the prosperity of his brother, the banker, whose failure has made the name memorable in the annals of bankruptcy, he had probably access to much company of the upper ranks; and it is certain, that from this, or from a disposition naturally graceful, his manners were peculiarly elegant and courtly.

His printed works were, besides the occasional sermons already mentioned, “Sermons to Young Women,” 1765, 2 vols. 12mo, “Addresses to Young Men,” 1777, 2 vols. 12mo. “Addresses to the Deity,” 1785, 12mo. A volume of “Poems,” 1786; and some sermons, the most valuable of which is “A charge at the ordination of the rev. James Lindsay,” his successor in Monkwell-street, to whose eloquent and affectionate discourse on his funeral, we are indebted for the principal part of this account. He printed also when at Bath, “A Discourse on Pain,” 1791 remarkable for a certain cure for the cramp, which we dare not transcribe, but of which the original thought seems to be borrowed from Beaumont and Fletcher’s Knight of the burning Pestle, Act 3. Of these works his “Sermons to young Women” were once in high esteem. The novelty of the title, and of the subjects, as coming from the pulpit, made them universally read; but neither in them, nor in the greater part of his other works, do we discover talents that are more than superficial. He was perhaps the first of sentimental preachers, but we question whether that pre-eminence be enviable. He drew largely on his imagination, and by striking allusions, and graceful turns of expression, produced all that eloquence can produce when it is not addressed to the judgment, a temporary persuasion. But he made no additions to our stock of theological knowledge, and, although he appealed in a general way, to the fundamental articles of the Christian belief, he illustrated none of its doctrines. His chief aim in truth seems to have been to refine and polish the language of devotion, and in this it must be confessed he has eminently succeeded.

, another brother of the preceding, was born in 1724, and educated in the Marischal college, Aberdeen, of which he died rector magnijicus, or lord rector, an office of great dignity in the Scotch universities, and to which he bequeathed a legacy of \000l. At the age of eighteen, he had completed the usual course of academical studies, and had distinguished himself for his proficiency in Greek and mathematics. He had also studied physic and surgery under an able practitioner, and then joined the army as a volunteer, and afterwards served as surgeon to the brigade of guards on the coast of France, and in all the wars of Germany, and some part of that time, if we mistake not, under sir John Pringle. The warm support of his military friends, and of some persons of high rank to whom he had been serviceable, concurred with his own merit and address in recommending him to very extensive practice in London. His publications, likewise, added considerably to his fame: and he was sent for to greater distances, and received larger sums, than almost any physician of his time. By these means he might have acquired an immense fortune, had he not been a very great sufterer by the bankruptcy of his brother Alexander, and had he not proved himself a man of most unbounded liberality to his family and friends, and a generous patron to many of his young countrymen, who were, from time to time, recommended to his good offices. His address had much of the courtly manner of past times, and his conversation, while unassuming, was replete with elegant anecdote and solid information. His practice lay much among persons of rank, whose manners became familiar to him. Few men died more generally lamented by a very extensive circle of friends. Although originally of a delicate constitution, by temperance and exercise he preserved his health for many years, but suffered at last a long and severe illness, which ended in his death, Dec. 4, 1792, at his house in Brook-street, Grosvenor-square. His first publication was “A Treatise on the Venereal Disease,” which was followed, some years after, by another on “Fevers,” and a third on “The ulcerated Sore Throat.” In all these, except perhaps the first, he gave the result of long practice and judicious observation. Just before his death he published "The great importance and proper method of cultivating and curing Rhubarb in Britain, for medicinal uses/* 1792, 8vo. For his successful attempts to cultivate this valuable medicine, the importation of which at that time cost the nation annually 200,000l. the society for the encouragement of arts unanimously voted him a gold medal. Sir William was a fellow of the royal society, and received the honour of knighthood from his majesty about 1787.

, another eminent physician, nephew to the preceding, was born in Aberdeen, November 18, 1736, and was the only and posthumous child of Mr. George Fordyce, the proprietor of a small landed estate, called Broadford, in the neighbourhood of that city. His mother, not long after, marrying again, he was taken from her when about two years old, and sent to Fovran, at which place he received his school-education. He was removed thence to the university of Aberdeen, where, it is said, he was made M. A. when only fourteen years of age, but this we much doubt. In his childhood he had taken great delight in looking at phials of coloured liquors, which were placed at the windows of an apothecary’s shop. To this circumstance, and to his acquaintance with the late learned Alexander Garden, M. D. F. R. S. many years a physician in South Carolina, and in this city, but then apprentice to a surgeon and apothecary in Aberdeen, he used to attribute the resolution he very early formed to study medicine. He was in consequence sent, when about fifteen years old, to his uncle, Dr. John Fordyce, who at that time practised medicine at Uppingham, in Northamptonshire. With him he remained several years, and then went to the university of Edinburgh, where, after a residence of about three years, he received the degree of M. D. in October 1758. His inaugural dissertation was upon catarrh. While at Edinburgh, Dr. Cullen was so much pleased with his diligence and ingenuity, that, besides shewing him manyother marks of regard, he used frequently to give him private assistance in his studies. The pupil was ever after grateful for this kindness, and was accustomed to speak of his preceptor in terms of the highest respect, calling him often “his learned and revered master.” About the end of 1758 he came to London, but went shortly after to Leyden, for the purpose, chiefly, of studying anatomy under Albinus. He returned in 1759 to London, where he soou determined to fix himself as a teacher and practitioner of medicine. When he made known this intention to his relations, they highly disapproved of it, as the whole of his patrimony had been expended upon his education. Inspired, however, with that confidence which frequently attends the conscious possession of great talents, he persisted in his purpose, and, before the end of 1759, commenced a course of lectures upon chemistry. This was attended by nine pupils. In 1764 he began to lecture also upon materia medica and the practice of physic. These three subjects he continued to teach nearly thirty years, giving, for the most part, three courses of lectures on each of them every year. A course lasted nearly four months; and, during it, a lecture of nearly an hour was delivered six times in the week. His time of teaching commenced about 7 o'clock in the morning, and ended at 10; his lectures upon the three above-mentioned subjects being given one immediately after the other. In 1765 he was admitted a licentiate of the college of physicians. In 1770 he was chosen physician to St. Thomas’s hospital, after a considerable contest; the number of votes in his favour being 109, in that of his antagonist, Dr. Watson, 106. In 1774 he became a member of Dr. Johnson’s, or the literary club and in 1776 was elected a fellow of the royal society. In 1787 he was admitted a fellow of the college of physicians. No circumstance can demonstrate more strongly the high opinion entertained of his abilities by the rest of his profession in London, than his reception into that body. He had been particularly active in the dispute, which had existed about twenty years before, between the fellows and licentiates, and had, for this reason, it was thought, forfeited all title to be admitted into the fellowship through favour. But the college, in 1787, were preparing a new edition of their Pharmacopoeia; and Knowing his talents in the branch of pharmaceutical chemistry, suppressed their resentment of his former conduct, and, by admitting him into their body, secured his assistance in the work. In 1793 he assisted in forming a small society of physicians and surgeons, which has since published two volumes, under the title of “Medical and Chirurgical Transactions;” and continued to attend its meetings most punctually till within a month or two of his death. Having thus mentioned some of the principal events of his literary life, we shall next give a list of his various medical and philosophical works; and first of those which were published by himself, 1. “Elements of Agriculture and Vegetation.” He had given a course of lectures on these subjects to some young men of rank; soon after, the close of which, one of his hearers, the late Mr. Stuart Mackenzie, presented him with a copy of them, from uotes he had taken while they were delivered. Dr. Fordyce corrected the copy, and afterwards published it under the above-mentioned title. 2. “Elements of the Practice of Physick.” This was used by him as a text-book for a part of his course of lectures on that subject. 3. “A Treatise on the Digestion of Food.” It was originally read before the college of physicians, as the Gulstonian lecture. 4. “Four Dissertations on Fever.” A fifth, which completes the subject, was left by him in manuscript, and has since been published. His other works appeared in the Philosophical Transactions, and the Medical and Chirurgical Transactions. In the former are eight papers by him, with the following titles: 1. Of the light produced by inflammation. 2. Examination of various ores in the museum of Dr. W. Hunter. 3. A new method of assaying copper ores. 4. An account of some experiments on the loss of weight in bodies on being melted or heated. 5. An account of an experiment on heat. 6. The Cronian lecture on muscular motion. 7. On the cause of the additional weight which metals acquire on being calcined, &c. Account of a new pendulum, being the Bakerian lecture. His papers in the Medical and Chirurgical Transactions are, 1. Observations on the small-pox, and causes of fever. 2. An attempt to improve the evidence of medicine. 3. Some observations upon the composition of medicines. He was, besides, the inventor of the experiments in heated rooms, an account of which was given to the royal society by the present sir Charles Blagden; and was the author of many improvements in various arts connected with chemistry, on which he used frequently to be consulted by manufacturers. Though he had projected various literary works in addition to those which have been mentioned, nothing has been left by him in manuscript, except the dissertation on fever already spoken of; and two introductory lectures, one to his course of materia medica, the other to that of the practice of physic. This will not apear extraordinary to those who knew what confidence he ad in the accuracy of his memory. He gave all his lectures without notes, and perhaps never possessed any; he took no memorandum in writing of the engagements he formed, whether of business or pleasure, and was always most punctual in observing them; and when he composed his works for the publick, even such as describe successions of events found together, as far as we can perceive, by no necessary tie, his materials, such at least as were his own, were altogether drawn from stores in his memory, which had often been laid up there many years before. In consequence of this retentiveness of memory, and of great reading and a most inventive mind, he was, perhaps, more generally skilled in the sciences, which are either directly subservient to medicine, or remotely connected with it, than any other person of his time. One fault, however, in his character as an author, probably arose, either wholly or in part, from the very excellence which has been mentioned. This was his deficiency in the art of literary composition; the knowledge of which he might have insensibly acquired to a much greater degree than was possessed by him, had he felt the necessity in his youth of frequently committing his thoughts to writing, for the purpose of preserving them. But, whether this be just or not, it must be confessed, that notwithstanding his great learning, which embraced many subjects no way allied to medicine, he seldom wrote elegantly, often obscurely and inaccurately; and that he frequently erred with respect even to orthography. His language, however, in conversation, which confirms the preceding conjecture, was not less correct than that of most other persons of good education. As a lecturer, his delivery was slow and hesitating, and frequently interrupted by pauses not required by his subject. Sometimes, indeed, these continued so long, that persons unaccustomed to his manner, were apt to fear that he was embarrassed. But these disadvantages did not prevent his having a considerable number of pupils, actuated by the expectation of receiving from him more full and accurate instruction than they could elsewhere obtain. His person is said to have been handsome in his youth; but his countenance, from its fulness, must have been always inexpressive of the great powers of his mind. His manners too, were less refined, and his dress in general less studied, than is usually regarded as becoming the physician in this country. From these causes, and from his spending a short time with his patients, although sufficient to enable him to form a just opinion of their disorders, he had for many years but little private employment in his profession; and never, even in the latter part of his life, when his reputation was at its height, enjoyed nearly so much as many of his contemporaries. This may have partly resulted too, from his fondness for the pleasures of society, to which he often sacrificed the hours that should have been dedicated to sleep; he has frequently indeed, been known in his younger days, to lecture for three hours in a morning, without having undressed himself the preceding night. The vigour of his constitution enabled him to sustain for a considerable time, without apparent injury, this debilitating mode of life; but at length he was attacked with the gout, which afterwards became irregular, and for many years frequently affected him with excruciating pains in his stomach and bowels; in the latter part of his life, also, his feet and ankles were almost constantly swollen, and a little time before his death he had symptoms of water in the chest. To the first mentioned disease (gout), he uniformly attributed his situation, which, for several weeks previous to his dissolution, he knew to be hopeless. This event took place at his house in Essex-­street, May 25, 1802.

