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

We will conclude our account of this eminent father with what a learned and candid critic of our own has delivered concerning him. Origen, says Jortin, “was very learned and ingenious, and indefatigably industrious. His whole life, from his early years, was spent in examining, teaching, and explaining, the scriptures; to which he joined the study of philosophy, and all polite literature. He was humble, modest, and patient under great injuries and cruel treatment, which he received from Christians and Pagans: for, though he ever had a considerable number of friends and admirers, on account of his amiable qualities and accomplishments, he was persecuted and calumniated by men, who had neither his learning nor his virtue, degraded from the order of presbyters, driven from his home, and excommunicated by one Demetrius, bishop of Alexandria, who envied him, says Eusebius, for the reputation which he had gained. His inquisitive genius, and his mixing philosophy with Christianity, led him, perhaps, into some learned singularities and ingenious reveries; but he was by temper far from dogmatizing in such points, from fomenting schisms, and setting up himself for the head of a party. He lived in times when Christians were not so shackled with systems and determinations as they were afterwards, nor so much exposed to disingenuous and illiberal objections; and had more liberty to pursue their inquiries, and to speak their mind. He was ever extremely sober and exemplary, practising what 'he preached to others; and he lived and died poor, and destitute even of common conveniences.” It may be necessary to add, that there was a sect of ancient heretics, who resembled, and even surpassed, the abominations of the Gnostics: they were called Origenians, but appear to have derived their name from some person totally distinct from the preceding Origen, whose followers were called Origenists.

When Orleannois was laid waste by the overflowing of the Loire in 1733, the duke, by his speedy help, saved a multitude of men who were perishing in the water, and furnished even the necessary grain for sowing the lands. It is universally known that, in 1739 and 1740, his liberality had no bounds but the people’s wants. He extended his alms not only to the poor catholics in Berlin, and throughout Silesia, but to those of the Indies and America. This great man also founded charity-schools in several places, and communities of men and women for the instruction of youth; a college at Versailles; a divinity chair in the Sorbonne, for explaining the Hebrew text of the holy scriptures. At Orleans he established foundations of midwives, and of surgeons for cutting for the stone. He purchased several very useful secrets, which he made public; and his gardens were filled with scarce and valuable simples from the most remote climates, for the relief of the sick. Anxious about. the public good to his last moments, he bequeathed to the seminary of the Trentetrois, a sum sufficient for the re-establishment of the scholarships; and from that time the young divines of this seminary have been taught Hebrew in the Sorbonne. These charitable occupations did not prevent his acquiring great learning. He applied with incredible success to the study of St. Thomas, Estius, the most valuable treatises in defence of religion, the fathers, the best ecclesiastical authors, the Hebrew, Chaldee, Syriac, and Greek languages, that he might have the satisfaction of reading the hoi? scriptures in the original text. He also devoted some time to studying history, geography, botany, chemistry, natural philosophy, and painting. So rapid was his progress, that, in the last seven or eight years of his life, he cited texts of scripture almost always from memory, with the variations of the Hebrew, Greek, anoWulgate. The Greek fathers were as familiar to him as the Latin; and he explained with facility Plato’s Dialogues, and other profane authors. The duke of Orleans honoured the literati with his patronage, and encouraged them by his bounty, preferring those whose researches contributed to the glory of religion, or the public welfare. In the codicil of his* will., he leaves an annuity to the abb Frangois, and explains his motive in the following terms: “Being desirous to take upon myself to return the obligation which the public are under to S. abbe” Francois, author of a late work on the proofs of our religion, and to enable him to continue such useful labours, I give and bequeath to the foresaid S. Abbe Francois, five hundred livres annual-rent and annuity.“Ivlothwiths’tanding the immense sums which this prince spent, both in France and in foreign counrries, he discharged the accumulated debts of his own house,” restored its exhausted finances, and considerably increased its domains. Though humble and plain in his private life, he was grand and noble on public occasions. It is well known with how much magnificence he went into Alsace to espouse the queen in his majesty’s name; how liberal he was to the soldiers while colonel-general of the French infantry, and in what manner he celebrated the dauphin’s birth, the marriage of the duke of Chartres, &c. Gay and lively in conversation, he became serious the moment that any one began to talk to him on business. His austerities and application to study having brought on a long and painful illness, he waited for the approach of death with an incredible firmness and courage, speaking of it with the greatest tranquillity. He died February 4, 1752, aged forty-eight years and six months, universally regretted. He left many works in manuscript, principally literal translations, paraphrases, and commentaries on part of the Old Testament; a literal translation of the Psalms from the Hebrew, with a paraphrase, and notes; several dissertations against the Jews; a literal translation of St. Paul’s Epistles from the Greek, with a paraphrase, notes, and pious reflections, and several other curious treatises and dissertations on different subjects. His modesty would not permit him to print any of his writings he bequeathed them, with his library, to the Dominicans.

, a Jesuit who acquired a considerable reputation in his own country as a historian, was born at Bourges in 1644. He was a teacher of the belles lettres in different colleges for several years, and became a celebrated preacher. Some separate lives which he published, in an agreeable style, and with judicious reflections, first attracted the public attention, but his reputation chiefly arose from his historical writings. Voltaire says that father D'Orleans was the first who chose revolutions for his subject, and adds, that the idea was not more happy than the execution. His “History of the Revolutions of England” met with the universal approbation of the French critics, and would have been, says Palissot, a perfect model, had the author concluded with the reign of Henry V11I, but after that he was no longer allowed to be impartial. English critics, however, have a less favourable opinion of his qualifications for writing such a history; and Echard, who translated part of the work, “History of the Revolutions in England under the family of the Stuarts, from 1603 to 1690,” 1711, 8vo, has very properly cautioned his readers against the author’s prejudices. Father D'Orleans, whose private character is represented as very amiable, died in the prime of life iti 1698. His works are, l.the history already mentioned, “Histoire des Revolutions d'Angleterre,” Paris, 1693, 3 vols. 4to, afterwards reprinted in 4 vols. 12ino, with heads. Francis Turpin published a continuation in 1786, in 2 vols. 8vo. 2. “Histoire des Revolutions d' Espagne,” ibid. 1734, 3 vols 4to. This, left incomplete by the author, was finished by Brumoy and Rouille, but it had not the same success as his revolutions of England, which his countrymen are willing to impute to the subject being less interesting. 3. “Histoire de M. Constance, premier minister du roi de Siam, et de la derniere revolution de cet etat,” ibid. 1692, 12mo. 4. “Histoire des deux conquerants Tartares Chimchi et Camhi, qui ont subjugue la Chine,” ibid. 1689, 8vo. 5. The lives, published separately, of Spinola, 1693, 12mo; of P. Cotton, 1688, 4to of Ricci, 1693, 12mo; of Mary of Savoy and the infanta Isabella, 1696, 12mo, and of Stanislaus Kostka, 1712, reprinted in 1727, with the life of Louis de Gonzaga. 6. “Sermons et instructions Chretiennes sur diverses matieres,” 1696, 2 vols. 12mo.

, an eminent historian, the son of Dr. Alexander Orme, a physician and surgeon in the service of the East India company, was born at Anjengo, in the Travancore country, in 1728. He was sent to England for hi education, and was entered at Harrow-school when he was only six years of age. After he left school, he was a year in the office of the accomptant-general of the African company, to be initiated in commercial transactions, and then embarked for Calcutta, where he arrived in 1742. As soon as he engaged in the company’s service, he acquired the highest reputation for the zeal with which he entered into their interests, and at the same time acquired such knowledge of the institutions, manners, and customs of the natives of India, that, in 1752, when some regulations were thought necessary in the police of Calcutta, he was desired to give his opinion on the subject. He accordingly drew up the greater part of “A general idea of the Government and People of Indostan.” In 1753 he returned to England, and was frequently consulted by men in power on Indian affairs, and respecting plans, at that time in agitation, for supporting the British interest in Hindoostan. Mr. Orme revisited India in 1754, on being appointed by the court of directors a member of the council at Fort St. George, and contributed much to those measures which finally gave to the English the superiority in India which they have ever since possessed. Mr. Orme held the office of commissary and accomptant-general during the years 1757-8, but in the latter year his health obliged him to embark for England, where he arrived in the autumn of 1760, and settling in London, employed himself in preparing “The History' of the Military Transactions of the British nation in Itidostan, from the year 1745,” the first volume of which, bringing down the history to 1756, was published in 1763, and extremely well received by the public. The East India company, duly sensible of his merits, and of the importance of his historical researches, not only gave him free access to all their records, but appointed him to be their historiographer, with a salary of 400l. per annum. To obtain the most accurate information respecting the war which was to be the subject of the second volume, he went over to France in 1773, where he was furnished liberally with various authentic documents, but it was not till 1778 that the work was brought to its completion. This contained all the events which took place in the English settlements in India from 1756 to 1763, with an investigation of the rise and progress of the English commerce in Bengal, and an account of the Mahommedan government from its establishment in 1200. In 1782 Mr. Orme published a work entitled “Historical Fragments of the Mogul empire of the Marattoes, and of the English concerns in Indostau from the year 1659.” This, which was an octavo volume, was his last publication, for though his literary pursuits were unremitted, yet his health was unequal to the exertions required for the composition. In 1792 he left the metropolis to enjoy in retirement the society of. his friends, and the recreation afforded by a well- assorted library. The place of his retirement was Ealing, where he was often visited by his friends, who appear to have loved him with great affection. Amongst these may be mentioned general Richard Smith, Mr. Robarts, one of the court of directors, Mr. Dairy mple, sir George Baker, and the late Mr. Owen Cambridge. But his books were his chief companions; and such was the active curiosity of his mind, that at the age of seventy he found in them a constant source of amusement. He continued his studies to the last month of his life, and a great many of his books bear interesting evidence of the strict attention with which he perused them; for their margins are filled with observations in his own hand writing. In the beginning of January 1801, he fell into a state of weakness and languor that prognosticated his speedy dissolution; and he expired on the 14th of that month, in the seventy-third year of his age.

Mr. Or me was not known to be married, even to those who were most in his confidence; but in a letter from him to a particular friend, which, agreeably to the directions he left, was delivered according to its address, after his death, he acknowledges his marriage: and, in consequence of that acknowledgment, the court of directors settled a small annuity on his widow. He left no children.

Mr. Orme was somewhat above the middle stature, and his countenance expressed much shrewdness and intelligence. In his personal habits he seems not to have had any striking peculiarities. His general manner was sensible, easy, and polite. Of the qualities of his heart, those who knew him long and intimately thought very highly. He was zealous in the service of those whom he really loved: -but as it was not his custom to make professions of friendship, his acts sometimes surpassed expectations. His powers of conversation were very considerable; and such was the extent of his knowledge, the readiness of his thoughts, and the facility of his expression, that he generally illustrated, in a pleasing, often in a forcible, manner, whatever subject he talked on. Ancient literature was one of his favourite topics and he conversed on it with no common degree of learning and critical exactness, yet without any sort of pedantry or affectation. He loved to talk of music and painting, and was a good judge of both.

, a polemical writer of the time of James I. was descended paternally from a Lancashire family, which assumed the name of an estate in that county, in the reign of Henry III. of which it still continues the possession. His grandfather, John Ormerod, a younger brother of this house, married a Lancashire lady of the name of Whitaker, who from the contiguity of the estate of Ormerod and Holme, was most probably of the family of the Whitakers of the latter place. It is not unlikely that this relationship to the learned divinity-professor of Cambridge, might influence the subject of this article in his choice of his university, and in his theological studies.

His labours were rewarded by the valuable rectory of HuntspilT in Somersetshire: where he continued resident, at the visitation of that county by the proxies of Camden in 1623. In this place he died, in 1626, leaving issue one son Richard, born in 1619, and three daughters, by his wife Johanna, daughter of Richard Hinckson, esq. of Goham in Kent, who survived him to 1638. Their wills are extant in the Prerogative office in London.

, a famous Spanish Jew, was carefully educated in that religion by his parents, who were Jews, though they outwardly professed themselves Roman catholics; abstaining from the practice of Judaism in every thing, except only the observation of the fast of expiation, in the month Tisis, or September. Our author studied the scholastic philosophy as it was then taught in Spain, and became such an adept that he was made professor of metaphysics in the university of Salamanca: but, afterwards applying himself to the study of physic, he practised that art at Seville with success, till, being accused of Judaism, he was thrown into the inquisition, and suffered the most dreadful cruelties, in order to force him to confess. According to his own account, he was put into a dark dungeon, so straight, that he could scarce turn himself in it; and suffered so many hardships, that his brain began to be disturbed. He frequently asked himself, “Am I indeed that Don Balthasar Orobio, who walked freely about in Seville, who was entirely at ease, and had the blessings of a wife and children!” sometimes imagining that his past life was only a dream, and that the dungeon where he then lay was his true birth-place, and to all appearance would prove the place of his death. At other times, he used to form metaphysical arguments, and resolve them, acting the three different parts of opponent, respondent, and moderator, at the same time. In this whimsical way he diverted himself from time to time, but when examined by the inquisitors, constantly denied that he was a Jew. At length he was put to the torture, in the most cruel manner, yet without extorting any confession from him, and his tormentors, after three years’ confinement, finding themselves baffled by his perseverance, ordered his wounds to be cured, and so discharged him. As soon as he had got his liberty, he resolved to quit the Spanish dominions; and, going to France, was made professor of physic at Thoulouse. The theses, which he made as candidate for this place, were upon putrefaction and he maintained them with such a metaphysical subtlety as embarrassed all his competitors. He continued in this city some time, still outwardly professing the popish religion: but at last, growing weary of dissembling, he repaired to Amsterdam, where he was circumcised, took the name of Isaac, and professed Judaism; still continuing here also to practise physic, in which he was much esteemed. Upon the publication of Spinoza’s “Tractatus Theologico-Politicus,” he saw its fallacy, but did not think it worthy of an answer, until Bredenbergh, who had at one time written a confutation of it, published another treatise as objectionable as that of Spinosa’s. Orobio then took up his pen against both the authors, and published a piece to that purpose, entitled “Certamen philosophicum adversus J. B. principia,” 1684, 4to. But the dispute which he held with the celebrated Philip Limborch against the Christian religion (see Limborch), did him most credit, on the score of acuteness, moderation, and temper. The three papers which he wrote on the occasion were afterwards printed by his antagonist, in an account which he published of the controversy, under the title of “Arnica collatio cum Judæo, &c.” Orobio died in 1687.