, a learned Portuguese ecclesiastic, was born at Lisbon in 1523, and entered among the Dominicans in February 1539. Having acquired a critical knowledge of the Latin, Greek, and Hebrew languages, king John III. sent him to study theology in the university of Paris, where he became distinguished for his proficiency. On his return to Lisbon the king appointed him his preacher, and prince Louis at the same time entrusted to him the education of his son. Of all the divines sent by king Sebastian to the council of Trent in 1561, he held the first place in respect of talents. It is said that one day when he was about to ascend the pulpit, he asked the fathers of the council, who were his auditors, in what language they would wish to hear him preach, such facility he had in all the modern languages. In consideration of his uncommon merit these fathers appointed him a member of that celebrated council of Feb. 26, 1562. He was also appointed secretary to the committee for examining and condemning such publications as they thought unfit to be disseminated, and this office was ever after given to a monk of his order. The fathers of the council afterwards sent him on an important mission to pope Pius IV. who discovering his talents, and knowing his integrity, conferred upon him the place of confessor to his nephew, the cardinal St. Charles Borromeo. At Rome he was also employed to reform the Breviary and the Roman Missal, and to compose the Roman catechism. This detained him at Rome for some time; but having at length returned to Portugal, he was chosen prior of the Dominican convent at Lisbon in 1568. His other offices were those of confessor to king John III. and the princess Mary, daughter of king Emanuel, qualificator of the inquisition, and deputy of the tribunal of conscience, and of the military orders. From the profits of these places he built the convent of St. Paul in the village of Almada, opposite Lisbon, and there he died, Feb. 10, 1581. He published an oration at the council of Trent, and the catechism and breviary mentioned above; but his principal work was a commentary of Isaiah, “Isaiae prophetae vetus et nova ex Hebraico versio, cum commentario, &c.” Venice, 163, fol. This is a very rare edition; but the work was afterwards added to the London edition of the “Critici Sacri,”

, perhaps better known by the name of Philip of Bergamo, was born at Soldio, an estate belonging to his family near Bergamo, in 1434. He was of the order of Augustines, and was famous in his time as an historian, which he did not much deserve. He published a chronicle from Adam to 1503, which, except in those events that fell under his own knowledge, is a tasteless compilation from the most credulous authors. It was first published by him in 1482, and a fourth edition in 1505. He died June 15, 1520. There is also extant by him a “Confessional, or Interrogatorium,” printed at Venice, in 1487, folio, and “A Treatise of illustrious Women,” in Latin, published at Ferrara, in 1497, folio.

, or Peter Van Foueest, an eminent physician, was born at Alcmaer in 1522. He was sent by his father to Louvain, in order to study with a view to the profession of the law; but, preferring that of medicine, cultivated it in the universities of Bologna, Padua, and Rome; at the former of which he graduated, and afterwards proceeded to complete his studies at Paris. He settled, at the request of his friends, in his native town; but at the end of twelve years removed to Delft, in consequence of a petition from the inhabitants of that place, which was at that time ravaged by a fatal contagious epidemic. Forestus in obeying the call of humanity, not only preserved his own health, but was so successful in his administration of remedies to others, that the town of Delft retained him in the capacity of physician, with a considerable pension, for nearly thirty years; after which he was invited to Leyden, to give the first lectures on medicine at the opening of the university in 1575. He afterwards returned to Delft, and resided there about ten years more, when his attachment to his native city impelled him to visit Alcmaer, where he terminated his life in 1597, in the seventy-fifth year of his age.

Forestus (for by his Latin name he is best known), was one of the most expert physicians of his time: he was extremely industrious, and his principal views were directed to the observation of diseases, in which he manifested, in numerous instances, a considerable degree of penetration and judgment. Mailer, indeed, has thrown out some suspicions against the histories of djsease which he has detailed; and apprehends that he was occasionally more anxious to prove the justness of his“prognostics, and the felicity of his cures, than to relate a true account of the symptoms: but Boerhaave has praised him highly for the care and attention which he has evinced in the collection of so large a number of histories of disease. The following are the titles of his works: 1.” Observationum et Curationum Medicinalium sive Medicinae Theories et Practicae, libri 28,“Francofurti, 1602, 2 vols. folio. 2. A third volume of the same work in 1604; and 3. A fourth volume, consisting of the 30th, 31st, and 32d books in 1607. 4. In 1610 a fifth volume was printed under the title of” Observationum et Curationum Chirurgicarum, libri quinque. Accesserunt de incerto ac fallaci Urinarum judicio adversus Uromentas et Uroscopos, libri tres“in which the fallacy and absurdity of the pretensions of the uroscopists are clearly pointed out. 5. A sixth and last volume of these treatises was published at Francfort in 1611, with the title of” Observationum et Curationum Chirurgicarum libri quatuor posterius," folio. All these books of observations were printed separately at Leyden, between 1589 and 1610, in 8vo. The three books relative to the urine, in 1583. Complete collections of the works of Forestus have been subsequently published at various times and places.

, a Prussian writer of various talents, originally of a French refugee family, was born at Berlin in 17 1L He was educated at the royal French college for the church, and being ordained in his twentieth year, he was chosen one of the officiating ministers of the French congregation in Berlin. In 1737 he was appointed professor of eloquence in the French college, and in 1739 succeeded to the philosophical chair of the same college. On the restoration of the royal academy of sciences and belles lettres at Berlin in 1744, M. Formey was made secretary to the philosophical class, and four years afterwards sole and perpetual secretary of -the academy. His talents and fame procured him admission into many foreign learned bodies, as those of London, Petersburg, Haarlem, Mantua, Bologna, and many others in Germany, and he was personally acquainted with several of the most eminent and illustrious characters throughout Europe. Besides his academical employments, he rttas agent or secretary to the dowager princess of Wirtemberg: he filled several offices in the French colony at Berlin, and at length became a privy counsellor in its superior directory. He was twice married, and by his second wife had many children, seven of whom survived him. He died in the month of March 1797, at the great age of eighty-five years and eight months. In Thiebault’s “Anecdotes of Frederic II.” there are some of Formey, by which it would appear that he was apt to be very unguarded, and almost licentious in conversation, but often procured his pardon by the ingenuity of his excuses. His publications were extremely numerous, but we have nowhere seen a complete list. The following, however, probably includes the principal: 1. “Articles des Pacte Conventa, dresses et conclus entre les etats de Pologne et le roi Frederic-Auguste,” 1733, 4to, translated from the Latin. About this time he was concerned in the publication of several political pieces on the affairs of Poland. 2. “Le fidele fortifie par la grace,” a sermon, Berlin, 1736. 3. “Ducatianaj ou remarques de feu M. leDuchat, &c.” Amst. 2 vols. 8vo. 4. “Bibliotheque Germanique;” in this journal he wrote from vol. XXVII. The lives of Duchat, Beausobre, Baratier, &c. are from his pen. 5. “Mercure et Minerve% ou choix de nouvelles, &c.” another periodical work, begun in Dec. 1737, and concluded in March 1738. C. “Amusemens litteraires, moraux, et politiques,” a continuation of the preceding, as far as July of the last mentioned year. 7. “Correspondence entre deux amis sur la succession de Juliers et de Bergues,” Hague, 1738. 8. “Sermons sur le mystere de la naissance de Jesus Christ,” from the German of lleinbeck, Berlin, 1738. 9. “Sermons sur divers textes de Tecriture sainte,” ibid. 1739, 8vo. 10. “Remarques historiques sur les medaille* et monnoies,” ibid. 1740, 4to, from the German of Koehler. II.“Journal de Berlin,” 1740, of which he edited the last six months of that year. 12. “La Belle Wolfienne,” 1741, 8vo. Formey had adopted the philosophy of Leibnitz, as explained by Wolf, and in this publication endeavoured, but without success, to render their principles familiar to the ladies. 13. “Memoires pour servir a Tbistoire de Pologae,” Hague, 1741, 8vo, from the Latin of Lengnich. 14. “La yie de Jean-Philippe Baratier,” Berlin, ifo. 15. ‘ Le iriomphe de i’evidence, ou refnta.­tion du Pyrrhonisme ancien et moderne,“2 vols. 8vo, an abridgment from Crousaz. 16.” Traite sur la reformation de la justice en Rrusse,“to which is added a treatise on dreams. 17.” Eloges des academicians de Berlin et de divers autres savans,“Berlin, 1757, 2 vols. 12mo. 18.” Principes du droit naturel et des gens,“Amst. 3 vols. 12mo, from Wolff’s Latin work. 19.” Conseils pour former une bibliotheque,“Francfort, 1746, of which the sixth edition appeared in 1775, 8vo. 20.” Le systeme du vrai bonheur,“1761. 21.” Melanges philosophiques,“Leyden, 1754, 2 vols. 12mo, translated afterwards into English. 22.” La comtesse Suedoise,“Berlin, 1754, 8vo, from the German of Gellert. 23.” Examen philosophique de la liaison reelle entre les sciences et les mceurs,“1755, 8vo. 24.” L'Abeille du Parnasse,“1750 1754, 10 vois. 8vo. 25.” Le Philosophe Paien, ou pensees de Pline, avec un commentaire literal et moral,“Leyden, 3 vols. 12mo. 26.” Principes elementaires des Belles Lettres,“Berlin, 1759. 27.” Diversite’s historiques,“1764, 8vo f from ^lian, with notes. 28.” Abrege de toutes les sciences a Tusage des adolescens,“Berlin, 1764—1778, 8 vols. 12mo. 9-9.” Introduction generate aux sciences, avec des conseils pour former un bibliotheque choisie,“Amst. 1764. 30.” Discours de Gellert sur la morale,“Berlin, 1766. 31.” Traduction Franchise de l'Histoire des Protestans,“by Hansen, Halle, 1767. Some of these have been published in English, particularly his small work on the belles lettres, and another not noticed above,” Histoire abrege*e de la Philosophic," which we can remember a very popular book in this country. Formey, indeed, if not one of the most profound, was one of the most pleasing of writers, and all his works were calculated by clearness and precision of style for popular reading. He deserves credit also as one of the defenders of revelation against Diderot and Rousseau; and for this reason Voltaire endeavoured to prejudice the king of Prussia against him. Besides the extensive labours we have enumerated, and the list is by no means complete, Formey wrote many articles in the French Encyclopaedia, and in that of Yverdun. His correspondence with literary men was most extensive, and almost all the booksellers on the continent occasionally engaged his services as an editor.

, a celebrated astrologer, was born at Quidham, near Wilton, in Wiltshire, Dec. 30, 1552, of a good family, being the grandson of sir Thomas Forman, of Leeds, and great grandson of another sir Thomas Forman. As an introduction to his astrological history, we are told that, at six years old and after, he was much troubled “with strong dreams and visions.” His education at Salisbury was of a very humble kind, his master being only able to teach him English, and something of the accidence. From him he was sent to the free school at Salisbury, where he continued two years. His next preceptor was one Minterne, a prebendary of the cathedral, of whom we are only informed that he used to carry his wood from place to place in winter to warm himself, and made Simon do the same, “so gaining heat without fire.” In 1563 Ford’s father died, a very unfortunate event, for his mother not caring for him, made him keep sheep, and plow, and pick up sticks. At the age of fourteen, however, he became apprentice to a dealer in grocery and drugs at Salisbury, and acquired some knowlege of the latter, which he endeavoured to improve by books, but his master would not let him read. Yet such was his avidity to learn, that his master having a young boarder in the house who wept to school at Salisbury, Ford learned of him what he had been taught in school, although that was. but little. ~At length, in consequence of a quarrel with his master’s wife, he obtained leave to quit his service, and went again to school for about eight weeks, applying very diligently to his books until his “illnatured and clownish mother” refused to maintain him. At length, when in his eighteenth year, he became schoolmaster at the priory of St. Giles’s, and by teaching thirty boys for half a year, scraped together forty shillings. With this, accompanied by an old schoolfellow, he travelled on foot to Oxford, and became a poor scholar of Magdalen college, being partly maintained by a bachelor of arts; but this person employed him in so many menial employments during his college frolics, that he left the university after two years’ residence.

Hitherto we have seen onjy the laudable efforts of a young man to overcome the difficulties of adverse fortune. In what follows he is less entitled to respect. He now applied himself to the study of physic and astrology, and after having travelled to Holland for that purpose, set up in Philpot-lane, London, where his practice being opposed by the physicians, and himself four times fined and imprisoned, he went to study at Cambridge, where he took a doctor’s degree, and a licence to practise; and settling at Lambeth, openly professed the joint occupation of physician and astrologer. “Here he lived,” says Lilly, “with good respect of the neighbourhood, being very charitable to the poor, and was very judicious and fortunate in horary questions and sicknesses.” His charity to the poor, however, was not wholly disinterested. Quacks of this description are generally well repaid for their charity by the good report of the poor, wh.o are illiterate and credulous. In 1601 a complaint was made to Whitgift, archbishop of Canterbury, against him for deluding the people, but it does not appear what steps were taken against him. In the mean time he was much resorted to by all ranks of people; among others the famous, or rather infamous, countess of Essex, applied to him for his assistance in her wicked designs, as appeared by the trials of that lady and of Mrs. Anne Turner, for the murder of sir Thomas Overbury. He died suddenly in a boat on the Thames, Sept. 12, 1611, and if we may believe Lilly, predicted his death on that day. He wrote a great many books, on the philosopher’s stone, magic, astronomy, natural history, and natural philosophy, two treatises on the plague, and some religious tracts, of which Anthony Wood has given a catalogue from the Ashmolean museum, where his Mss. were deposited, but it seems doubtful whether any of them were printed. There are also some of his Mss. on astrology in the British Museum. He was a man of considerable learning in all the above sciences, as they were then understood, but seems to have been either an egregious dupe, or unprincipled impostor, in the use he made of his knowledge.

, a learned Swedish naturalist, was born in 1736, and studied first at Gottingen, and afterwards at Upsal, where he became a pupil of Linnæus. In 1761 he was sent, at the expence of the king of Denmark, to investigate the natural productions of the East, in company with the celebrated Niebuhr, and, unhappily too soon for the interests of science, died at Jerim in Arabia, July 11, 1763, aged thirty-one. His notes and descriptions, rich in information respecting the natural history of Egypt and Arabia, but not corrected by references to other authors, as they would have been by himself for the press, were published in three quarto volumes, under the direction of his fellow-traveller, at Copenhagen in 1775.

, an eminent protestant divine, born 1495, at Augsburg, was among the friends of Reuchelinus, Melanchton, and Luther, and taught Hebrew with reputation at Wittemberg, where he died December 8, 1556, leaving an excellent “Hebrew Dictionary,” Basil, 1564, fol. He must be, however, distinguished from another John Forster, a German divine, who died 1613, author of “De Interpretatione Scripturarum,” Wittemberg, 1608, 4to and “Commentaries on Exodus, Isaiah, and Jeremiah,” 3 vols. 4to and from Valentine Forster, who published a “History of the Law,” in Latin, with the “Lives of the most eminent Lawyers,” to 1580, the time in which he wrote.