, a learned Spanish ecclesiastic, flourished in the fifth century, and was born at Tarragona in Catalonia. He was a disciple of St. Augustin; and, in the year 414, was sent to Africa by Eutropius and Paul, two Spanish bishops, to solicit Augustin’s assistance against heretics who infested their churches. He continued a year with this doctor, and in that time made a great proficiency in the knowledge of the Scriptures. In the year 415, Augustin dispatched him to Jerusalem, to consult St. Jeroni upon the origin of the soul; and Orosius on his return brought into Africa the relics of the martyr St. Stephen; whose body, as well as those of Nicomedes, of Gamaliel, and his son Abiba, had been found during Orosius’s residence in Palestine. At length, by the advice of Augustin, our author undertook the history we have of his in seven books, under the title, as is said, of “Miseria humana;” containing an account of the wars, plagues, earthquakes, floods, conflagrations, thunder and lightning, murder, and other crimes, which had happened from the beginning of the world to the year of Christ 416. The purpose of it was to shew, against some heathen objectors, that these calamities had not been more frequent, after the commencement of Christianity, than before; and farther, that it was owing to the Christian religion, that the Roman Cpmrnonwealth, which did not deserve to continue, was nevertheless then still subsisting. It has gone through several editions: as, Paris, 1506, 1524, and 1526, folio; Cologne, 1536, 1542, 1561, and 1572, 8vo, with the “Apologia de Arbitrii libertate;” at Mentz, in 1615, and lastly by Havercamp at Ley den, 1738, 4to, and 1767, the same edition with a different date. We have an Anglo-Saxon version by king Alfred, which was published with an English translation by the hon. Daines Barrington, in 1773, 3vo.

, the most celebrated of all the Greeks in the fabulous ages, was distinguished as a teacher of religion and philosophy, and his name became as illustrious among the Greeks, as that of Zoroaster among the Persians, of Buddas among the Indians, or of Thoth, or Hermes, among the Egyptians. But it has happened to Orpheus, as to many other wise men of antiquity, that spurious writings have been ascribed to him, and modern tenets have been obtruded upon the world under the sanction of his name. It has even been questioned, whether Orpheus ever existed. Cicero asserts, on the authority of Aristotle, that there was no such person as the poet Orpheus. But no passage of tjiis kind is at present to be found in the works of Aristotle; and the opinion is contradicted by the general testimony of the ancients, who relate, that Orpheus was a native of Thrace, who flourished before the Trojan war, and passed the greater part of his life in Greece.

Diodorus Siculus relates, that, “having been instructed in the religious tenets and ceremonies of his own country $ he travelled into Egypt, where he acquired a knowledge of the mysteries of religion, and became an eminent master of philosophy, poetry, and music.” Thus qualified, he came among the Greeks, who were at that time a rude and unenlightened people, and by the united powers of poetry, religion, and philosophy, civilized their manners, while wonders have been ascribed by the poets to the power of his music.

, a celebrated geographer, was descended from a family originally seated at Augsburg: but his grandfather William Ortelius settled, in 1460, at Antwerp, and dying there in 1511, left Leonard, the father of Abraham, who was born in that city April 1527. In the course of a learned education, he particularly distinguished himself in the languages and mathematics; and afterwards he became so famous for his knowledge in geography, that he was called the Ptolemy of his time. He travelled a great deal in England, Ireland, France, Italy, and Germany, suffering no curiosity to escape his inquiries. In England he became acquainted with Camden (see Camden). When he had finished his travels, he fixed at Antwerp, where he first published his “Theatrum orbis terrse.” This work procured him the honour of being appointed geographer to Philip II. of Spain; and he afterwards published the following pieces: “Thesaurus Geographicus;” “Deorum dearumque capita ex veteribus numismatibus;” “Aurei seculi imago, sive Gtrr manor urn veterum mores, vita, ritus, et religio;” “Itinerarium per nonnuJlas Belgiue partes.” He was possessed of many rarities, in antique statues, medals, and shells. The greatest men of that age were friends to him to his death, which happened in June 1598. Justus Lipsius wrote his epitaph; and several funeral eloges were made of him, which were published, under the title of “Lachrymae,” by Francis Svveerts, who annexed an account of his life. All his works are in Latin.

In April 1741, died Mr. Berry, the minister of the Presbyterian meeting at Shrewsbury; and about the same time Mr. Dobson, the pastor of the Independent Church in that town, to which Mr. Orton’s father belonged, removed to Walsall, in Staffordshire. These two societies being thus vacant, concurred in an invitation to Mr. Orton, to accept the pastoral charge among them, promising, that in that case they would unite together in one congregation. Accordingly, having accepted their offer, he removed, in October 1741, to Shrewsbury, and, on the 18th of that month, preached his first sermon to the united congregations. In the following month, he had the misfortune to lose his father, who died at the age of fifty- two. This event was not only a great personal affliction to Mr. Orton, but brought upon him such a weight of cares, in addition to his various duties as a minister, that his health was materially injured; the consequence of which was, that he was laid under the necessity of having several assistants, in succession: as Mr. Francis Boult, who continued at Shrewsbury till the end of the year 1745; Mr. Moses Carter, who died in 1747; and Mr. Joseph Fownes. By Dr. Doddridge’s death Mr. Orton lost his much-honoured tutor, father, and friend, whose life he afterwards published. In March 1752, Mr. Orton was invited to assume the pastoral charge of the congregation belonging to Dr. Doddridge. Upon this his people at Shrewsbury were alarmed; and, apprehending that he might listen to the application, they sent him a most respectful, affection-r ate, and unanimous address, to intreat that he would not leave them. A separate address, to the same purpose, was made to him by the young persons of the society. He had no inclination to quit a situation in which he was comfortable and useful; especially as there were some circumstances at Northampton that were of a discouraging nature. Nevertheless, he thought it a proper piece of respect to take some time to consider of the invitation, which at length he declined.

Mr. Orton’s quitting his pastoral connection with the dissenters at Shrewsbury, was attended with unhappy consequences. A contest arose with respect to the choice of an assistant to Mr. Fownes, which, at length ended in a separation. The larger number of the society thought it their duty to provide themselves with another place of worship; and with these Mr. Orton concurred in opinion. He esteemed himself, says his biographer, bound to countenance them upon every principle of conscience, as a Christian, a Dissenter, a Minister, and a Friend to Liberty. Though Mr. Fownes continued at the old chapel, this circumstance did not occasion any diminution in the friendship and affection subsisting between him and Mr. Orton. One almost unavoidable effect of the division was, its being accompanied with a bad spirit, in several persons, on both sides of the question. The height to which the matter was carried, rendered Mr. Orton’s situation at Shrewsbury greatly uncomfortable, and materially affected his health. He found it necessary, therefore, to retire to another place; and at length, in 1766, he fixed at Kidderminster, to which he was principally led that he might have the advice of a very able and skilful physician (Dr. Johnstone, of Worcester), who always proved himself a faithful and tender friend. He continued at Kidderminster for the remainder of his clays; and although prevented, by the bad state of his health, from ever again appearing in the pulpit, he still retained the same zeal for promoting the great objects of the Christian religion. What he could not perform as a preacher, he was solicitous to effect as a practical writer. Previously to his resignation of the pastoral office his only publications were, his Funeral Sermon for Dr. Doddridge, printed in 1752; a Fast Sermon in 1756, occasioned by the earthquake at Lisbon; and “Three Discourses on Eternity, and the Importance and Advantage of looking at Eternal Things,” published in 1764. These three discourses have gone through six editions, and have been translated into Welch. Such was Mr. Orton’s ill state of health, together with his attention to the duties of his profession, that it was not till 1766 that he was enabled to give to the world his “Memoirs of the Life, Character, and Writings of Dr. Doddridge.” In 1769, he published a set of sermons, under the title of “Religious Exercises recommended: or, Discourses on the Heavenly State, considered under the Idea of a Sabbath.” In 1771, he published “Discourses to the Aged.” Our author’s next publication, which appeared in 1774, was entitled “Christian Zeal; or three Discourses on the Importance of seeking the Things of Christ more than our own.” These seem to have been intended to check the se!6sh and clamorous zeal which then appeared among the Dissenters for matters of a worldly kind, and to direct it to the support and advancement of real practical religion. In 1775, Mr. Orton committed to the press three farther Discourses, under the title of “Christian Worship,” which have been, translated into Welch. Two volumes of “Discourses on Practical Subjects” were the production of the next year. Mr. Orion’s last publication, which appeared in 1777, was entitled “Sacramental Meditations or, Devout Reflections on various Passages of Scripture, designed to assist Christians in their attendance on the Lord’s Supper, and their Improvement of it.” These meditations, which are fifty in number, are all founded on different texts of the Sacred Writings, and are, what the author himself used in the administration of the sacrament, according to the method observed among Dissenters from the Church of England.

Besides these several publications, all of which appeared with his name, Mr. Orton, in 1770, was the author of two anonymous tracts, entitled “Diotrophes admonished,” and “Diotrophes re-adrnonished.” They were written in defence of his excellent friend, Dr. Adams, at that time vicar of St. Chad’s, Shrewsbury, who had been violently attacked by the writer of a piece, which made a considerable noise in its day, called “Pietas Oxoniensis.” There is one small publication by Mr. Orton, hitherto omitted, which was the earliest piece printed by him, having first appeared in 1749, and we apprehend without his name. The title of it is “A Summary of Doctrinal and Practical Religion, by way of question and answer; with an introduction, shewing the Importance and Advantage of a Religious Education.” So well has this tract been received, that it has gone through seven editions. In the course of his ministerial service, he delivered a short and plain exposition of the Old Testament, with devotional and practical reflections; which exposition and reflections have recently been published, from the author’s manuscripts, for the use of families, by the reverend Robert Gentleman, of Kidderminster, Worcestershire, in six large volumes, octavo. The first volume appeared in 1788, and the last in 1791; but the work has not attained any great share of popularity. The other posthumous publication is, “Letters to a young Clergyman,” 1791, 2 vols. 12mo. Besides Mr. Orton’s publication of Dr. Doddridge’s hymns, and of the three last volumes of the Family Expositor, he printed, in 1764, a new edition of the life and death of the rev. Mr. Philip Henry, and prefixed to it an address to the descendants of that eminently pious and worthy divine.

, a very learned critic, and the correspondent of many eminent English scholars, was born at Amsterdam, July 28, 1696, of a family originally from France. He was intended for commerce by his father, who nevertheless gave him a classical education under David Hoogstraten and the celebrated Hemsterhuis. It was Peter Bdrman, however, who prevailed on his father to change his destination, and allow him to become a scholar by profession. He was accordingly sent, in 1715, to the university of Leyden, where he studied the Greek language and literature under James Gronovius; history, antiquities, and rhetoric under Peter Burman, the oriental languages underHey man and Schaaf, and jurisprudence under Schulting and No.odt. Before his academical course was completed, viz. in 1718, he visited England, where one of his brothers John-Leonard was settled as a merchant. His object on this visit was to form an acquaintance with some of the literati of that age; but principally to inspect the public libraries in London, Oxford, and Cambridge. He remained, however, here only from July to the beginning of Autumn, when he returned to Leyden; and, having finished his studies, took the degree of doctor of law Feb. 3, 1721. He then went to the Hague, with a view to the bar, but became dissatisfied with the profession, and seems from this time to have relinquished every pursuit but that of general literature. In 1723 be began his travels by visiting Antwerp, Brussels, Louvain, and lastly France, where he spent a twelvemonth. At Paris he became acquainted with many eminent characters, particularly Monfaucon, Sallier, Fraguier, Sevin, Chamillart, Bouquet, Boivin, and Tournemine, who respectively introduced him to the societies of the learned, and to the most noted libraries and museums. In the month of August 1724, he returned to Amsterdam; but had not been long there before the dangerous illness of one of his brothers rendered it necessary for him to revisit London, where he remained a year, employed as he had been at Paris, in the company of the learned, and among the libraries. Here he became intimate with Bentley, Chishull, Sherard, Cunningham, Mead, Potter, Hutchinson, Markland, Wasse, &c. &c.

He published, in 1750, in quarto, a new edition of “Chereas and Callirhoe;” and a new edition of the Greek Anthology was expected from him, for which he had some valuable materials, and one of Theocritus, perhaps also one of Catullus, Tibulius, and Propertius but all these undertakings were frustrated by the unexpected death of this labprious and acute critic, which took place Sept. 13, or 14, 1751. He left a son John, who was born in 1734. What D'Orville published is to be found in a collection, in imitation of one begun in England by Jortin, in 1731, under the title of “Observationes Miscellaneae,” a work of profound erudition, which he edited along with Burman, as far as Jo vols. 8vo; and after Burman’s death, D'Orville published four additional volumes, under the title of “Observationes Miscellaneae Novae,” the last of which was completed a few clays before his death. Of his dissertations inserted in these volumes, two have been greatly admired, “Exercitatio de inscriptionibus Deliacis,” and “Diatribe in Inscriptiones quasdam,” &c. Some years after his death, his travels and observations in Sicily were published by Peter Burman, the younger, under the title “Simula, quibus Siciliae veteris rudera, additis antiquitatum tabulis illustrantur,” &c. 1764, fol. His only other publication was a controversial pamphlet against Cornelius Pauw, Amst. 1737, 8vo, in which he retorts on that author for some of the severities he was too much accustomed to exercise upon his learned contemporaries. D'Orville had a brother Peter, who died in 1739. He wrote some elegant Latin poems, a collection of which was published at Amsterdam, in 1740.