, an eminent naturalist, was the son of a burgomaster at Dirschaw, in Polish Prussia, where he was born Oct. 22, 1729. We learn nothing of his education until his fifteenth year, when he was admitted into the gymnasium of Joachimsthal at Berlin, where his application to the study of ancient and modern languages was incessant and successful. From 1748, when he went to the university of Halle, he studied theology, and continued his application to the learned languages, among which he comprehended the Oriental, and after three years he removed to Dantzic, and distinguished himself as a preacher, imitating the French rather than the Dutch manner; and in 1753 he obtained a settlement at Nassenhuben. In the following year he married his cousin, Elizabeth Nikolai. During his residence in this place he employed his leisure hours in the study of philosophy, geography, and the mathematics, still improving his acquaintance with the ancient and modern languages. With a small income, and increasing family, the difficulties he experienced induced him to accept the proposal of removing to Russia, in order to superintend the new colonies at Saratow, but not succeeding in this or any other scheme of a settlement in that country, he removed to London in 1766, with strong recommendations, but with very little money. After his arrival, he received from the government of Russia a present of 100 guineas; and he also made an addition to his stock by the translation of Kalm’s Travels and Osbeck’s Voyage. At this time lord Baltimore proposed to him a settlement in America, as superintendant of his extensive property in that country; but he preferred the place of teacher of the French, German, and natural history in the dissenting academy at Warrington. For the first department he was by no means well qualified, his extraordinary knowledge of languages being unaccompanied by a particle of taste, and his use of them being barbarous, though fluent; and his knowledge of natural history was of little value in his academical department. This situation, however, for these or other reasons which we never heard assigned, he soon abandoned; and returning to London, he was engaged, in 1772, to accompany captain Cook, as a naturalist, in his second voyage round the world. At this time he was forty-three years of age, and his son George, who went with him, was seventeen. Upon his return to England in 1775, the university of Oxford conferred upon him the degree of LL. D. At this time he was projecting, with the assistance of his son, a botanical work in Latin, containing the characters of many new genera of plants, which they had discovered in the course of their voyage. An account of the voyage having been published by his son in English and German, the father was supposed to have had a considerable share in it; and as he had entered into an engagement not to publish any thing separately from the authorized narrative, he thus incurred the displeasure of government, and gave offence to his friends. Independently of the violation of his engagement, he was also chargeable with having introduced into his work several reflections on the government which appointed, and some falsehoods respecting the navigators who conducted the expedition. The father and son, finding that, in consequence of these circumstances, their situation in London was become unpleasant, determined to quit EnglaiYd. Before the execution of their purpose, their condition became embarrassed and distressing; but Mr. Forster was invited, in 1780, to be professor of natural history at Halle, and inspector of the botanical garden and in the following year he obtained the degree of M. D. His health, however, began to decline and the death of his son George so deeply impressed his mind as to aggravate his other complaints. Towards the commencement of 1798, his case became desperate; and before the close of this year, viz. on the 9th of December, he died. Mr. Forster’s disposition was most unamiable, and extremely irritable and litigious; and his want of prudence involved him in perpetual difficulties. Yet these seem to have all been virtues in the eyes of the celebrated Kurt Sprengel of Halle, who thus embellishes his character, which we should not copy if it did not mention some particulars of his studies and works: “To a knowledge of books in all branches of science, seldom to be met with, he joined an uncommon fund of practical observations, of which he well knew how to avail himself. In natural history, in geography, both physical and moral, and in universal history, he was acquainted with a vast number of facts, of which he who draws his information from works only has not even a distant idea. This assertion is proved in the most striking manner by his ‘ Observations made in a Voyage round the World.’ Of this book it may be said, that no traveller ever gathered so rich a treasure on his tour. What person of any education can read and study this work, which is unparalleled in its kind, without discovering in it that species of instructive and pleasing information which most interests man, as such The uncommon pains which Forster took in his literary compositions, and his conscientious accuracy in historical disquisitions, are best evinced by his * History of Voyages and Discoveries in the North, 7 and likewise by his excellent archaeological dissertation ‘ On the Byssus of the Ancients.’ Researches such as these were his favourite employment, in which he was greatly assisted by his intimate acquaintance with the classics. Forster had a predilection for the sublime in natural history, and aimed at general views ratUer than detail. His favourite author, therefore, was Buffon, whom he used to recommend as a pattern of style, especially in his ‘ Epoques de la Nature,’ his description of the horse, camel, &c. He had enjoyed the friendship of that distinguished naturalist; and he likewise kept up an uninterrupted epistolary intercourse with Linna3us, till the death of the latter. Without being a stickler for the forms and ceremonies of any particular persuasion, he adored the eternal Author of all which exists in the great temple of nature, and venerated his wisdom and goodness with an ardour and a heart-felt conviction, that, in my opinion, alone constitute the criterion of true religion. He held in utter contempt aM those who, to gratify their passions, or imitate the prevailing fashion, made a jest of the most sacred and respectable feelings of mankind. His moral feelings were equally animated: he was attracted with irresistible force by whatever was true, good, or excellent. Great characters inspired him with an esteem which he sometimes expressed with incredible ardour.”

, son of the preceding, was born at Dantzic in 1754, and accompanied his father to England when he was about twelve years of age. At Warrington, where he studied for some time, he acquired a perfect use of the English tongue; and possessing a retentive memory and fertile imagination, he distinguished himself by his various literary and scientific attainments. We have already mentioned that he accompanied his father in the circumnavigation of the globe; and on leaving England, after their return, he wished to settle at Paris. After a temporary residence in that city, he removed, in 1779, to Cassel, and undertook the office of professor of natural history in the university of that place. But soon after, the senate of Poland having offered him a chair in the university of Wilna, Forster accepted of the invitation. But, although this office was very lucrative, he accepted of the propositions of Catherine II. empress of Russia, who, jealous of every species of glory, wished to signalize her reign, by procuring to the Russian nation the honour of undertaking, after the example of England and France, a new voyage of discovery round the world. Unfortunately for the progress of knowledge, the war with the Ottoman Porte occasioned the miscarriage of this useful project, but Forster could not long remain in obscurity. The different publications, with which he occasionally enriched natural history and literature, increased his reputation. The elector of Mentz accordingly appointed him president of the university of the same name; and he was discharging the functions of his new office when the French troops took possession of the capital. This philosophical traveller, who had studied society under all the various aspects arising from different degrees of civilization who had viewed man simple and happy at Otaheite an eater of human flesh in New Zealand corrupted by commerce in England; depraved in France by luxury and atheism; in Brabant by superstition, and in Poland by anarchy: beheld with wild enthusiasm the dawnings of the French revolution, and was the first to promulgate republicanism in Germany.

The Mayencois, who had formed themselves into a national convention, sent him to Paris, in order to solicit their re-union with the French republic. But, in the course of his mission, the city of Mentz was besieged and retaken by the Prussian troops. This event occasioned the loss of all his property; and what was still more disastrous, that of his numerous manuscripts, which fell into the hands of the prince of Prussia. One Charles Pougens, who has written his life, after conducting our hero through these scenes of public life, proceeds to give us a view of his domestic habits and private principles. He tells us, that he formed a connexion (whether a njarriage or not, the studied ambiguity of his language leaves rather uncertain) with a young woman named Theresa Hayne, who, by, the illumination of French philosophy, had divested herself of all the prejudices which, we trust, the ladies of this country still consider as their honour, as they are certainly the guardians of domestic peace. Miss Hayne was indignant at the very name of duty. With Eloisa, she had taken it into her head, that

She was frank enough, however, says our author, to acknowledge the errors of her imagination; and from this expression, and his calling her Forster’s wife, we are led to suppose that she was actually married to him. But their union, of whatever kind, was of short duration. Though the lady is said to have been passionately attached to celebrated names, the name of George Forster was not sufficient to satisfy her. He soon ceased, we are informed, to please her; she therefore transferred her affections to another; and, as was very natural for a woman who was indignant at the name of duty, she proved false to her husband’s bed. Forster, however, pretended to be such a friend to the modern rights of men and women, that he defended the character of his Theresa against crowds who condemned her conduct. Nay, we are told, that he considered himself and every other husband who ceases to please, as the “adulterer of nature.” He therefore laboured strenuously to obtain a divorce, to enable Theresa Hayne to espouse the man whom she preferred to himself. Strange, however, to tell, the prejudices even 'of this cosmopolite were too strong for his principles. While he was endeavouring to procure the divorce, he made preparations at the same time, by the study of the Oriental languages, to undertake a journey to Thibet and Indostan, in order to remove from that part of the world, in which both his heart and his person had experienced so severe a shock. But the chagrin occasioned by his iniffortunea, joined to a scorbutic affection, to which he had been long subject, and which he had contracted at sea during the voyage of circumnavigation, abridged his life, and prevented him from realizing this double project. He died at Paris, at the age of thirty -nine, on the 15th of February, 1792.

This is a strange tale; but we trust it will not prove useless. The latter part of it, at least, shows, that when men divest themselves of the principles of religion, they soon degenerate from the dignity of philosophers to the level of mere sensualists; and that the woman who can, in defiance of decorum and honour, transfer her affections and her person from man to man, ranks no higher in the scale of being than a female brute of more than common sagacity. It shows, likewise, that the contempt of our modern sages for those partial attachments, which unite individuals in one family, is a mere pretence that the dictates of nature will be heard and the laws of nature’s God obeyed. George Forster, though he was such a zealous advocate for liberty and equality as to vindicate the adultery of his wife, yet felt so sensibly the wound which her infidelity inflicted on his honour, that he could not survive it, but perished, in consequence, in the flower of his age.

His works are, “A Voyage round the World, in his Britannic majesty’s sloop Resolution, commanded by captain James Cook, during the years 1772, 3, 4, and 5,” London, 1777, 3 vols. 4to. This work was translated by himself and his father into German, and published at Berlin, in 2 vols. 4to, 1778—1780; “Reply to Mr. Wales’ s Remarks on Mr. Forster’s Account of captain Cook’s last Voyage,” London, 1778, 4to; “A Letter to the right Honourable the earl of Sandwich,” 1779, 4to. He was concerned for some time with professor Lichtenberg of Gottingen, in the publication of the Gottingen Magazine; Uo wrote some papers in the Transactions of the Academy of Sciences at Upsal he had a large share in the ;< Characters generum Plantarum, &c." of his father and was employed by professor Pallas, and others, in the continuation of Martini’s Dictionary of Natural History.

, an English divine and scholar of eminence in the last ceatury, was born Feb. 3, 1717, at Stadscombe, in the parish of Plimstock, Devonshire, of which his father, Robert Forster, was then minister. His mother, Elizabeth, was daughter of the rev. John Tindal, vicar of Cornwood, in the same county, and sister of the rev. Nicolas Tindal, translator of Rapin’s History. His father, soon after the birth of this his eldest child, being chosen lecturer to St. Andrew’s church at Plymouth, went thitherto reside, and continued in the same place and office till his death. His son, the subject of this article, having received the rudiments of a grammatical education at home, in which he made an early progress, was put under the tuition of the rev. John Bedford, master of the grammar-school at Plymouth; and of this numerous seminary he had gained the first place before he was thirteen years old. In 1731-2 he was removed to Eton, and at the same time entered at Pembroke college, Oxford, in order to entitle him to an exhibition. After passing about sixteen months at Eton, while Dr. George was head-master, he went to college, and became a pupil of Dr. Radcliffe. On June 13, 1733, he was admitted scholar of Corpus Christi, where Dr. Burton was tutor. In 1729 he became fellow; and afterwards took the care of pupils himself as assistant to Mr. Paget, but was disappointed in his wishes of succeeding that gentleman as the college tutor, Mr. Patten being appointed by the president to that office. He was admitted to the degree of B. A. Oct. 13, 1735; to that f M. A. Feb. 10, 1738, and to that 'of B. D. April 9, 1746, as soon as his standing allowed, in order to preserve hie seniority in college. His degree of D. D. was deferred till 1750, the time of his leaving the university. In 1739 he received deacon’s orders from Dr. Wynne, bishop of Bath and Wells, and priest’s orders from Dr. Hoadly, bishop of Winchester.

His first preferment in the church was the small rectory of Hethe in Oxfordshire, which was given him July 6, 1749, by the lord chancellor Hardwicke, on the recommendation of one of his earliest friends, Dr. Seeker, bishop of Oxford, and afterwards archbishop of Canterbury. By him he was also introduced to the notice of Dr. Butler, then bishop of Bristol, to whom, in 1750, he became domestic chaplain, when that prelate was translated to the see of Durham. In this situation he continued till the death of his new patron, which took place before he had &n opportunity of conferring upon Dr, Forster any mark of Ins affection and esteem. The bishop, however, who died in his arms at Bath, bequeathed him a legacy of 200l. and appointed him executor of his will. He now returned to college, determining to obliterate the remembrance of his disappointments by a renewed application to his studies. But he was very soon called forth again, and appointed, in July 1752, one of the chaplains to Dr. Herring, archbishop of Canterbury. In Feb. 1754 he was promoted by the lord chancellor Hardwicke to the prebendal stall in the church of Bristol; and in the autumn of the same year the archbishop gave him the valuable vicarage of Rochdale, in Lancashire. He was admitted fellow of the royal society in May 1765. In May 1756 he was sworn one of the chaplains to his late majesty, George II. and through the interest of lord Roystou, was appointed by sir Thomas Clarke to succeed Dr. Terrick, in the summer of 1757, as preacher at the Rolls chapel. In August 1757, he married Susan, relict of John Balls, esq. of the city of Norwich, a lady of great merit, and possessed of a considerable fortune. Upon his marriage he hired a house in Craig’s court, Westminster, where, after a short illness, he died on Oct. 20, foJlowing, in the forty-first year of his age, leaving no issue. His widow afterwards married Philip Bedingfield, esq. of Ditchingham, in Norfolk. His body was interred in St. Martin’s church, Westminster, and a monument was erected to his memory by his widow, in the cathedral church of Bristol, with an elegant Latin inscription, written by his friend Dr. Hayter, then bishop of Norwich.

To the number of his friends, who were at all known in the learned world, besides those already mentioned, may be added the rev. Zachary Mudge, author of a translation of the Psalms, and a volume of sermons Dr. Burton, Dr. Bentham, Dr. Benson, bishop of Gloucester and his great successor, Dr. Warburton, with the last of whom he occasionally held a literary correspondence. In private life, Dr. Forster was a man of much discernment, mildness, and benevolence. He always shewed his contempt of what was absurd, and his abhorrence of what he thought wicked, in a manner the most likely to produce a good effect on those whom he wished to convince or reform; at the same time with the most perfect command of his temper. By an uniform application to study, he acquired and deserved the character of very considerable erudition, and great critical acumen; possessing a knowledge of the Greek, Latin, and Hebrew languages, not exceeded by any man of his time.

Dr. Forster published, 1. “Reflections on the natural antiquity of government, arts, and sciences, in Egypt,” Oxford, 1743. 2. “Platonis dialogi quinque, Recensuit, notisque iilustravit, N. Forster, A. M. &c.” ibid. 1745. This is a very correct text of the Amatores, Euthyphro, Apologia Socratis, Criton, and Phaedo; and this edition of 1745 is preferred to those of 1752, and 1765, afterwards published. 3. “Appendix Liviana, continens, 1. ‘ Selectas codicum Mss. et editionum antiquaruru lectiones, prsecipuas variorum emendationes, et supplementa lacunarum in iis T. Livii qui supersunt libris; 2. J. Freinshewiii supplementorum lib. decem in locum decadis secundac Livianae deperdittp,’” ibid. 1746. This was a joint publication of Dr, Forster and another fellow of Corpus college, and was published without a name. 4. “Popery destructive of the evidence of Christianity.; a sermon before the university of Oxford, Nov. 5, 1746,” ibid. 1746. 5. “A Dissertation upon the account supposed to have been give*i of Jesus Christ by Josephus: being an attempt to show that this celebrated passage, some slight corruptions only excepted, may reasonably be esteemed genuine,” ibid. 1749. The criticism contained in this dissertation is allowed to be ingenious, even by Mr. Bryant, who, in deciding the controversy, defended the passage as it stands. Bishop Warburton’s opinion of it was still more favourable, as appears by his testimony to the author’s “abilities, candour, and address,” in his Julian, p. 93; and by part of a letter of his to Dr. Forster, in which, after having noticed some judicious observations of Dr. Forster, made on his Julian in manuscript, Warburton says, “I have often wished for a hand capable of collecting all the fragments remaining of Porphyry, Celsus, Hierocles, and Julian, and giving them to us with a just, critical, and theological comment, as a ‘ Defy to Infidelity.’ It is certain we want something more than what their ancient answerers have given us. This would be a very noble work. I know of none that has all the talents fit for it but yourself. What an opening will this give to all the treasures of sacred and profane antiquity and what an opportunity would this be of establishing a great character The author of the dissertation on the passage of Josephus (which I think the best piece of criticism of this age) would shine here. Think of it: you cannot do a more useful thing to religion or your own character. Controversies of the times are things that presently vanish. This will be always of the same importance.” (Dated Oct. 15, 1749.) 6. “Biblia Hebraica, sine punctis,” Oxon. 1750, 2 vols. 4to. 7. “Remarks on the rev. Dr. Stebbing’s Dissertation on the power of states to deny civil protection to the Marriages of Minors, &c.” Lond. 1755.