But what renders some account of James Philip D'Orville iriore interesting in this country is, that his Long celebrated library and collection of manuscripts have been recently purchased from his heirs. So rich a treasure has not been imported into this country for many years, and the original purchase does honour to the two individuals, Dr. Raine, and Mr. Banks, who afterwards disposed of the Mss. to the university of Oxford, which did not hesitate a moment to add them to their incomparable library. Of these it would be unnecessary in this place to give any account, as they are amply detailed in the catalogue published at the Clarendon press in 1806, “Codices Manuscript!, et impressi cum notis manuscriptis, olim D'Orvilliani, qui in Bibi. Bodleiana apud Oxonienses adservantur,” 4to. About the same time D'Orville’s library of printed books were sold by auction in London, among which were many volumes with copious ms notes, which certainly ought to have been classed with the manuscripts.

, an English writer of considerable abilities, was born about 1589. He was descended from an ancient family, who had been long seated at Chicksand, near Shefford, in Bedfordshire, where his grandfather, and father, sir John Osborne, were men of fortune, and, according to Wood, puritans, who gave him what education he had at home, but never sent him to either school or university. This he appears to have afterwards much regretted, on comparing the advantages of public and private education. As soon, however, as he was of age, he commenced the life of a courtier, and being taken into the service of the Pembroke family, became master of the horse to William earl of Pembroke. Upon the breaking out of the civil wars, he sided with the parliament, but not in all their measures, nor all their principles; yet they conferred some public employments upon him; and, having married a sister of one of Oliver’s colonels, he was enabled to procure his son John a fellowship in All-souls’ college, Oxford, by the favour of the parliamentary visitors of that university, in 1648. After this he resided there himself, purposely to superintend his education; and also to print some books of his own composition. Accordingly, among others, he published there his “Advice to a Son,” the first part in 1656; which going through five editions within two years, he added a second, 1658, in 8vo. Though this had the usual fate of second parts, to be less relished than the first, yet both were eagerly bought and admired at Oxford, especially by the young students; which being observed by the “godly ministers,” as Wood calls them, they drew up a complaint against the said books, as instilling atheistical principles into the minds of the youth, and proposed to have them publicly burnt. Although this sentence was not carried into execution, there appeared so many objections to the volumes, that an order passed the 27th of July, 1658, forbidding all booksellers, or any other persons, to sell them. But our author did not long survive this order, dykig Feb. 11, 1659, aged about seventy. For the accusation of atheism there seems little foundation; but many of his sentiments are otherwise objectionable, and the quaintness of his style, and pedantry of his expression, have long ago consigned the work to oblivion. His other publications were, 1. “A seasonable Expostulation, with the Netherlands,” &c. 1652, 4to. 2. “Persuasive to mutual compliance under the present government.” 3. “Plea for a free State compared with Monarchy.” 4. “The private Christian’s non ultra,” &c. 1G56, 4to. 5. A volume in 8vo, containing, “The Turkish policy, &c. a Discourse upon Machiavel, &c. Observations upon the King of Sweden’s descent into Germany a Discourse upon Piso and Vindex, &c. a Discourse upon the greatness and corruption of the Court of Rome another upon the Election of Pope JLeo X. Political occasion for the defection from the Church of Rome a Discourse in vindication of Martin Luther.” Besides these were published, 1. “Historical Memoirs on the Reigns of Queen Elizabeth and King James.” 2. “A Miscellany of sundry Essays, &c. together with political deductions from the History of the Earl of Essex,” c. Other pieces have been ascribed to him on doubtful authority. A collection of his works was published in 1689, 8vo and again, 1722, in 2 vols. 12mo.

, a divine of considerable eminence, was a native of Bavaria, and born in 1498. He studied at Wittemburg and Nureinburg, and began to preach at the latter place in 1522. He is generally numbered among the worthies who promoted the reformation and among other services of great importance, contributed very much to enlighten the mind of the celebrated Cranmer, who became acquainted with him while abroad negociating some matters for Henry VI II. The unrestrained conversation of Osiander appeared to our countryman, at first, as a kind of libertinism it sounded harshly in his ear: and he would ask,“if such an opinion were false, how could it possibly possess itself of the minds of the greatest and most learned men of all ages, through such a tract of time?” But Osiander carried him boldly still higher into antiquity. “Tell me not,” said he, “what Austin says, and Jerome; but what Peter says, and Paul. Read your Bible; and say honestly, whether such and such doctrines are not plainly repugnant to such and such passages of Scripture?” Osiander, however, in the end did not in all things adhere to his own advice, and became the cause of great disturbances in the Lutheran churches.

This doctrine was opposed by many eminent divines; but Osiander persisted, and drew up a confession of faith, which was printed by order of the duke of Brandenburg, but highly disapproved by the Lutheran divines assembled at Augsburg. He was a studious and acute divine; but disposed to adopt novel and mystical opinions, and much disliked on account of his pride and arrogance. He shamefully treated the excellent Melancthon in his old age, who bore his insolence with a truly Christian spirit. Osiander died suddenly at Konigsberg, where he was minister and professor, in 1552. He wrote “Harmonia Evangelica” “Epistola ad Zninglium de Eucharistia;” “Dissertationes dure, de Lege et Evangelic et Justificatione;” “Liber de Imagine Dei, quid sit.” His son Luke was a Lutheran minister, and wrote an institution of the Christian religion, and other works. He died at Tubingen in 1604. And there was another Luke Osiander, who was chancellor of Tubingen, who died in 1638, and who left behind him a treatise “On the Omnipresence of Christ as Man.”

, a learned Portuguese divine, descended from an illustrious family, was born at Lisbon in 1506. Discovering an extraordinary inclination for literature, he was sent, at thirteen, to the university of Salamanca; where having studied Greek and Latin, and law, he removed at nineteen to Paris, to be instructed in Aristotle’s philosophy, which was then the vogue. From Paris he went to Bologna, where he devoted himself to the study of the sacred Scriptures, and the Hebrew language; and he acquired such reputation, as a theologist, that, on his return home, John III. king of Portugal appointed him professor of divinity at Coimbra, Taking priest’s orders, the care of the church of Tavora was given him by Don Lewis infant of Portugal; and, soon after, the archdeaconry of Evora by cardinal Henry, archbishop of that province, and brother to king John; and at last he was nominated to the bishopric of Sylves in Algarva, by Catharine of Austria, that king’s widow, who was regent of the kingdom during the minority of her grandson Sebastian. When this prince became of age to take the administration of the kingdom into his own hands, he resolved upon an expedition against the Moors in Africa, much against the persuasions of Osorio who, to avoid being an eye-witness of the calamities he dreaded, made various pretences to go to Rome. Here pope Gregory XIII. gave him many testimonies of his esteem: but he had not been absent above a year, when the king recalled him home; and not long after, Sebastian was killed in the battle of Alcazer, against the Moors, Aug. 4, 1578. During the tumults in Portugal which succeeded this fatal event, Osorio took every means to prevent the people of his diocese from joining in them; but the miseries of his country at this juncture are said to have broke his heart, and he died of grief, Aug. 20, 1580, aged seventy-four.

He is much commended for his piety and charity. He maintained several learned men in his palace, and at meals had some portion out of St. Barnard’s works read; after which all present were at liberty to propose any difficulties that occurred upon it. As a writer, Du Pin observes, that his diction is easy and elegant; for which reason he is called the Cicero of Portugal, as being a great imitator of Cicero, both in style, choice of subjects, and manner of treating them. His compositions are not intermixed with quotations, but consist of connected reasonings. He does not endeavour, in his “Commentaries” and “Paraphrases,” to explain the terms of the text, but to extend the sense of it, and shew its order and series fully, that young divines may improve their diction, and learn to write elegantly, both as Christian philosophers, orators, and divines. His works were collected and published at Rome, 1592, in 4 vols, folio, by Jerome Osorio his nephew, who prefixed his uncle’s life to the edition. The titles of his works are, “De nobilitate civili, et de nobilitate Christiana;” “De gloria,” printed with the foregoing. Some have thought this last to have been written by Cicero; and that Osorio found it, and published it as his own. “De regis institutione et disciplina;” “De rebus Emanuelis regis invictissimi virtute et auspicio gestis;” of which a new edition was published at Coimbra, 1791, 3 vols. 12mo. There is an English translation, 1752, 2 vols. 8vo. “De justitia caelesti, lib. x. ad Reginaldum Polum Cardinalem;” “De vera sapientia, lib. v. ad Gregorium XIII. P. M.;” besides paraphrases and commentaries upon several parts of scripture. He wrote a piece to exhort our queen Elizabeth to turn papist; which was answered by Walter Haddon, master of the requests to that queen.

This was the first step towards making his fortune; for the same friend being afterwards made archbishop of Thoulouse, and appointed by Henry III. ambassador in ordinary at the court of Rome in 1580, engaged D‘Ossat to be secretary to the embassy; and the archbishop dying in 1581, his secretary was employed in the same character by cardinal d’Este, protector of the French affairs at Rome. He continued in this service till the death of the cardinal protector, in 1586; who by will left him 4000 crowns, and offered him a diamond worth 20,000 crowns, to keep as a security till the legacy should be paid; but D‘Ossat generously refused the pledge, though he had no hopes of ever receiving the legacy. Before this time he had entered into the church, and been ordained priest; and during his residence with the cardinal, acquired a knowledge of the intrigues of the court of Rome, and displayed so much political ability, that he was -continued in the secretaryship under cardinal de Joyeuse, who succeeded d’Este. This was done by the express command of Henry ill. that he might be a kind of political tutor to that cardinal, who, being then only twenty-six years of age, had not gained sufficient experience; and he conducted himself so agreeably to Joyeuse, that he presented him in 1588 to the priory of St. Martyn du Vieux Bellesme; and the same year he was a second time invested with the post of counsellor to the praesidial court of Melun, which he had obtained before he left Paris.

Upon Henry the Fourth’s abjuring the Protestant religion in 1593, the papal absolution for him was obtained by D‘Ossat; which was deemed a master-stroke of his abilities. The favour was strongly opposed both by the Spaniards and the princes of the house of Lorrain, and also by the Hugonots, who were naturally averse to their beloved prince’s being reconciled to the see of Rome; but every difficulty was removed by the artful management of D’Ossat, who dissipated all the scruples of Clement VIII. a pope by nature extremely diffident; so that the affair was resolved on before the arrival of James Davy, afterwards cardinal Du Perron, who, indeed, by the figure that he made, quickened the execution . The king, in consideration of this service, nominated D‘Ossat, in 1596, to the bishopric of Rennes, to which the bull was signed gratuitously by the pope. Sept. 1597, he was appointed counsellor of state, on which occasion he took the oath before the duke of Luxemburg, then the French ambassador at Rome; who, having leave to return home in 1598, the superintendency of the French affairs was committed to D’Ossat, till another ambassador should be appointed; and, May the following year, he was created a cardinal. The king had solicited this favour for some time, his low birth being made an objection. Nor indeed was his fortune even now equal to this high station; but he resolved not to lay aside the modesty and temperance he had hitherto observed, and in that spirit refused an equipage and some fine furniture which were sent him three weeks after his promotion, by cardinal de Joyeuse, in whose house he had received the compliments of the cardinals upon his election. The legacy, however, already mentioned, of cardinal d'Este, happened unexpectedly to be paid to him the following year, 1600; and so seasonably, that, as he himself declared, he should otherwise have been almost ruined. Some time after, the pope gave him the abbey of Nant, in Rouerge. Upon cardinal de Joyeuse returning to France this year, he was appointed vice-protector of the French nation; and in that quality was affable, easily accessible, and kind to those who had occasion to apply to him. All these preferments were highly agreeable to Henry IV. who the same year added to them the bishopric of Bayeux, the revenues of which were richer than those of Rennes. This, however, he resigned in 1603, finding the affairs of the court would not permit him to reside in his diocese; and he had scarcely made this sacrifice when he died, March 13, 1604, in his 68th year. His corpse was interred in the church of St. Lewis, at Rome, where there is a monument erected to his memory.

Father Tarquinio Galucci made his funeral oration, or panegyric; the sum of which is, that he united the most exact probity with the most consummate policy, and therefore was universally esteemed. He was a man, says Perrault, of an incredible penetration and he laid his measures with such true discernment, and executed them with such diligence, that it is scarce possible to mark a single false step in the numerous affairs which he negociated. Wicquefort, speaking of his abilities, observes, that he had given proofs of his skill in negociations in that which he transacted, with the grand duke of Tuscany, for the restitution of the island of If; in that with pope Clement VIII. in order to reconcile Henty IV. to the church of Rome; in that of the invalidity of the said king’s marriage with queen Margaret of Valois, which had been valid near thirty years; in that of the dispensation with regard to the marriage between Catharine of Bourbon, sister to Henry, with the duke of Bar, a papist, then a protestant; and in several other very important and delicate affairs. His dispatches, continues this writer, are as useful to an ambassador, who hopes to succeed in his employment, as the Bible and the “Corpus Juris” to such lawyers and divines as would succeed in their respective professions. These letters of our minister were first published under the title of “Lettres du Cardinal D'Ossat,” at Paris, 1624, folio, and have been enlarged and published at several times and places since. They were published at Paris in 1697, 4to, with his life, and notes by Amelot de la Houssaye ; and, lastly, in 1708, at Amsterdam, 12mo, five volumes. This is the best and most ample edition. Several of his original letters were formerly in Colbert’s library. In 1771, a life of him was published at Paris, in 2 vols. 12mo, which is said to be extremely partial to the character of the cardinal, but to contain much valuable information as to the history of the events in which he was concerned. 1

, one of the most celebrated Swiss divines of the latter age, was born at Neufchatel, Nov. 25, 1663. He was the only son of John Rtfdolph Ostervald, minister of Neufchatel, Inhere the family of Ostervald had been settled for nearly three centuries, and had produced many persons eminent in the army and at the bar. His father determined to give him the best education, with a view to the ministry, should his inclination lead that way. Accordingly, in 1676, he took him to Zurich, to be instructed in the learned languages, and to learn German at the same time, under the care of professor John Henry Ott, who was his intimate friend. After a dilfgent application here for eighteen months, young Ostervald returned home in Oct. 1677, and continued his classical studies tinder Mr. D'Aubigne, principal of the college of Neufchatel. A year after he was sent to Saumur, where he maintained some learned theses with such ability, that the degree of master of arts was conferred upon him with every testimony of respect, although he had not yet reached his sixteenth year. In Sept. 1680, he took a voyage to Rochelle, where he was introduced to some eminent literary characters; and the following year, removed to Orleans, and began the study of divinity under the celebrated Pajou, which he continued afterwards under Mr. Allix, and the celebrated Claude, at Paris. His fellow student here was Mr. Charles Tribolet, his relation, and afterwards his colleague at Neufchatel; few friends, we are told, have been more closely connected, or more similar in sentiment on all occasions.

About this time, his father’s health decaying, he sent for our student, who arrived at Neufchatel in April 1682. In July following his father died, after having the satisfaction to hear his son deliver two probation sermons the preceding month. Mr. Ostervald, who was still conscious that he had much to learn, went to Geneva in October of the same year, and became acquainted with the most eminent teachers there, particularly the divinity professor Tronchin, with whom he afterwards corresponded. On his return to Neufchatel in May 1683, he underwent the usual examinations, and received imposition of hands in July; but he afterwards used to regret that he had been thus honoured too early in life, for he was not yet quite twenty. The office of deacon of Neufchatel being vacant in 1686, Ostervald was appointed, and acquitted himself with great credit, in the instruction of youth, which was the principal duty he had to perform, and in the performance of it he composed his vety popular “Catechism.” In 1693 he preached a weekly lecture, and a vacancy happening in the church of Neufchatel, by the resignation of one of its ministers in 1699, Mr. Ostervald was chosen to succeed him. In the course of his very long ministry, he was greatly admired, and eminently useful as a preacher, and he never ceased to the last to bestow great pains on the composition of his sermons, although thqy recurred so frequently. About the end of the same year, 1699, he became intimate with the celebrated John Alphonsus Turretin, who paid him a visit at Neufchatel in September, and two years afterwards with the no less celebrated Samuel Werenfels; and the union of these three divines was usually called “The Triumvirate of Swiss theologians,” and lasted to their deaths.

In 1700, the clergy of Neufchatel chose Mr. Ostervald for their dean, an annual office to which he was frequently re-elected, and held it at one time for three successive years. In 1700, also, the London society for the propagation of the Gospel chose him a member, and had before so far honoured him as to cause his “Abridgment of the Sacred History” prefixed to his Catechism, to be translated into Arabic, in order to be sent to the East Indies. The year that he was first chosen dean was distinguished by the introduction of a new version of the Psalms in the churches, and various regulations of great utility in the modes of theological study and discipline, in all which he took an active part. He began also from this time to give a complete course of instructions to divinity students, which he carried on for forty-five years with great success and approbation. Such indeed was the fame of his lectures, that some of his pupils, eager to diffuse their usefulness more extensively, published some part of them, without either his knowledge or consent. In this way his “Ethica Christiana” was published in Latin, at London, in 1727, and often reprinted both in Dutch and French. A “Compendium Theologiae,” and “Trait4 du Ministere Sacre,” were also published in the same manner. Against all these Ostervald advertised, that they were published without his knowledge, and that he would not be responsible for their errors. Even this, however, had very little effect on the sale, so highly was every thing valued of which he was the reputed author; and, after all, there were not any errors faund in them which could affect his reputation. The last mentioned treatise was published in English in 1781, by the rev. Thomas Stevens, who considered it as the most complete that had then appeared, under the title of “Lectures on the exercise of the Sacred Ministry.”

Mr. Ostervald had a considerable hand in the new liturgy which was introduced in the beginning of the last century in the churches of Neufchatel and Vallagin, btit this was not printed until 1713, soon after which an English translation appeared. Before tbis, in 1699, his first avowed publication appeared, under the title of “Traite des Sources de la Corruption,” which was also translated into English, and is one of the “Tracts” published by Dr. Watson, the present bishop of Llandaff, in 1782. The principal opponent Ostervald met with was Philip Naude, the mathematical professor at Berlin, who objected that in a treatise on the sources of the corruptions that exist in the world, he had kept too much out of sight that great source, the fall of man. Ostervald’s next publication was his celebrated “Catechism,” already mentioned, which no sooner appeared than it was translated into various languages, but not received among the divines of his own country without considerable opposition. The clergy of the canton of Berne, in particular, drew up their sentiments on it, accusing the author of omitting many doctrines which they thought essential in a work of this description. "To this an answer was also drawn up, which may be seen in our authority, but is too uninteresting at this time to be extracted. The objections of the divines of Berne seem to hinge chiefly on tbis, that Ostervald’s catechism is more moral than evangelical. Their opposition, however, does not seem to have lessened its popularity; and his biographer mentions the high respect which many eminent divines of the church of Rome entertained for it and its author, particularly Fenelon, Colbert, and Bignon.

, so called, because he was bishop of that diocese in the twelfth century, was son of Leopold, marquis of Austria, and Agnes, daughter of the emperor Henry IV. He studied in the university at Paris, and retiring afterwards to the Cistertian monastery of Morimond in Burgundy, became abbot there. In 1138, he was made bishop of Frisingen, accompanied the emperor Conrad to the Holy Land, and died at Morimond, September 21, 1158, leaving a “Chronicle” in seven books, from the creation to. 1146. This work, which is principally to be consulted for the history of the tenth, eleventh, and twelfth centuries, was continued to 1210, by Otho de St. Blaise. Otho of Frisingen, who was an able Aristotelian, also wrote a treatise on the end of the world, and on Anti-Christ, and two books of the “Life of the Emperor Frederic Barbarossa.” Each of these works may be found in the collections by Pistorius, Muratori, &c. and also separately.

, a learned Swiss divine, was born in the canton of Zurich in 1617, where he was first educated, but in 1635 was sent to study at Lausanne, Geneva, and Groningen, and afterwards at Leyden and Amsterdam. After this he visited England and France; and upon his return to his native country, obtained the living of Dietlickon, which he held for twenty-five years. In 1651 he was nominated to the professorship of eloquence at Zurich in 1655, to that of Hebrew and in 1668, to that of ecclesiastical history. He died in 1682, leaving behind him several works which indicate great learning and acquaintance with ecclesiastical history. Of these which are written in Latin, the principal are, a treatise “On the Grandeur of the Church of Rome;” “Annals relating to the History of the Anabaptists;” “A Latin Discourse in favour of the Study of the Hebrew Language;” “A Latin Treatise oh” Alphabets, and the Manner of Writing in all Nations.“He had a son, John Baptist Ott, born in 1661, who acquired great celebrity by his knowledge of the oriental languages and antiquities. He was pastor of a church at Zollicken, and afterwards professor of Hebrew at Zurich. In 1715 he was promoted to the archdeaconry of the cathedral in that city. He was the author of several works of considerable reputation: as,” A Dissertation on Vows;“” A Letter on Samaritan Medals, addressed to Adrian Reland:“both these are written in the Latin language; a treatise in German,” On the manuscript and printed Versions of the Bible before the era of the reformation;“and” A Dissertation on certain Antiquities discovered at Klothen, in 1724." Thus far we learn from Moreri and the Dictionnaire Historique, but we suspect that this John Baptist was either the John Henry Ott, librarian to archbishop Wake, or his brother. Of this last we are told, that archbishop Wake had received many civilities from his father in the early part of his life, and recollecting this, and that he had many children, appointed his son John Henry, whom he found in England, to be Dr. Wilkins’s successor, as librarian at Lambeth. He also ordained him deacon and priest, and in. June 1721, collated him to the rectory of Blackmanston, Kent. Mr. Ott obtained other promotions, the last of which, in 1730, was a prebend of Peterborough. He continued librarian till archbishop Wake’s death, in 1737. The time of his own death we have not been able to ascertain.

, one of the first names in the English drama, was born at Trottin in Sussex, March 3, 1651— 2, the son of the rev. Humphrey Otway, rector of Woolbeding. From Winchester-school, where he was educated, he was entered, in 1669, a commoner of Christ-church, but left the university without a degree, whether for want of money, or from impatience of academical restraint, or mere eagerness to mingle with the world, is not known. The anonymous writer of his life in one of the editions of His works, reports that he removed from Oxford to St. John’s-college, Cambridge, the probability of which rests only on a copy of verses sent to him by Duke the poet, who was his intimate friend. At Cambridge, however, he could not have remained long, if ever he paid more than a visit to it, for he appeared in London in 1672 in the character of the king in Mrs. Behn’s “Forced Marriage,” and found himself unable to gain any reputation on the stage. If he ever went to Cambridge, it must have been after this period, for Duke himself was not entered of Trinity-college until 1675.

Dr. Johnson has endeavoured to account for his failure on the stage with more precision than perhaps was necessary, as the circumstance is far from being uncommon. This kind of inability, says that eminent critic, he shared with Shakspeare and Jonson, as he shared likewise some of their excellences. It seems reasonable to expect that a great dramatic poet should without difficulty become a great actor that he who can feel, could express that he who can excite passion, should exhibit with great readiness its external modes but since experience has fully proved, that of those powers, whatever be their affinity, one may be possessed in a great degree by him who has very little of the other; it must be allowed that they depend upon different faculties, or on different use of the same faculty that the actor must have a pliancy of mien, a flexibility of countenance, and a variety of tones, which the poet may be easily supposed to want; or that the attention of the poet and the player have been differently employed; the one has been considering thought, and the other action; one has watched the heart, and the other contemplated the face.

In 1677 he produced “Titus and Berenice,” a translation, with some alterations from Racine, in three acts, and written in rhyme, and “The Cheats of Scapin,” a farce partly from Moliere, which were acted together with considerable success. The custom of annexing farces to plays was about this time introduced. These were followed in ]678, by his comedy of “Friendship in Fashion,' 7 which bad some success, but we know not whether the author was at this time in London. It is certain that in 1677, he went abroad; a circumstance which is thus introduced by Dr. Johnson:” Want of morals, or of decency, did not in those days exclude any man from the company of the wealthy and the gay, if he brought with him any powers of entertainment; and Otway is said to have been at this time a favourite companion of the dissolute wits. But as he who desires no virtue in his companion has no virtue in himself, those whom Otway frequented had no purpose of doing more for him than to pay his reckoning. They desired only to drink and laugh: their fondness was without benevolence, and their familiarity without friendship. Men of wit, says one of Otway’s biographers, received at that time no favour from the great but to share their riots “irom which they were dismissed again to their own narrovy circumstances. Thus they languished in poverty without the support of eminence.”

The Soldier’s Fortune,“and its second part” The Atheist,“produced in 1681 and 1684, were both successful, but better suited to the manners of that age than to those of the present. The incidents and characters in both may be traced to other plays, and neither is worthy of the talents which, in 1682, gave to the theatre” Venice Preserved,' 1 a tragedy, whose permanent fame, like that of the Orphan, renders it only necessary to say that his powers of poetry and of language were now exerted with greater energy. The striking passages are in every mouth; and the public seems to judge rightly of the faults and excellences of this play, that it is the work of a man not attentive to decency, nor zealous for virtue; but of one who conceived forcibly, and drew originally, by consulting nature in his own breast.

All this was performed before he was thirty-four years old; for he died April 14, 1685, “in a manner,” says Dr. Johnson, “which I am unwilling to mention. Having been compelled by his necessities to contract debts, and hunted, as is supposed, by the terriers of the law, he retired to a public-house (the Bull, according to Anthony Wooo 1 ), on Tower-hill, where he is said to have died of want; or, as it is related by one of his biographers^ by swallowing, after a long fast, a piece of bread which charity had supplied. He went out, as is reported, almost naked in the rage of hunger, and, finding a gentleman in a neighbouring coffee-house, asked him for a shilling. The gentleman gave him a guinea; and Otway going away bought a roll, and was choaked with the first mouthfuL All this, I hope, is not true; and there is this ground of better hope, that Pope, who lived near enough to be well informed, relates in Spence’s Memorials, that he died of a fever caught by violent pursuit of a thief that had robbed one of his friends. But that indigence, and its concomitants, sorrow and despondency, pressed hard upon him, has never been denied, whatever immediate cause might bring him to the grave.”