, an Austrian lawyer, was born in 1598. He published a political work at the age of nineteen, entitled “Hypomnemata politica,” and spoke a congratulatory harangue at Padua in the name of the German youth, in the presence of John Cornaro, who was just elected doge of Venice, with which the latter was so much pleased, that he honoured Forstner with the order of St. Mark. Forstner went afterwards into France, and returned to Germany, where, having been some time counsellor to the count de Hohenloe, and his envoy at Vienna, he became vice-chancellor, then chancellor of Montbeliard. He was afterwards employed in the negociations for the peace of Munster, and discovered so much prudence, and such great abilities, that the count de Traumandorf, the emperor’s plenipotentiary, procured him the rank of aulic counsellor. He died October 28, 1667, and left, besides his “Hypomnemata politica,” 1623, 8vo, “De principatu Tiberii, Notæ politicæ ad Taciturn,” a collection of his Letters on the Peace of Munster; “Omissorum Liber;” “Epistola apologetica ad amicum, contra secreti Temeratores, et Epistola de moderno Imperii statu;” and two historical letters, in tom. XIV. of Schelhorn’s Amœnitates Litterariæ.

, an able horticulturist, was born at Old Meldrum in the county of Aberdeen, in 1737, and having been early initiated in horticulture, a favourite study in his own country, he came to London in 1763. Shortly after he became pupil to the celebrated Philip Miller, gardener to the company of apothecaries at their physic-garden at Chelsea, and succeeded him in that situation in 1771. Here he remained until the beginning of 1784, when he was appointed by his majesty chief superintendant of the royal gardens at Kensington and at St. James’s; which employments he held until his death, July 25, 1804.

About 1768, Mr. Forsyth paid particular attention to the cultivation of fruit and forest trees, and turned his thoughts especially toward the discovery of a composition to remedy the diseases and injuries incident to them. After repeated trials, he at length succeeded in preparing one which fully answered his expectation; and in 1789 the success of his experiments attracted the notice of the commissioners of the land revenue, upon whose recommendation a committee of both houses of parliament was appointed to report upon the merits of his. discovery. The result of their inquiries was a perfect conviction of its utility; and in consequence, an address was voted by the house of commons to his majesty, praying that a reward might be “ranted to Mr. Forsyth, upon his disclosing the secret of his composition to the public, which was accordingly done; and in 1791, Mr. Forsyth published his.” Observations on the diseases, defects, and injuries of Fruit and Forest Trees,“to which he added the whole of the correspondence between the commissioners of the land revenue, the committee of parliament, and himself. In 1802 he published the final result of his labours, in” A Treatise on the culture and management of Fruit Trees," &c. 4to, the value of which work has been duly appreciated by the public, three editions having been sold in a very short time. Mr. Forsyth was a member of the society of antiquaries, and of the Linnaean and other learned bodies. He was a man of great benevolence, and although allowed to, rank high in his profession, had all the diffidence and modesty which adhere to men of real worth and knowledge.

, an eminent English lawyer in the reign of Henry VI. was descended from an ancient family in Devonshire: but we cannot learn either the place or time of his birth. It is also uncertain in which ^university he studied, or whether he studied in any. Prince, in his -Worthies of Devonshire, supposes him to havebeen educated at Oxford, and bishop Tanner fixes him to Exeter, college: and the great learning every where shewn in his writings makes these conjectures probable. When he turned his thoughts to the municipal laws of the land, he settled at Lincoln’s Inn, where he quickly distinguished himself by his knowledge of civil as well as common law. The first date that occurs, with respect to his preferments, is the fourth year of Henry VI.; when, as Dugdale informs us, he was made one of the governors of Lincoln’s Inn, and honoured with the same employment three years after. In 1430 he was made a serjeant at law; and, as himself tells us, kept his feast on that occasion with very great splendour, In 1441 he was made a king’s serjeant at law; and, the year after, chief justice of the king’s bench. He is highly commended by our most eminent writers, for the wisdom, gravity, and uprightness, with which he presided in that court for many years. He remained in great favour with the king, of which he received a signal proof, by an unnsual augmentation of his salary. He held his office through the reign of Henry VI. to whom he steadily adhered, and served him faithfully in all his troubles; for which, in the first parliament of Edward IV. which began at Westminster, Nov. 1461, he was attainted of high treason, in the same act by which Henry VI. queen Margaret, Edward their son, and many persons of the first distinction, were likewise attainted. After this, Henry fled into Scotland, and it is generally believed, that he then made Fortescne chancellor of England. His name, indeed, upon this occasion, is not found recorded in the patent rolls; because, as Selden says, “being with Henry VI. driven into Scotland by the fortune of the wars wijth the house of York, he was made chancellor of England while he was there.” Several writers have styled him chancellor of England; and, in his book “De laudibus legum Anglia;,” he calls himself “Cancellarius Angliae.”

In April 1463, he embarked with queen Margaret, prince Edward, and many persons of distinction, who followed the fortunes of the house of Lancaster, at Hamburg, and landed at Sluys in Flanders; whence they were conducted to Bruges, thence to Lisle, and thence into Lorrain. lu this exile he remained for many years, retiring from place to place, as the necessities of the royal family required: for though, during that space, the queen and prince were often in motion, and great efforts were made to restore. Henry, yet, considering the age of Fortescue, it is not probable that he was suffered to expose himself to such hazards; especially as he might do them better service by soliciting their interest at different courts. It is certain, that he was not idle; but, observing the excellent understanding of prince Edward, who applied himself wholly to military exercises, and seemed to think of nothing but qualifying himself for an expert commander, he thought it high time to give him other impressions, and to infuse into his mind just notions of the constitution of his country, as well as due respect to its laws; so that, if Providence should favour his designs, he might govern as a king, and not as a tyrant, or a conqueror. With this view 1 as we learn from his introduction, he drew up his famous work, entitled “De Laudibus Legtirn Anglise;” which, though it failed of its primary intention, that hopeful prince being not long after cruelly murdered, will yet remain an everlasting monument of this great and good man’s respect and affection for his country. This very curious and concise vindication of our laws was received with great esteem when it was communicated to the learned of that profession; yet it was not published till the reign of Henry VIII. when it was printed hy Edward Whitchurch, in 16mo, but without a date. In 1516 it was translated by Robert Mulcaster, and printed by R. Tottel, and again in 1567, 1573, and 1575; also by Thomas White in 1598, 1599, and 1609. Fortescue, with HenghamVs “Summa magna et parva,” was likewise printed in 1616 and 1660, 12mo, and again, with Selden’s notes, 1672, 12mo. In 1737 Fortescue was printed in folio; and lastly, in 1775, an English translation with the original Latin, was published in 8vo, with Selden’s notes, and a great variety of remarks relative to the history, antiquities, and laws of England, with a large historical preface by F. Gregor, esq. In 1663, E. Waterhouse, esq. published “Fortescue illustratuV” a commentary on the “De Laudibus,” which, although prolix and defective in style, Mr. Hargrave thinks may be resorted to with great advantage, and may very much facilitate the labours of more judicious and able inquirers. When lord chancellor, sir John is said to have drawn up the statute 2$ Henry VI. “of resumption of certain grants of the crown,” which, though much relied upon by the writers on that subject, is not extant in any present edition of the statutes. The house of Lancaster having afterwards a prospect of retrieving their fortunes, the queen and the prince went over to England, Fortescue with many others accompanying them. They did not succeed, so that this chancellor was forced to reconcile himself as well as he could to the victorious Edward IV.; for which purpose he wrote a kind of apology for his own conduct. Tlws treatise, though it has never been published, Selden had seen; as he tells us in his preface to Fortescue' s book, “L)e Laudibus, <kc.” After all these extraordinary changes of masters and fortunes, he preserved his old principles in regard to the English constitution; as appears from another valuable and learned work, written by him in English, and published in the reign of queen Anne, with this title: “The difference between an absolute and limited monarchy, as it more particularly regards the English constitution: being a treatise written by sir John Fortescue, knight, lord chief justice, and lord high chancellor of England, under king 'Henry VI. Faithfully transcribed from the manuscript copy in the Bodleian library, and collated with three other manuscripts (which were afterwards printed). Published with some remarks by John Fortescue Aland, of the Inner Temple, esq. F. R. S. 1714,” 8vo. There is a manuscript of this work in the Cotton library, in the title of which it is said to be addressed to Henry VI. but many passages in it shew it to have been plainly written in favour of, and for the service of, Edward IV. A second edition, with amendments, was published in 1719, 8vo. As for this author’s other writings, which were pretty numerous, as they were never printed, we know nothing more of them than we learn from the titles, and the commendations bestowed upon them by those who had perused them. They have, however, been carefully preserved in libraries, some of them being still extant under the following titles “Opusculum de natura Legis Naturae, et de ejus censura in successione regnorum supremorum;” “Defensio juris Domus Lancastriae” “Genealogy of the House of Lancaster” “Of the title of the House of York” “Genealogise Ilegum Scotios” “A Dialogue between Understanding and Faith” "A Prayer Book which savours touch of the times we live in,' 1 &c. It would certainly be a gratification, if not a benefit, to the learned world, if his manuscripts were printed; for he was a man of general knowledge, great observation, and his writings would probably throw much light upon the dark parts of our history and antiquities.