Pope’s account of Otway’s death was first related by Dr. Warton in the notes to his “Essay on Pope,” and in the. following words: “Otway had an intimate friend who was murdered (not robbed) in the street. One may guess at his sorrow, who has so feelingly described true affection in his * Venice Preserved.' He pursued the murderer on foot, who fled to France, as far as Dover, where he was seized with a fever, occasioned by the fatigue, which afterwards carried him to his grave in London.” The robber, we find, is by this account a murderer, and as Dr. Warton was alt ways more correct as to minor facts than Dr. Johnson, it is probable that he relates the story as he heard it, but it is to be traced to Spence, who was informed by Dennis, the critic, that “Otway had a friend, one Blakiston, who was shot; the murderer fled towards Dover, and Otway pursued him. In his return he drank water, when violently heated, and so got the fever which was the death of him.” And Dennis in the Preface to his “Observations on Pope’s translation of Homer,” 1717, 8vo, says, “Otway died in an alehouse,” which is not inconsistent with the preceding account, as he generally lived in one; but whether the story of the guinea and the loaf can be introduced with any probability to heighten the poet’s distress, we do not pretend to determine. It would not perhaps be very wrong to conjecture that both accounts might be true, but his contemporaries have left us no precise documents. Dr. Johnson has remarked that Otway appears by some of his verses to have been a zealous loyalist, and had what was in those times the common reward of loyalty, he lived and died neglected.

When Otway first began to rise into reputation, Dryden spoke slightingly of his performances, but afterwards acknowledged their merit, though perhaps somewhat coldly. In his preface to Du Fresnoy, he says, “To express the passions which are seated in the heart by outward signs, is one great precept of the painter’s, and very difficult to perform. In poetry the very same passions and motions of the mind are to be expressed; and in this consists the principal difficulty, as well as the excellency of that art. This (says Du Fresnpy) is the gift of Jupiter; and to speak in the -ame heathen language, we call it the gift of our Apollo, not to be obtained by pains or study, if we are not born to it. For the motions which are studied, are never so natural as those which break out in the height of a real passion. Mr. Otway possessed this part as thoroughly as any of the ancients and moderns. I will not defend every thing in his * Venice Preserved;‘ but I must bear this testimony’to his memory, that the passions are truly touched in it, though perhaps there is somewhat to be desired both in the grounds of them, and in the height and elegance of expression. But nature is there, which is the greatest beauty.” This is high praise from Dryden, who could not but be conscious that Otway excelled him in the pathetic.

, a learned French monk, originally of a family of Rheims, was born at Mezieres, Feb. 11, 1638. His father was a weaver, and designed to breed him to his own business; but the son’s inclination leading him to literature, he retired in 1656, against the will of his parents, among the Premontres, passed his noviciate in the abbey of Verdun, and made his profession in November, 1658. He was afterwards sent into France, where he spent four years in the studies of philosophy and theology, with, however, very little assistance from his masters, who were very ignorant; he then applied himself particularly to ecclesiastical history, which was his favourite study. Thus employed, he remained in obscurity for twenty years, among those of his order, when his talents became known by one of those apparently accidental circumstances which give a turn to the lives of men. His superiors happened to place him in 1678, in the abbey of Bucilly, in Champagne, and Lewis XIV. on a journey in 1680, coming to this abbey, stopped to dine. It was usual for such a guest to receive the compliments of the society; and when Oudin found that all the monks were afraid to appear, in order to address his majesty, he undertook the task, and acquitted himself so well, that the king and court were surprized to find, in so savage and solitary a place, a person of so much address and good sense; and his majesty, greatly pleased with his reception, ordered the abbey a purse of fifty louis d'ors. Oudin’s abilities being thus discovered, he was sent in 1614, by Michael Colbert, the principal and reformergeneral of this order, to visit the abbeys and churches belonging to them, and to take from their archives whatsoever might be of use in his history. On this occasion he went to all the convents in the Netherlands, returned to France with a large collection of historical documents, and in 1685 wade the same researches in Lorrain, Burgundy, and Alsace. In 1688 he published “A Supplement of the Ecclesiastical Writers, omitted by Bellarmine,” a work which did him much honour, under the title “Supplementum de scriptoribus vel scriptis ecclesiasticis a Bellarmino omissis, ad annum 1460, vel ad artem typographical!! inventam.” He published afterwards a complete body of those works, with the title of “Commentarius de scriptoribus ecclesias antiquis, illorumque scriptis, adhunc extantibus in celebrioribus Europae bibliothecis, a Bellarmino, Possevino, Phil. Labbeo, Gul, Caveo, Ellio, Du Pin,” &c. 3 vols. folio. This is his principal work; but if we may believe Le Clerc, our author did not understand either Greek or; Latin sufficient for it and it certainly abounds in errors, a great many of which, however, belong to the press.

, a learned French Jesuit, was born November 1, 1673, at Vignory, in Champagne. He was carefully educated at Langres, by an uncle, who was an ecclesiastic, and began his noviciate among the Jesuits in 1691, His uncle bequeathed him an annuity of 400 livres on condition of his residing either at Paris or Dijon. Accordingly he settled at Dijon, where he taught rhetoric fifteen years, and theology fifteen years more, with great applause. Besides Greek and Latin, he understood Spanish, Portuguese, Italian, and English, and had particularly studied antiquities, both sacred and profane. Father Oudin undertook to write commentaries on the whole Bible, but could not finish them, being employed by father Francis Retz, general of his order, in a general history, or Bibliotheque of authors belonging to the Jesuits. This important work had been begun by father Ribadeneira, and carried on to 1618. Alegambe continued it to 1643, and Sotwel to 1673. Other Jesuits were afterwards successively employed to carry it on; but as they had published nothing, and only collected some undigested materials, it was thought that father Oudin would acquit himself better in the undertaking. The learned Jesuit did indeed apply himself to it with indefatigable ardour during the rest of his life, and drew up 1928 articles, but they still remain in ms. He died at Dijon, of a dropsy in his breast, April 28, 1752, aged seventy-nine. The principal among his printed works are, 1. An excellent little poem in Latin, which he wrote at the age of twenty-two, entitled “Somnia,” 8vo and 12mo; and some other poems in the same language, most of which are in “Poemata Didascalica,” 3 vols. 12mo; 2. Harangues in Latin, and several Dissertations on different literary subjects, printed in the abbe le Boeuf 's “Dissertations,” 3 vols. 12mo; 3. Some of the Lives of learned men in* Niceron’s “Memoires;” 4. A Memoir, 4to, “in answer to the Ordinance of M. the bishop of Auxerre,” September 18, 1725, against some propositions dictated by father le Moyne, a Jesuit; 5. “A Commentary on St. Paul’s Epistle to the Romans,” 1743, 12mo, in Latin; 6. An edition of “Publius Syrus,” with notes, Dijon, 1734, 8vo, &C.

, an English divine, celebrated for his uncommon skill in the mathematics, was born at Eton, in Buckinghamshire, about 1573, or, according to Aubrey, March 5, 1574. His father was a scrivener there, and taught his son writing and arithmetic. He was afterwards bred a scholar upon the foundation of that school, and was elected thence, in 1592, to King’s college, in Cambridge; of which, after the regular time of probation, he was admitted perpetual fellow. He did not neglect the opportunity his education gave him, of improving himself in classical learning and philosophy, as appears from some of his works, written in very elegant Latin; but his genius leading him particularly to the mathematics, he applied himself chiefly to that study. He began at the fountain head, and read all the ancient authors in the science, as Euclid, Apollonius, Archimedes, Diophantus, &c. in perusing whose works, he did not content himself, as he tells us in the preface to his “Clavis,” with barely learning their positions, but was diligent in looking into the sagacity of their invention, and careful to comprehend the peculiar force and elegance of their demonstrations. After he had been at Cambridge about three years, he invented an easy method of geometrical dialling; which, though he did not publish it' till 164-7, was yet received with so much esteem, that Mr. (afterwards sir) Christopher Wren, then a gentleman-commoner of Wadham college, in Oxford, immediately translated it from the English into Latin. This treatise was added to the second edition of his “Clavis,” with this title, “A most easy way for the delineation of plain Sun-dials, only by Geometry,” &c. In 1599 he commenced M. A. having regularly taken his bachelor’s degree three years before. In 1600 he, projected an horizontal instrument for delineating dials upon any kind of plane, and for working most questions which could be performed by the, globe. It was contrived for his private use only, and though not executed so perfectly as if he had had access to better tools, yet he had such an opinion of it, that thirty years afterwards, he consented it should be made public; and it was accordingly published, together with his “Circles of Proportion,” in 1633, 4to, by William Forster, who had been taught the mathematics by Oughtred, but was then himself a teacher of that science. To some editions of this work is subjoined " The just apology of William Oughtred against the slanderous insinuations of Richard Delamain, in a pamphlet called * Grammelogia, or the Mathematical Ring,' in which the author claimed Oughtred’s invention. In the mean time his eager desire to promote the science of mathematics kept him twelve years at college, in which time, both by his example and instructions, he diffused a taste for mathematics throughout the university.

At length, having received holy orders from Dr. Bilson, bishop of Winchester, he was, in Feb. 1605, instituted to the vicarage of Shalford, in Surrey, which he resigned on being presented in 1610 to the rectory of Albury, near Guilford, to which he now repaired, and continued his mathematical pursuits, as he had done in college, without neglecting the duties of his office. Still, however, the mathematical sciences were the darling object of his life, and what he called “the more than Elysian Fields,” and in which he became so eminent, that his house, we are told, was continually filled with ydtmg gentlemen, who came thither for instruction. Among these Aubrey mentions Seth Ward, afterwards bishop of Salisbury, sir Jonas Moore, sir Charles Scarborough, and sir Christopher Wren. He taught them all gratis, and although Mr. Ward remained half a year in his house, he would accept of no remuneration for his board. Lord Napier, in 1614, publishing at Edinburgh his “Mirifici Logarithmorum canonis descriptio, ejusqtie usus in utraque trigonometria, &c.” it immediately fell into the hands of Mr. Briggs, then geometry-reader of Gresham college, in London; and that gentleman, forming a design to perfect lord Napier’s plan, consulted Oughtred upon it who probably wrote his “Treatise of Trigonometry” about the same time, since it is evidently formed upon the plan of lord Napier’s “Canon.” In prosecuting the same subject, he invented, not many years after, an instrument called “The Circles of Proportion,” which was published with the horizontal instrument mentioned above. All such questions in arithmetic, geometry, astronomy, and navigation, as depended upon simple and compound proportion, might be wrought by it; and it was the first sliding rule that was projected for those uses, as well as that of gauging. Mr. Oughtred, however, modestly disclaimed any extraordinary merit in it, and next to lord Napier and Mr. Briggs, expressly gives the honour of the invention to Mr. Edmund Gunter.

Notwithstanding all Oughtred’s mathematical merit, he was, in 1646, in danger of a sequestration by the committee for plundering ministers; in order to which, several articles were deposed and sworn against him; but, upon his day of hearing, William Lilly, the famous astrologer, applied to sir Bulstrode Whitelocke and all his old friends, who appeared so numerous in his behalf, that though the chairman and many other presbyterian members were active against him, yet he was cleared by the majority. This Lilly tells us himself, in the “History of his own Life,” where he styles Oughtred the most famous mathematician then of Europe. “The truth is,” continues this writer, “he had a considerable parsonage and that alone was enough to sequester any moderate judgment besides, he was also well known to affect his majesty.” His merit, however, appeared so much neglected, and his situation was made so uneasy at home, that his friends procured several invitations to him from abroad, to live either in Italy, France, or Holland, but he chose to encounter all his difficulties at Albury. Aubrey informs us that the grand duke invited him to Florence, and offered him 500l. a year, but he would not accept it because of his religion. From the same author we learn that he was thought a very indifferent preacher, so bent were his thoughts on mathematics; but, when he found himself in danger of being sequestered for a royalist, " he fell to the study of divinity, and preached (they sayd) admirably well, even in his old age.

“He was more famous abroad for his learning, and more esteemed than at home. Several great mathematicians came over into England on purpose to be acquainted with him. His country neighbours (though they understood not his worth) knew that there must be extraordinary worth in him, that he was so visited by foreigners.” “When Seth Ward, M. A. and Charles Scarborough, M. D. came, as in a pilgrimage, to see and admire him, they lay at the inue at Sheeres (the next parish); Mr. Oughtred had against their coming prepared a good dinner, and also he had dressed himselfe thus; an old red russet cloak, cassock that had been black in days of yore, girt with an old leather girdle, an old-fashioned russet hat, that had been a bever tempore R. Eliz. When learned foreigners came and saw how privately he lived, they did admire and bless themselves, that a person of so much worth and learning should not be better provided for.” Aubrey seems to confirm the report that he was not uninfected with astrological delusions. We more admire his mathematical enthusiasm. “He has told bishop Ward, and Mr. Elias Ashmole (who was his neighbour) ‘on this spot of ground, or leaning against this oak, or that ash, the solution of such or such a problem came into my head, as if infused by a divine genius, after I had thought of it without success for a year, two, or three.’” “His wife was a penurious woman, and would not allow him to burn candle after supper, by which means many a good notion is lost, and many a problem unsolved; so that Mr. Henshaw (one of his scholars) when he was there, bought candle, which was a great comfort to the old man.”

, a learned professor of divinity of the university of Francfort on the Oder, was born at Dantzic, Oct.7, 1671. He was descended from the ancient and noble family of Oisel or Loisel, which made a great figure in Norman history; and one of his ancestors having come to England with William the Conqueror, his descendants were not extinct in the time of queen Elizabeth. Of this descent, however, our learned professor seldom was heard to boast. He had more pleasure in relating that his immediate ancestors were pious protestants, who, having escaped the massacre of St. Bartholomew’s day in France, took refuge in Flanders; and that his great grandfather, who had lost his all on that occasion, began trade and acquired great property, of which he was again stript during the persecution under the duke of Alva, and obliged to fly to Leyden with three hundred families, who established the cloth manufactory there under his direction. One of his uncles was James Ousel or Loisel, already mentioned (see Oisel*), the editor of an excellent edition of the “Octavius” of Minutius Felix, with notes, printed at Leyden in 1652, 4to and 8vo, and reprinted in 1672. His father Michael Ousel was a merchant, who died when this his sou was very young, leaving him to the care of a step-mother, who paid every possible attention to his education.

, a learned French ecclesiastic, of the seventeenth century, was a native of Chinon in Tourraine, and a canon of Tours, He enjoyed the reputation of an universal scholar; was a poet, mathematician, divine, a controversial writer, and even a musician, although in the latter character he appears to have escaped the very minute researches of Dr. Burney in his valuable history of that art. He had been music- master of the holy chapel at Paris for ten years, before he became a canon of Tours. He wrote a great many works, among which some of his controversial pieces against the protestants, his “History of Music from its origin to the present time,” and his dissertation on Vossius’s treatise “De poematum cantu et viribus rythmi,” remain in manuscript. Those which were published, are, 1. “Secret pour composer en musique par un art nouveau,” Paris, 1660. 2. “Studiosis sanctarum scripturarum Biblia Sacra in lectiones ad singulos dies, per legem, prophetas, et evangelium distributa, et 529 carminibus mnemonicis comprehensa,” ibid. 1668; of this a French edition was published in 1669. 3. “Motifs de reunion a l‘eglise catholique, presentes a ceux de la religion pretendue-reforme*e de France, avec un avertissement sur la reponse d’un ministre a Poffice du saint Sacrement,” ibid. 1668. 4. “Le motifs de la conversion du comte de Lorges Montgommery,” dedicated to Louis XIV. ibid. 1670. 5. “Defense de Tancienne tradition des eglises de France, sur la mission des premiers predicateurs evangeliques dans les Gaules, du temps des apotres ou de leurs disciples immediats, et de Pusage des ecrits des S. S. Severe-Sulpice, et Gregoire de Tours, et de Tabus qu‘on en faiten cette rnatiere et en d’autres pareilles,” ibid. 178. This was addressed to the clergy and people of To'irs by the author, who held the same sentiments as M.de Ma re a, respecting St. Denis. 6. “L‘Art de la science des Nombres, en Francois et en Latin, avec un preface de i’excellence de Farithmetique,” ibid. 1677. 7. “Architecture harmonique, ou application de la doctrine des proportions, de la musique a ^architecture, avec un addition a cet ecrit,” ibid. 1679, 4to. 8. “Calendarium novum, perpetuum, et irrevocable,” 1682; but this work he was induced to suppress by the advice of his friend M. Arnauld, who thought that his ideas in it were too crude to do credit to his character. His last publication was, 9. “Breviarium Turonense, renovatum, et in melius restitutum,” 1685. He died at Tours, July 19, 1694, and the following lines,

, an English bishop, and styled by Camden a “prodigious learned man,” was born in 1559, and, after a proper foundation in grammar-learning, at Hadley school, was sent to St. John’s college, Cambridge, and became a scholar there: but, afterwards removing to Trinity-college, was chosen fellow of that society. In 1596 he was appointed regius professor of divinity, when he took the degree of D. D. and, about the same time, was elected master of Catharine-hall in the same university. In 1601 he had the honour to succeed the celebrated Dr. Alexander Nowell in the deanry of St. Paul’s, London, by the recommendation of his patron sir Fulk Greville, and queen Elizabeth; and, in the beginning of James’s reign, he was chosen prolocutor of the lower house of convocation. In 1612 he was appointed one of the first governors of the Charter-house hospital, then just founded by Thomas Sutton, esq. In April 1614, he was made bishop of Litchfield and Coventry; and, in 1618, translated to Norwich, where he died May 12, 1619. He was buried in that cathedral, where he lay unnoticed till some time after the restoration of Charles II. when Cosin, bishop of Durham, who had been his secretary, erected a monument in 1669, with a Latin inscription, in which he is declared to be, “Vir undequaque doctissimus, et omui enconiio major.” Wood observes, that he had the character of being the best scholastic divine in the English nation; and Cosin, who perhaps may be thought to rival him in that branch of learning, calls himself his scholar, and expressly declares that he derived all his knowledge from him. He is allso celebrated by Smith, for his distinguished wisdom, erudition, and piety. In the controversy, which in his time divided the reformed churches, concerning predestination and grace, he held a middle opinion, inclining rather to Arminianism , and seems to have paved the way for the reception of that doctrine in England, where it was generally embraced a few years afterwards, chiefly by the authority and influence of archbishop Laud. Overall had a particular friendship with Gerard Vosius and Grotius; and was much grieved to see the love of peace, and the projects of this last great man to obtain it, so ill requited. He laboured heartily himself to compose the differences in Holland, relative to the Quinquarticular controversy; as appears in part by his letters to the two learned correspondents just mentioned, some of which are printed in the “Præstantium et eruditorum virorum epistolæ ecclesiasticæ et theologicæ,” published by Limborch and Hartsoeker, as an historical defence of Arminianism.

But our bishop is known in England chiefly by his “Convocation-Book,” of which Burnet gives the following account: “There was a book drawn up by bishop Overall, four-score years ago, concerning government, in which its being of a divine institution was positively asserted. It was read in convocation, and passed by that body, in order to the publishing of it; in opposition to the principles laid down in the famous book of Parsons the Jesuit, published under the name of” Doleman.“But king James did not like a convocation entering into such a theory of politics, so he wrote a long letter to Abbot, who was afterwards archbishop of Canterbury, but was then in the lower-house. By it he desired that no further progress should be made in that matter, and that this book might not be offered to him for his assent; there that matter slept. But Sancroft, archbishop of Canterbury, had got Overall’s own book into his hands; so, in the beginning of this (K. William’s) reign, he resolved to publish it, as an authentic declaration that the Church of England had made in this matter; and it was published, as well as licensed, by him a very few days before he came under suspension, for not taking the oaths (October 1689). But there was a paragraph or two in it that they had not considered, which was plainly calculated to justify the owning the United Provinces to be a lawful government; for it was there laid down, that when a change of government was brought to a thorough settlement, it was then to be owned and submitted to as a work of the providence of God; and part of king James’s letter to Abbot related to this.” But what gave this book much consequence on its revival was, that the celebrated Dr. Sherlock acknowledged that he became reconciled to take the oaths to the new government, at the revolution, by the doctrines above-mentioned in Overall’s work.

Bishop Montague of Norwich, who was a great admirer of bishop Overall, very frequently and confidently affirmed that Vossius’s Pelagian history was compiled out of bishop Overall’s collections. Overall also is named among the translators of the Bible; and Mr. Churton notices the share he had in the church catechism, of which he is universally said to have written what regards the sacraments.

Soon after his arrival he contracted an intimacy with the infamous favourite of Jarnes I. Robert Carr, afterwards earl of Somerset. This man’s history is too well known to render it necessary to dwell upon it in this place. Intoxicated as he was with an advancement at court, of which he was so unworthy, he was not wholly insensible of his own ignorance and inexperience; and he found in sir Thomas Overbury a judicious and sincere adviser, who endeavoured to instill into him the principles of prudence and discretion; and so long as he was content to be ruled by Overbury’s friendly counsels, he enjoyed, what Hume says is rare, the highest favour of the prince, without being hated by the people. It is easy, therefore, to see what attached Carr to Overbury; and the latter, who could not but perceive the inferiority of the royal favourite, appears to have connected himself with him from motives of ambition, which, for a time, he had every prospect of gratifying. In 1608 he was knighted by the influence of Carr, and his father was appointed one of the judges for Wales. The year following, sir Tnornas made another tour on the continent, which is said to have produced “Observations upon the Provinces United; and on the State of France,” Lond. 1651, 12mo; but it is very doubtful whether he was the real author of this work.

His connection with Carr, now viscount Rochester, continued to be mutually agreeable until the latter engaged in an amour with the countess of Essex, the particulars of which reflect disgrace, not only on the parties immediately concerned, but on the reign in which such shameful transactions could be carried on with impunity. No sooner, says Hume, had James mounted the throne of England, than he remembered his friendship for the unfortunate families of Howard and Devereux, who had suffered for their attachment to the cause of Mary and to his own. Having restored young Essex to his blood and dignity, and conferred the.titles of Suffolk and Northampton on two brothers Of the house of Norfolk, he sought the farther pleasure of uniting those families by the marriage of the earl of Essex with lady Frances Howard, daughter of the earl of Suffolk. She was only thirteen, he fourteen years of age; and it was thought proper, till both should attain the age of puberty, that be should go abroad and pass some time in his travels. He returned into England after four years absence, and was pleased to find his countess in the full lustre of beauty, and possessed of the love and admiration of the whole court. But when he claimed the privileges of an husband, he met with nothing but symptoms of aversion and disgust; nor could his addresses, or the persuasions of her friends, overcome her obstinacy; and disgusted at last with her reiterated denials, he gave over the pursuit, and separating himself from her, thenceforth abandoned her to her own will, antS it is said that although he discovered her attachment to Rochester, he took little notice of it.

With Rochester she had already carried on a criminal intercourse, which, instead of satiating their desires, made them lament their unhappy fate, and long for an union that should be indissoluble. So momentous an affair, however, could not be concluded without consulting Overbury, with whom Rochester was accustomed to share all his secrets, and who, in fact, had been privy to his connection with lady Essex, and had even promoted it by dictating to Rochester those ingenious and passionate letters by which, in a great measure, the lady was won. Like an experienced courtier, says Hume, he thought that a conquest of this nature would throw a lustre on the young favourite, and would tend still farther to endear him to James, who was charmed to hear of the amours of his court. But when Rochester hinted his design of obtaining a divorce and marrying the countess, Overbury used every method to dissuade him from the attempt, representing how difficult it would be to procure a divorce, and how disgraceful to marry the woman whose mind these two friends had combined to debauch! And, in what the historian calls the “zeal of friendship,” he went so far as to threaten Rochester, that he would separate himself for ever from him, if he could so far forget his honour and his interest as to prosecute the intended marriage.

In the mean time, sir Thomas Overbury’s father came to town, and petitioned the king for his discharge. He likewise applied to Somerset, to whom several pressing letters were also written by sir Thomas himself; but all to no purpose. Sjr Thomas had no suspicion at first of the complicated villainy of Somerset in the affair of his refusing the embassy to Russia, nor that his imprisonment was his friend’s contrivance; but, discovering it at length by his delays to procure his liberty, he expostulated with him by letter in the severest manner, and even proceeded to threats. This terrified Somerset so much, that he charged the lieutenant of the Tower to look to Overbury well; for if ever he came out, it would be his ruin, or one of the two must die. During these delays many attempts were made to poison Overbury; none of which succeeded till a glyster was given him, Sept. the 14th, which, after operating in the most violent manner, put an end to his life, about five the next morning. His corpse, being exceedingly offensive, was interred about three the same day in the Tower chapel. Immediately after his death, some suspicion of the true cause of it was rumoured about; but the great persopages concerned prevailed so far as to make it be believed that he died of a disorder contracted before his imprisonment. The whole, however, was discovered about two years after, when the inferior agents were all apprehended, tried, and executed; but the earl of Somerset and his countess, although both tried and condemned, were pardoned by the king the following year, 1616, lest, as it has been said, he should make discoveries not very creditable to the private character of that monarch. The cpuntess died afterwards of a cancer, despised by all who knew her; and Somerset himself lived to share the just contempt of mankind.

Sir Thomas’s character is represented by Weldon in the following terms: “in this manner fell sir Thomas Oververbury, worthy of a longer life and a better fate; and, if I may compare private men with princes, like Germanicus Caesar; both by poison procured by the malice of a woman, both about the 33d year of their age, and both celebrated for their skill and judgment in poetry, their learning, and their wisdom. Overbury was a gentleman of an ancient family, but had some blemishes charged upon his character, either through a too great ambition, or the insolence of a haughty temper. After the return from his travels, the viscount Rochester embraced him with so entire a friendship, that, exercising by his majesty’s special favour the office of secretary provisionally, he not only communicated to sir Thomas the secrets, but many times gave him the packets and letters unopened, before they had been perused by the king himself: which, as it prevailed too much upon his early years, so as to make him, in the opinion or some, thought high and ambitious, yet, he was so far from violating his trust and confidence, that he remains now one example among others, who have suffered in their persons or their fortunes for a freedom of advice, which none but sincere friends will give, and many are such ill friends to themselves as not to receive.”

Dying without issue, sir Thomas’s estate came to hi younger brother, whose son, sir Thomas Overbury, was also the author of some pieces. These are, I. “A true and perfect Account of the Examination, Trial, Condemnation, and Execution, of Joan Perry and her two sons, for the supposed Murder of William Harrison, written by way of letter to Thomas Shirley, M. D. in London, 1676,” 4to. This is one of the most remarkable incidents in story. Harrison was not really murdered, but conveyed away alive by a gang of Mohocks, and carried to Turkey; where, corning into the hands of a physician, he acquired some skill in that faculty; and at length, after many years absence, found means of getting away, and returned home, to the great astonishment of every body, since the sufferers for his supposed death had actually confessed the murder. 2. ' Queries proposed to the serious Consideration of those who impose upon others in things of divine and supernatural Revelation, and prosecute any upon the account of Religion with a desire of their candid and Christian Resolution thereof;“printed in 1677. In answer to which there came out the same year” AtaxiaD Obstaculum; an answer to certain queries, intituled, Queries proposed,“&c. Upon this, sir Thomas wrote a reply, entitled, 3.” Ratiocinium Vernaculum or, a Reply to Ataxiae Obstaculum," &c.