We know nothing further of his life, which probably was spent in retirement in the country, free from the cares, and remote from the dangers of a court. Neither is there any distinct account preserved of his jdeath; we are only told in general, that he was then near ninety years of age, which the circumstances of his life rendered very probable. His remains were interred in the church of Ebburton in Gloucestershire, where he had purchased an, estate; and where one of his descendants, in 1677, caused a monument to he repaired, upon which was the figure of this venerable person in his robes, and added an inscription to his memory. It was truly said by his editor, Mr. Fortescue Aland, that “all good men and lovers of the English constitution speak of him with honour; and that he still lives, in the opinion of all true Englishmen, in as high esteem and reputation as any judge that ever sat in Westminster hall. He was a man acquainted with all sorts of learning, besides his knowledge in the law, in which he was exceeded by none; as will appear by the many judgements he gave when on the bench, in the year-book of Henry VI. His character in history is that of pious, loyal, and learned: and he had the honour to be called the chief counsellor of the king. He was a great courtier, and yet a great lover of his country.”

, a learned Italian prelate and poet, was born in 1674, obtained the highest rank of episcopacy under pope Clement XI, and flattered himself that Clement XII. a friend of poetry and poets, would advance him to the dignity of cardinal. This pope continally giving him reason to hope, as constantly found excuses for disappointing him; at length one instance more of this duplicity, added to so many that had passed, completely extinguished the expectations of Fortiguerra, and this mortification so deeply affected him, that it proved fatal. When he was on his death-bed, Clement sent to him, endeavouring to comfort him once more, and revive his hopes, but the sick man turning himself about, and raising the clothes, only uttered such an explosion, as once surprised and entertained the British house of commons, and said, “that is my answer; a good journey to us both” <c Eccovi la riposta bon viaggio e per lei, e per me.“He died soon after this, which happened in 1735, being then sixty-one. His house was the general resort of wit and literature in Rome, and he wrote his ”Ricciardetto,“a burlesque poem in thirty cantos, in a very short time, to prove to a party of this kind, how easy it is for a man of imagination to write in the style of Ariosto, whom some of them had preferred to Tasso. In this poem he gave abundant liberty to his imagination, and its extravagance would be fatiguing beyond measure, were it not supported by the utmost ease of versification, and perpetual sallies of pleasantry and genius. It has been ably translated into French by a M. du Mourner, chev. of St. Louis, who died in 1768. There is also a translation of” Terence" by Fortiguerra, with the Latin text, printed at Urbino in 1736, and adorned with cuts, a very splendid book.

, a Venetian historian, was born in 1628. He is principally known as the continnator of the History of Venice written by Naui. His history was published in 1692, in 4to, and makes the tenth volume of the collection of Venetian historians, published in 1718, 4to, a collection badly printed, but containing only good authors. Foscarini was a senator, and filled several important posts in the republic. He died in 1692. He was employed by the state to write his history, and is supposed to have been furnished with the most authentic documents. Two novels by him are extant in an Italian collection, called “Novelle degli Academici incogniti,” 1651, 4to.

, a French painter, the pupil of Le Brun, who suffered him to paint for him occasionally in some of his most capital works, was the son of a goldsmith, and born at Paris in 1640. He perfected his talents in Italy, and on his return was employed to paint the dome of the hotel of invalids. Louis XIV. settled upon him a pension of 1000 crowns, and he was received into the academy of painting, where he became rector and professor. His fame extended even to England, whither he was invited by the earl of Montagu, and employed by liini in decorating his magnificent house, now the British Museum, where his paintings at that time attracted universal admiration. William III. on seeing them, offered him a handsome establishment in this country; but, at the same time, the celebrated architect Mansard, wrote to him from France, that he was wanted there to co-operate with him in finishing some public buildings, and he returned to his native country, where he died in 1716. He was reckoned inimitable in his time as a colourist, and excellent both in landscape and historical painting.

, nephew of the former, and also the son of a goldsmith, was born at Paris in 1658. He became lord of Aubigny by purchasing the lands to which that title was attached. He was successively secretary to the marquis de Crequi, and the duke d'Aumont. When the former of these noblemen was slain at the battle of Luzara, La Fosse was employed to carry his heart to Paris, and celebrated the death of the young hero in verses which are still extant. He was so much a master of Italian as to write skilfully in that language both in prose and verse, but his chief fame as a poet was atchieved in his own language, in which he wrote several tragedies, and many other poems. His ft Polixene, Manlius, and Theseus,“published in his” Theatre,“2 vols. 12mo, maintained their station in the French theatre till the revolution; and all his dramas are said to abound with passages which would not disgrace the finest tragic writers of France. His versification was highly finished, and he said that the expression cost him more than the thoughts. His” Manlius," the best of his pieces, has been pronounced in many respects worthy of Corneille; yet even in France, we are told, he is less known than he deserves. He was intimate with the poet J. Baptiste Rousseau, and lived the life of a philosopher, preferring letters to fortune, and friendship to every thing. He died Nov. 2, 1708, at the age of fifty. His modesty was equal to his genius; and when any of his pieces were less successful than others, he professed constantly that he never appealed from the judgment of the public.

, an English dissenting minister, was born at Exeter, Sept. 16, 1697. His grandfather was 9, clergyman at Kettering in Northamptonshire; but his father, being educated by an uncle who was a dissenter, imbibed the same principles, and was afterwards by trade a tucker, or fuller, in Exeter. He was sent early to the free school in that town, where the foundation of a friendship between him and Dr. Conybeare, afterwards bishop of Bristol, is said to have been laid; and thence was removed to an academy in the same city, where he finished his studies. He there displayed pre-eminent natural abilities, a quick apprehension, a solid judgment, a happy memory, and a free commanding elocution.

He began to preach in 1718; soon after which a strong debate arose among the dissenters, upon the doctrine of the Trinity, and subscription to tests. The dispute was fiercely carried on among them in the West of England, and particularly at Exeter, where he then resided. As he embraced the obnoxious opinions, he found it necessary to quit the county of Devon, and to accept of an ijivitation to Melborne in Somersetshire. Here he continued till some of his hearers took offence at the freedom of his opinions, and made that place uneasy to him. Then he removed to Ashwitk, an obscure retreat under the hills of Mendip in the same county, where he preached to two poor congregations, one at Colesford, the other at Wokey near Wells, both of which together did not produce more than 15l. per annum. It seems to have been here that he wrote his celebrated “Essay on Fundamentals,” and likewise his sermon “On the Resurrection of Christ;” for they were both printed in 1720.

From this place he removed to Trowbridge in Wiltshire, where he boarded with Mr. Norman, a reputable glover. Here his congregation did not consist of more than twenty or thirty persons; and his finances were so very insufficient for his support, that he began to entertain thoughts of quitting the ministry, and learning the glove trade of Mr. Norman; choosing-rather to recur to some secular employment, than seek for succour in the established church. About this time he was convinced, by reading Dr. Gale, that baptism of the adult by immersion was the true scripture-doctrine, and accordingly was baptised that way in Lpndon: but this caused no misunderstanding between him and his presbvterian congregation. While he was meditating on the poverty of his condition, and looking abroad for better means of subsistence, Robert Houlton, esTj. took him into his house as a chaplain, and treated him with much huiiiniiity. Tins event seems to have opened his way to public notice; for, in 1724, he was chosen to succeed Dr. Gale at Barbican, in London, where he laboured as a pastor above twenty years. In 1731 he published a “Defence of the usefulness truth, and excellency of the Christian Revelation,” against Tindal’s “Christianity as old as the Creation.” This Defence is written with great force of argument, and great moderation has been well accepted, and much esteemed by the candid and judicious of all parties and, as is said, was spoken of with great regard by Tindal himself. In 1744 he was chosen pastor of the independent church of Pinners-hall. In 1748 the university of Aberdeen conferred on him the degree of D. D. by diploma: for at this time the Scottish divines had the highest opinion of his merit.

In August 1746 he attended lord Kilmarnock, who was concerned in the rebellion the year before; and they who lived with him imagined that this attendance made too deep an impression on his tender, sympathizing spirit. His vivacity at least was thenceforward observed to abate; and, in April 1750, he was visited with a violent disorder, of which he never thoroughly recovered, though he continued to preach more or less till January 1752. Three days after, he h'nd another shock of the paralytic kind, which so impaired his understanding that he never possessed it rightly afterwards. About ten days before his death he was paralytic, but did not entirely lose his senses till the last, Nov. 5, 1753. Besides the pieces already mentioned, he published “Tracts on Heresy,” on which subject he had a controversy with Dr. Stebbing; several “Funeral Sermons,” one among the rest for the rev. Mr. Thomas Emlyn “An Account of lord Kilmarnock” four volumes of “Sermons,” in 8vo and two volumes of “Discourses on Natural Religion and Social Virtue,” in 4to.