, one of the finest poets of the Augustan age, was the son of a Roman knight, and a native of Sulmo, a town in the county of the Peligni, now Abruzzo. He was born in the year of Rome 7 Jo; that memorable year when the consuls, Hirtius and Pansa, were slain in the battle of Mutina against Antony. From his youth, his inclinations lay towards poetry; which, however, upon his father’s entreaties, he forsook, and, with a view to the practice of the law, studied eloquence under those eminent masters, Aurelius Fuscus and Porcius Latro, whose characters Seneca has drawn, and also mentions Ovid’s improvements under them. Such was his diligence and success, that he determined several private causes very judiciously, and frequently pleaded with great force of eloquence in the court of the centumviri. He was likewise made one of the triumviri, who were magistrates of great authority, and tried capital causes.

Soon after he had put on the toga virilis, which was done at seventeen, Augustus honoured him with the latus davits, an ornament worn only by persons of quality; but, upon the death of his elder brother, by which he came to an easy fortune, he bad adieu to law and the bar, and devoted himself entirely to poetry and pleasure; and being a man of wit, he soon became the companion and favourite of the wits of his day, Tibullus, Severus, Sabinus, Flaccus, &c. and the learned Hyginus is said likewise to have been his intimate friend. He soon discovered a genius adapted to all kinds of poetry; in which he might have been without a competitor, if his fancy had been regulated a little by judgment; but in his time custom laid no extraordinary restraint on the luxuriances of the pen, and Ovid was probably most flattered for those indecencies for which he is now most censured. He married thrice, and two of his wives he repudiated soon after marriage; but seems to have b^en affectionately attached to the third, Perilla, who appears indeed to have deserved the praises he bestows on her beauty and virtue. With her he lived very happily during his long course of prosperity; and she proved a great consolation to him in that reverse which he experienced in his latter days.

, in Spanish Gonçalo Hermandez de Oviedo Y Valdes, a Spanish historian, was born at Madrid, about the year 1478. He was educated among the pages in the court of Ferdinand king of Arragon, and Isabella queen of Castile, and happened to be at Barcelona in 1493, when Columbus returned from his first voyage to the island Haiti, which he called Hispaniola, and which now is known by the name of St. Domingo. Curiosity led him to obtain from Columbus and his companions an account of what was most remarkable in their voyages; and the information he obtained, and the services he rendered Spain during the war of Naples, induced Ferdinand to send him to the Island of Haiti, as intendant and inspector-general of the trade of the new world. The ravages which the syphilis had made during that war, led him to inquire into the most efficacious remedies for this malady, which was supposed to have come from the West Indies. His inquiries were also extended to every thing which regards the natural history of these regions and on his return to Spain, he published “Summario de la Historia general y natural de les Indias Occidentales,” Toledo, 1526, which he dedicated to Charles V. He afterwards made some additions to this work, which he published under the tide of “La Historia general y natural de las Indias Occidentales,” Salamanca, 1535, fol. It was translated into Italian, and afterwards into French, Paris, 1556, fol. It is in this work that he attempts to prove that the syphilis is endemic in the island of Haiti, and that it was imported thence to Spain, and afterwards to Naples, which opinion Astruc advances in support of his own; but this, however, has been called in question. Oviedo is thought to have been the first who recommended the use of the wood of guiacum in the disorder, a remedy not now in any great estimation.

, an eminent English physician, was born in the diocese of Worcester, and educated at Mertoncollege, Oxford, of which he became probationer-fellow in 1519. Having studied physic, he took his doctor’s degree in that faculty in 1527, and soon after was appointed physician to Henry VIII. and held the same office in the two succeeding reigns. In 1544 he was constituted a fellow of the college of physicians, and appears to have attained high consequence in his profession. He was a witness to the will of Henry VIII. who left him a legacy of 100l. It is reported that Edward VI. was brought into the world by Dr. Owen’s means, who performed the Caesarian operation on his mother, queen Jane Seymour. From this circumstance, whether truly or falsely related, we may conclude him to have been a practitioner in midwifery, as well as in physic. In the first year of queen Mary he was very instrumental in obtaining an act for the confirmation and enlargement of the powers granted to the college of physicians. Some time after, in the same reign, when a difference took place between the college of physicians and the university of Oxford, concerning the admission of an illiterate person to a degree, who was rejected by the college upon their examination; cardinal Pole, then chancellor of the university, was appealed to, and obliged the university to consult Dr. Owen and Dr. Thomas Huys, the queen’s physician, “de instituendis rationibus quibus Oxoniensis academia in admittendis Medicis uteretur.” An agreement was accordingly made, which the chancellor approved and ratified by his authority. Dr. Owen died Oct. 10, 1558, of an epidemic intermittent, and was buried in St. Stephen’s, Walbrook. Leland intimates that he had written several pieces on medical subjects, but none of them were preserved. Tanner mentions that he wrote a work entitled " A meet Diet for the new ague set forth by Mr. Dr. Owen, Lond. 1558, fol. In 1553, Edward VI. granted Durham-college, in Oxford, to our George Owen and William Martyn, which the following year they sold to sir Thomas Pope, who founded Trinity -college on the scite. Previous to this, Dr. Owen received a grant of Godstowe nunnery, with its adjoining estates, and this nunnery he converted into a dwelling-house with some alterations and improvements.

Such are the outlines of the life of a gentleman who certainly is entitled to a more ample memorial; one who to very extensive and profound literature, added the most amiable manners, the strictest attention to the duties of his station, and the most exemplary conduct in his several relations, both public and domestic. He had a truly pious frame of mind, and was perhaps superior in biblical erudition to most of his contemporaries.

This learned divine published, 1. “Harmonia Trigonometrica, or A short treatise on Trigonometry,” 1748, 8vo. 2. “The intent and propriety of the Scripture Miracles considered and explained,” 1755, 8vo. 3. “Observations on the Four Gospels, tending chiefly to ascertain the times of their publication, and to illustrate the form and manner of their composition,” 1764, 8vo. 4. “Short directions to young Students in Divinity, and Candidates for Holy Orders,” 1766, 8vo. 5. “An Enquiry into the present state of the Septuagint version of the Old Testament,” 1769, 8vo. 6. “Thevintent and propriety of the Scripture Miracles considered and explained, in a series of Sermons preached at Bow, in 1769, 1770, and 1771, at Boyle’s Lecture,” 1773, 2 vols. 8vo. 7. “Crjtica Saera, or a short introduction to Hebrew Criticism,” 177$, 8vo. This was criticised in a work entitled “Critica Sacra examined, or an attempt to shew that a new method may be found to reconcile the seemingly glaring variations in parallel passages of Scripture, and that such variations are no proofs of corruptions,” &c. 1775, 8vo. 8. “Supplement to Critica Sacra; in which the principles of that treatise are fully confirmed, and the objections of Mr. Raphael Baruh are clearly answered,” 1775, 8vo. 9. “Collatio Codicis Cottoniani Geneseos cum editione Romana a viro clarissimo Joanne Ernesto Grabe jam olim facta, nunc demum summa curaedita, 1778,” 8vo. This ancient and beautiful ms. was said to have been brought into England in the reign of Henry VIII. by two Greek bishops. Queen Elizabeth made a present of it to sir John Fortescue, from whom it descended to the Cotton Library. Walton says, that there were five volumes of this ms. containing the whole Pentateuch, but that the four last came into the hands of a Frenchman, who never returned them to the owner. This valuable ms. was nearly destroyed by the fire which so greatly damaged the Cotton Library in 1731. 10. “Critical Disquisitions; containing some remarks, 1. on Masius’s edition of the Book of Joshua, and, 2. on Origen’s celebrated Hexapla,” 1784, 8vo. 11. “A brief account, historical and critical, of the Septuagint Version of the Old Testament. To which is added, A Dissertation on the comparative excellency of the Hebrew and Samaritan Pentateuch,” &c. 1787, 8vo. 12. “The Modes of Quotation used by the Evangelical writers explained and vindicated,” 1789, 4to.

, in Latin called Audoenus, an English epigrammatist, was born at Armon, in Caernarvonshire; and being bred at Winchester-school, under Dr. Bilson, was chosen thence a scholar of New-college, in Oxford, of which he became probationer fellow in 1582, and actual fellow in 1584. He proceeded LL. B. in 1690, but quitting his fellowship the next year, taught school atTrylegh, near Monmouth; and about 1594 was chosen master of the free-school founded by Henry VIII. at Warwick. He generally laboured under necessitous circumstances, owing to indolence or imprudence. He had a rich uncle, upon whom lay his chief dependence, who was either a papist, or at least popishly inclined; yet, Owen’s genius being peculiarly turned for epigrams, he was not able to resist the charm of the following satirical distich upon that religion:

This he printed, among others, in 1606, at London; and the book, coming into the inquisitor’s hands at Rome, was put into the “Index Expurgatorius” on which the uncle struck him out of his will, and resolved to take no more notice of him. He often, however, experienced the kindness of his relation and countryman Williams, bishop of Lincoln, and lord keeper of the great seal, who contributed to support him several years during his life; and, after his death, which happened in 1622, erected a monument to his memory, with his bust in brass, crowned with laurel, on the pillar next to the consistory stairs at St. Paul’s cathedral, London, where he was interred. Under the bust was an epigram, intimating that his person was little as well as his fortune, and both less than his fame.

, the most eminent and learned of the nonconformist divines, was descended of an ancient and reputable family in Wales. He was the second son of Henry Owen, first a schoolmaster at Stokenchurch, and afterwards vicar of Stadham in Oxfordshire (who was reputed a puritan), and was born at Stadham in 1616. He was sent to a school at Oxford, kept by Mr. Edward Sylvester, in All Saints’ parish; and in his twelfth year was admitted of Queen’s college, where Thomas, afterwards bishop Barlow, was his tutor. Here he took his degrees in arts, that of master in 1636, at which time Anthony Wood does not omit to inform us that he took the oaths of allegiance, &c. During his residence at college, he pursued his various studies with incredible diligence, allowing himself for several years, not above four hours’ sleep in a night; yet he did not neglect useful exercise, and for the sake of his health sometimes partook of the recreations usual among his fellows, such as leaping, throwing the bar, ringing of bells, &c. To this diligence in study he allows that he was prompted by an early ambition to raise himself to such eminence in church or state as might be practicable, without at this time feeling any extraordinary predilection for either. He confessed that he was of an aspiring mind, affected popular applause, and was desirous of honour and preferment, and he paid the age the compliment to think that superiority of learning was the readiest way to obtain these objects. He likewise goes so far as to allow that at this time he felt no concern for the honour of God, or for serving his country unless in subserviency to his own interest; but, whatever were his motives, it is certain that he became at college a very distinguished scholar.

He remained here till the age of twenty-one, maintained chiefly by an uncle, a gentleman of a good estate in Wales, who having no children of his own, intended to have made him his heir, as his father had a large family. About this time, we are told by most of his biographers, archbishop Laud, who was also chancellor of Oxford, imposed several superstitious rites on the university, upon pain of expulsion, and that Mr. Owen had then received such light, that hifr conscience would not submit to these impositions; but what these impositions, or superstitious rites were, they have not informed us. It is probable they related to the academical habits, the wearing of which Laud enjoined very strictly, but which will scarcely now be thought of sufficient importance to trouble the conscience of any man. Mr. Owen, however, like many other good and wise men of his party, began with scruples on small matters, which obstinacy and perseverance magnified into objects of the most serious importance. That he was serious could not be doubted, for his hopes of rising could no longer be indulged; his friends, we are told, forsook him as one infected with puritanism, and he became so much the object of resentment from the Laudensian party, as they were called, that he was forced to leave college.

With this dislike to the discipline of the university, he appears to have connected at the same time many perplexing thoughts respecting his spiritual state, which ended in a sort of melancholy that lasted about five years, during which he seemed alienated from his friends and accustomed pursuits. He was roused to activity, however, as soon as the rebellion broke out, on which occasion he appeared a decided supporter of the measures of the parliament. The first consequence of this was, that his uncle, who was a zealous royalist, resented his conduct, settled his estate upon another, and died without leaving him any thing. About this time, however, sir Robert Dormer, of Ashcot, in the parish of Great Milton, took him into his family as chaplain, and tutor to his eldest son, a task for which he was eminently fitted; and he afterwards became chaplain to John lord Lovelace of Hurley, in Berkshire, a loyalist, who treated Mr. Owen with respect, from an opinion of his great learning; but when this nobleman went to joint the king’s army, Mr. Owen came up to London, and took lodgings in Charter-house yard. While here, going one day to Aldermanbury church, with a view of hearing Mr. Caiamy, it happened that a stranger preached, and the effect of his discourse was to remove all those doubts with which Mr. Owen had been perplexed for some years, and to restore the tranquillity of his mind on religious matters.

Mr. Owen was admitted into orders about the time he took his master’s degree, but had as yet obtained no preferment. During his abode in London, however, he wrote his “Display of Arminianism,” which was published in 1642, and became so popular, as to procure him very general respect from the party that had now obtained the disposal of church-preferments. It is still indeed considered a very able performance, but at that time was thought particularly seasonable, Arminianism, and the steps archbishop Laud took to encourage such opinions, having engaged the attention of all who meditated the changes, or reformation in church and state, which afterwards followed. The effect of the publication to himself was immediate, and important. Already a committee had been formed “for purging the church of scandalous ministers;” and Mr. White, the chairman of this committee, sent a special messenger to Mr. Owen, to present him with the living of Fordham in Essex; which offer he the more cheerfully embraced, as it gave him an opportunity for the regular exercise of his ministry, and he went thither to the great satisfaction, not only of that parish, but of the country round. He continued at this place about a year and a half, where his preaching was so acceptable, that people resorted to his ministry from other parishes. Soon after he came to Fordham, he married a lady, whose name is supposed to have been Rooke, by whom he had several children, none of whom survived him. In 1644 he published his discourse, “Of the Duty of Pastors and People.”