Dr. Foster’s character has been spoken of by his friends in the highest terms, and they dwell with peculiar emphasis on his humanity, as a man perfectly free from every thing gross and worldly. His benevolence and charities were so extraordinary, that he never reserved any thing for his own future use: and had it not been for two thousand subscribers to his “Discourses on Natural Religion and Social Virtue,” he would have died extremely poor. His way of thinking is thus described by himself: “I always had,” says he, “I bless God, ever since I began to understand, or think, to any purpose, large and generous principles; and there never was any thing either in my temper or education, which might incline me to narrowness and bigotry: and I am heartily glad of this opportunity, which now offers itself, of making this public, serious profession, that I value those who are of different persuasions from me, more than those who agree with me in sentiment, if they are more serious, sober, and charitable.” His talent for preaching was very eminent and extraordinary. His voice was naturally sweet, strong, distinct, harmonious: and his ear enabled him to manage it exactly. He was also a perfect master of action; his action, however, was grave, expressive, natural, free from violence, free from distortions: in short, such as became the pulpit, and was necessary to give force and energy to the truths there delivered. The Sunday evening lecture, begun in 1728, which he carried on at the Old Jewry above twenty years, shewed indisputably, that nobody ever went beyond him for popularity in preaching. Hither resorted persons of every rank, station, and quality clergy, wits, freethinkers: and hither curiosity might probably draw Pope himself, who, in the epilogue to his satires, has taken occasion to praise him for this talent in the following lines:

, an excellent classic scholar, was born in 1731, at Windsor, the propinquity of which to Eton was, fortunately for him, the motive for sending him to that college for education, where, at a very early age, he manifested great abilities, and, in an uncommon manner, baffled all the hardships which other boys in their progress usually encounter. He, however, had two considerable advantages the first, being received as a pupil by the late rev. Septimius Plumptree, then one of the assistants and the second, that he was -noticed by the reverend and very learned Dr. John Burton, vice-provost of Eton; by the abilities of the former in the Greek language, and of the latter in the Hebrew, Mr. Foster profited exceedingly. It was a matter highly pleasing to them, that they did not throw their seed on a barren soil whatever instruction he received, he cultivated incessantly and it is but justice to add, that he in a great measure excelled his contemporaries. His learning and his sobriety recommended him to many friends while he continued at Eton, which was till 1748, when he was elected to King’s college in Cambridge; a college to which, as Mr. Pote observes in his advertisement to his " Registrum Regale,' 7 Eton annually sendeth forth her ripe fruit. Mr. Foster here improved himself under the provost Dr. Wm. George, an excellent Greek, and general scholar. At the expiration of three years he there (as usual) became a fellow, and shortly afterwards was sent for to Eton by the late Dr. Edward Barnard, to be one of his assistants. Great honour was sure to attend Mr. Foster from this summons, for no man distinguished better, or could form a stronger judgment of his abilities and capacity, than Dr. Barnard: and such was his attention to the school, that he made it his primary consideration, that it should be supplied with assistants the most capable and the most deserving. At the resignation of this great master, which happened Oct. 25, 1765, when he was chosen provost on the death of Dr. Sleech, he exerted his whole interest for Dr. Foster to succeed him in the mastership, and by his weight in the college he carried his point. But it did not prove fortunate for his successor, or for the seminary; the temper, the manner, the persuasion, the politeness, the knowledge of the world, which Dr. Barnard so eminently displayed, did not appear in his successor. His learning justly entitled him to the situation; but learning is not the sole ingredient to constitute the master of such a school; more, much more, is required and Dr. Foster appeared to the greater disadvantage, from immediately succeeding so great a man. Nor could he long support himself in his situation his passions undermined his health and, notwithstanding his abilities as a scholar, his government was defective, his authority insufficient, and he judged it best to resign, that he might not destroy a fabric which he found himself unequal to support. Dr. Foster, however, did not retire unrewarded; his majesty, on the death of Dr. Sumner in 1772, bestowed on him a canonry of Windsor. But this he did not long enjoy; his ill health carried him to the German Spa, where he died in September the year following, and where his remains were interred; but afterwards were removed to Windsor, and deposited near those of his father, who had been mayor of that corporation.

Dr. Foster published “An Essay on the different nature of Accent and Quantity, with their use and application in the pronunciation of the English, Latin, and Greek Languages; containing, an account and explanation of the ancient tones, and a defence of the present system of Greek accentual marks, against the objections of Isaac Vossius, Henninius, Sarpedonius, Dr. Gaily, and others.” In this learned Essay, which sufficiently exalted his character as a scholar, not only Bentleian acuteness and variety of learning are conspicuous, but justness of composition, elegance united with spirit, and ingenuous and exemplary candour. It was printed for Pote in 1762. Several exercises of the doctor’s are extant in ms. which also do him peculiar honour.

, an eminent lawyer, was born at Marlborough in Wiltshire, Dec. 16, 1689. His father Michael, and his grandfather John, were attornies in that place. After attending the free-school there, Mr. Foster was matriculated at Oxford May 7, 1705, and studied about two years at Exeter college, but like many eminent men in the profession of the law, left it without taking a degree. On May 23, 1707, he was admitted into the society of the Middle Temple, and in due time was called to the bar, but not having much success as an advocate, he retired into the country, and settled in his native town. Here he contracted an intimacy with Algernon, earl of Hertford, afterwards duke of Somerset, which continued many years, and until the death of the noble duke, who by his will appointed his friend executor in trust with his son-in-law Hugh, earl (afterwards duke) of Northumberland. In 1725 he married Martha, the eldest daughter of James Lyde, esq. of Stantonwick in Somersetshire; and in a few years afterwards he removed to Bristol, where he exercised his profession with great reputation and considerable success; and in August 1735 he was chosen rer corder of the city, which office he retained many years. Soon after accepting this office in Easter term, 1736, he took on him the degree of serjeant at law. In 1720 he had published “A Letter of Advice to protestant Dissenters,” in which he is said to discover the most liberal and enlarged views; and in 1735 he published a pamphlet which engaged the public attention very much, entitled “An Examination of the scheme of Church power laid down in the Codex juris ecclesiastici Anglicani, &c.” In this he controverted the system of church power vested in the clergy, and which forms the ground-work of bishop Gibson’s “Codex.” Several answers, however, were published to Mr. Foster’s pamphlet, the principal one by Dr. Andrews, a civilian. Mr. Foster seems to have promised a continuation, in reply to him and others, but did not pursue the subject. In the postscript, however, to the third edition of his pamphlet, he adverts to “the personal severity,” with which Dr. Andrews had treated him; and adds, “It is not in my nature to make any return of that kind. I forgive him with all my heart. If, upon poor reflection, he can forgive himself, I pity him.”

Having greatly distinguished himself on many occasions after his settlement at Bristol, Mr. serjeant Foster, in the vacation after Hilary term J 8 Geo. II. (1745) on the recommendation of the lord chancellor Hardwicke, was appointed to succeed sir William Chappie, as one of the judges of the court of King’s Bench; and being knighted by the iking, was sworn into the office, April 22 of the above year. In this office he continued to Nov. 7, 1763, during which period many points of singular importance, as well in civil as criminal cases, in which he bore a considerable share, were determined. The criminal cases are reported by himself in his Crown Law, and many of the others may be seen in the Reports of Strange, Wilson, Burrow, and Blackstone. But although sir Michael Foster generally concurred in opinion with the other judges (who were in succession, sir William Lee, sir Martin Wright, sir Thomas Denison, sir Dudley Ryder, lord Mansfield, and sir John Eardley Wilmot) yet on several important questions, instances of which are given hy his biographer, he differed from some, if not from all of the judges. Indeed, his life, as drawn up by his nephew, Mr. Dodson, for the Biog. Britannica, and lately published separately, is merely a lawpamphlet, and contains, unless in a very general way, very little biography, very little of personal character, habits, or manners. At the conclusion, we are told that Mr. Justice Foster was blessed with a good constitution, and generally enjoyed a good state of health until some few years before his death. In no long time after the death of lady Foster (which happened in 1758) his health began to decline, and he complained of a loss of appetite, which made it necessary for him occasionally to spend some time at Bath. He received considerable benefit from the use of the Bath waters but wheresoever he was, he was patient and resigned, composed and cheerful rejoicing in the glorious prospect beyond the grave, which Christianity opened to his view. In Hilary, Easter, and Trinity terms, 1763, he seldom attended at Westminster-hall. He was confined to his bed a short time only, and on Monday, Nov. 7, he expired. He never had any children. By his own direction, he was buried in the parish church of StantonDrew, in Somersetshire, where lady Foster had been buried. The doctrines of our criminal law are very learnedly discussed by sir Michael Foster, in his “Report of the proceedings on the commission for the Trial of the Rebels in 1746, and other crown cases.” The first edition of these reports was published in folio, 1763; the second in 8vo, 1776, to which were added, some discourses on several branches of the crown law, with notes and references, by Michael Dodson, esq. his nephew; and the third, with a few discourses on high treason, on homicide, on accomplices, and some observations on the writings of lord Hale, and an appendix containing sir M. Foster’s opinion on several difficult and important cases, in royal 8vo, 1792, by the same Mr. Dodson.