Upon a report that the sequestered incumbent of Fordham was dead, the patron, who had no kindness for Mr. Owen, presented another to the living; on which the people at Coggeshall, a market-town about five miles from thence, earnestly invited him to be their minister; and the earl of Warwick, the patron, very readily gave him the living; and here he taught a more numerous congregation, seldom fewer than two thousand, consisting of persons generally sober, religious, and discreet, who contracted an uncommon and very steady regard for their pastor. Hitherto Mr. Owen had been a presbyterian in matters of church government; but after diligent inquiry into the nature of church government and discipline, he became convinced that the congregational way, or the mode of independency, was most agreeable to the rule of the New Testament; and he published his opinion, with the several reasons for it, in two quartos. Several ministers of the presbyterian denomination were dissatisfied with this change of Mr. Owen’s judgment, and particularly Mr. Gawdry reproached him very unhandsomely, to whom he returned, as he generally did, a much more civil answer. He had formed a church at Coggeshall upon these congregational principles, which continued long; but his reputation as a divine and preacher was not coofined to this spot. He was soon sent for to preach before the parliament: this sermon is entitled “A Vision of free Mercy, &c.” on Acts xvi. 11. April 29, 1646. He pleads for liberty of conscience and moderation towards men of different persuasions, &c. in an “Essay for the practice of Churchgovernment in the Country,” which he subjoins to that sermon. In 1643 he published his book, entitled “Salus electorum, sanguis Jesu:” or, “The Death of Death in the Death of Christ.” He dedicated this book to Robert earl of Warwick, where he pays his tribute of thanks to his lordship for that privilege of opening the door for his preaching the gospel at Goggeshall; and in his preface to the reader he tells us, “That this performance was the result of more than seven years serious inquiry into the mind of God about these things, with a perusal of all which he could attain, that the wit of men in former or later days hath published in opposition to the truth.” He had indeed such an opinion of this work, that although generally modest in speaking of himself, he scrupled not to declare, that “He did not believe he should live to see a solid answer given to it.” During the siege of Colchester, he became acquainted with general Fairfax, who was quartered at Coggeshall for some days; and when Colchester surrendered, he preached a sermon on the day of thanksgiving, and another to the parliamentary committee that had been imprisoned by the enemy, but were now released. These two sermons are entitled “Ebenezer, a Memorial of the Deliverance of Essex County and Committee.” He was again required to preach before the House of Commons, Jan. 31, 1648-9, the very next day after the murder of king Charles: much was expected from this sermon, and an apology for the bloody deed of the preceding day would infallibly have led to preferment; but we are told “his discourse was so modest and inoffensive, that his friends could make no just exception, nor his enemies take an advantage of his words another day.” After this he frequently was appointed to preach before the parliament, and, on Feb. 1649, had Cromwell, for the first time, as one of his hearers, who was highly pleased with the discourse. Cromwell was at this time preparing to go to Ireland, and meeting with Mr. Owen a few days afterwards, at general Fairfax’s house, he came directly up to him, and laying his hand on his shoulder in a familiar way, said, “Sir, you are the person I must be acquainted with.” JMr. Owen modestly replied, “That will be more to my advantage than yours;” to which Cromwell rejoined, “We shall soon see that,” and taking him by the hand led him into lord Fairfax’s garden; and from this time contracted an intimate friendship with him, which continued to his death. He acquainted Mr. Owen with his intended expedition into Ireland, and desired his company there to reside in the college at Dublin; but he answered that the charge of the church at Coggeshall would not permit him to comply with his request. Cromwell, however, would have no denial, and after some altercation, told the congregation at Coggeshall, that their pastor must and should go. He did not, however, travel with the army, but arrived privately at Dublin, and took up his lodgings in the college. Here he frequently preached, and superintended the affairs of the college, for about half a year, when he obtained Cromwell’s leave to return to Coggeshall, where he was joyfully x received.

In Sept. 1650, Cromwell required Mr. Owen to go with him to Scotland and when he found him averse to another absence from his flock at Coggeshall, he procured an order of parliament, which could not be disobeyed. He remained at Edinburgh about half a year, and returning to Coggeshall, expected, as his biographers say, to have passed the remainder of his days there. But the general reputation he had acquired, and his favouritism with Cromwell, pointed him out for a higher station, that of dean of Christ church, in room of Dr. Reynolds, afterwards bishop of Norwich, who had been placed in this office by the authority of the parliamentary visitors. Mr. Owen appears to have owed his promotion to the parliament itself, as appears by the following document “The House, taking into consideration the worth and usefulness of Mr. John Owen, student of QueenVcollege, M. A. has ordered that he be settled in the deanry of Christ-church, Oxford, in the room of,” &c. This was the first intimation Mr. Owen had of his appointment; but he afterwards received a letter from the principal students of the college, signifying their great satisfaction, and a commission from Cromwell, who was at this time chancellor of the university, to act as vicechancellor. Accordingly he went to Oxfprd in 1651, and on Sept. 26 of the following year, was admitted vicechancellor. About the same time he took his degree of D. D. His rise seems calculated to have gratified the ambition he acknowledged in his youthful days, for he had not been above twelve or fourteen years absent from Oxford, and was now only in his thirty-sixth year.

Granger remarks, that “Supposing it necessary for one of his persuasion to be placed at the head of the university, none was so proper as this person; who governed it several years with much prudence and moderation, when faction and animosity seemed to be a part of every religion.” It is certain that Dr. Owen’s administration was distinguished for moderation, arising doubtless from his natural temper; and that he was impartial in his patronage. At this time the presbyterians had considerably the ascendancy, and it was with such he most of all conversed in the university, and, in the disposition of several vacant livings, he generally gave them to presbyterians: nor was he ever wanting to oblige even the episcopal party, whom he suffered to meet quietly, about three hundred every Sunday, at the house of Dr. Willis, near Christ-church, where they celebrated divine service according to the liturgy of the church of England; and though he was often urged to it, yet he would never give them the least disturbance and if at any time they met with opposition or trouble on that account, it was from other hands, and always against his mind. In his office also of commissioner for ejecting “scandalous ministers,” as the royalists were generally called, he frequently took the part of men of merit, and particularly in the case of Dr. Edward Pococke. This moderation of temper in the exercise of power, gained him the love and respect of the most; yet we must observe also, that he would not suffer authority to be slighted, when there was occasion to assert it. At an act, when one of Trinity-college was Terrae-filius, before he began, the doctor stood up, and in Latin told him, he should have liberty to say what he pleased, provided he would avoid profaneness, obscenity, and personal reflections. The Terrse-filius began, and in a little time transgressed in all these particulars, and the doctor endeavoured to check him, but finding that he paid no attention to his remonstrances, he sent his beadles to pull him down, on which the scholars interposed, and would not suffer them to come near him. Dr. Owen then resolved to pull him down himself, and when his friends dissuaded him lest the scholars should do him some mischief, he exclaimed, “I will not see authority thus trampled on,” and actually seized on the offender and sent him to prison. Dr. Owen was never deficient in personal courage, for in 1654, having heard of some disturbances in Wiltshire, which threatened to reach Oxford, he ordered a troop of scholars to be raised and armed for the protection of the university; and Wood informs us that he often appeared at the head of them, well mounted, with a sword by his side and a case of pistols.

During his vice-chancellorship, he was a frequent preacher at St. Mary’s, and other places in the county, and published some of his numerous works, particularly in 1654, his “Saint’s Perseverance,” in answer to Goodwin’s “Redemption redeemed;” and in 1655, his “Vindiciæ Evangelicæ, or, the Mystery of the Gospel vindicated, and Socinianism examined,” against Biddle, who had published two Socinian Catechisms. In the preface to this work, which he wrote at the desire of the heads of houses and many other divines of Oxford, is a succinct and perspicuous history of Spcimanism from its first appearance. This was followed by his more popular treatise, often reprinted till this day, on Communion with God." In 1657 he was succeeded as vice-chancellor by Dr. Conant, and in 1659, as dean of Christ-church by Dr. Reynolds. For these changes his biographers no otherwise account than as parts of that general change which the restoration was about to effect. Dr. Owen, however, lost his vicechancellorship on the death of Oliver Cromwell, whose successor, Richard, appointed Dr. Conant. The latter was evidently an ejectment, and it is supposed the presbyterians had a hand in it.

Bishop Burnet relates an extraordinary anecdote relative to the death of Cromwell. He tells us, that Tillotson, happening to be at Whitehall on a fast-day of the household, about a week after, went out of curiosity into the presence-chamber, where the solemnity was kept; and saw there on one side of the table the new protector, with the rest of his family and, on the other, six preachers, among whom were Dr. Owen, Dr. Goodwin, Mr. Caryl, and Mr. Sterry, with whose sallies of enthusiasm Tillotson was much disgusted, God being in a manner reproached with the late protector’s services, and challenged for taking him away so soon. Goodwin, who had pretended to assure them in a prayer, a few minutes before he expired, that he was not to die, had now the confidence to say to God, “Thou hast deceived us, and we are deceived.” And Sterry, praying for Richard, used words next -to blasphemy, “Make him the brightness of the father’s glory, and the express image of his person.” No particular expression of Owen, however, is recorded; and therefore the fact does not particularly attach to him, but is rather generally illustrative of the enthusiasm of the party.

The short time he remained at Oxford, he preached at St. Peter’s in the East, to a crowded congregation who regretted his being now excluded from St. Mary’s; and after leaving Oxford, he retired to Stadham, where he had purchased an estate. According to Baxter, he is supposed to have had a particular hand in restoring the members of the old parliament, who compelled Richard Cromwell to resign; but this seems a disputable point. We are more certain that at the meeting of his brethren at the Savoy in 1658, he took an active part, and had a principal hand in drawing up the confession of faith of what were called the congregational churches. On the restoration of Charles II. he was not in possession of any church preferment, but had formed a congregation at Stadham, where he continued to preach for some time until he settled in London. Here he contracted an acquaintance with some of the most eminent persons in church and state, and might have risen to considerable preferment had he chosen to conform. In 1661 he published a learned and elaborate work, “De natura, ortu, progressu, et studio veras Theoiogiae,” 4to. The following year, one John Vincent Lane, a Franciscan friar, published a work called “Fiat Lux,” in which, under the pretence of recommending moderation and charity, he endeavoured to draw over his readers to the church of Rome, as the only infallible cure of all religious animosities. Two editions of this work were printed before it fell under Dr. Owen’s notice; but it was, at length, sent to him by a person of distinction, with a request that he would write a reply to it. This he readily undertook, and, in the same year, published his “Animadversions on Fiat Lux. By a Protestant.” This produced an answer from Lane, and another tract from Owen, entitled “A Vindication of Animadversions on Fiat Lux;” but there was some difficulty in obtaining a licence for this last book, when the bishops who were appointed by act of parliament the principal licensers of divinity-books had examined it: they made two objections against it. 1. That upon all occasions when he mentions the evangelists and apostles, even St. Peter himself, he left out the title of saint. 2. That he endeavours to prove that it could not be determined that St. Peter was ever at Rome. To the first the doctor replied, that the title of evangelist, or apostle, by which the scripture names them, was much more glorious than that of saint; for in that name all the people of God were alike honoured; yet to please them he yielded to that addition; but as to the other objections, he would by no means consent to any alteration, unless they could prove him to be mistaken in his assertion, and rather chose his book should never see the light than to expunge what he had written upon that subject; and in all probability it would not have been printed, had not sir Edward Nicholas, one of his majesty’s principal secretaries of state, who was informed of the matter, written to the bishop of London to license it notwithstanding this objection. This book recommended him to the esteem of the lord chancellor Hyde, who, by sirBulstrode Whitlocke, sent for him, and acknowledged the service of his late books against Fiat Lux; assuring him that he had deserved the best of any English protestant of late years; and that for these performances the church was bound to own and advance him; and at the same time he offered him preferment if he would accept it: the chancellor moreover told him there was one thing he much wondered at, that he being so learned a man, and so well acquainted with church history, should embrace that novel opinion of independency, for which, in his judgment, so little could be said. The doctor replied, that indeed he had spent some part of his time in reading over the history of the church, and made this offer to his lordship, if he pleased, to prove that this. was that way of government which was practised in the church for several hundred years after Christ, against any bishop he should think fit to bring to a disputation with him upon this subject. “Say you so” said the chancellor, “then I am much mistaken.” Other conversation passed between them, particularly about liberty of conscience The lord chancellor asked him what he would desire With respect *tb liberty and forbearance in the matters of religion. To which the doctor replied, “That the liberty he desired was for protestants, who assented to the doctrine of the church of England.” This was afterwards misrepresented, as if he meant to exclude all others from the exercise of their religion, which he often declared was not his meaning.

On the death of the rev. Joseph Caryl, in 1673, Dr. Owen was invited to succeed him in the charge of a very numerous congregation in Leadenhall- street, and as he had already a charge of the sme kind, the congregations agreed to unite. In the following year he published “A Discourse concerning the Holy Spirit;” in 1677, his “Doctrine of Justification by Faith;” and in 1679, his “Glorious Mystery of the Person of Christ;” all which, at least the genuine editions of them, are still in considerable request. Dr. Owen was in most of his works rather prolix, which has given rise to abridgments of some of them, but as these are executed sometimes by men not exactly according in his principles, little reliance can be placed on their accuracy. In his own days, we are told that his works procured him. the admiration and friendship of many persons of rank, who took great delight in his conversation. Among these are enumerated the earl of Orrery, the earl ofAnglesea, lord Willoughby of Parham, lord Wharton, lord Berkley, sir John Trevor, one of the principal secretaries of state, &c. Even Charles II. and the duke of York paid particular respect to him. It is said that when he was at Tunbridge, drinking the waters, the duke sent for him to his tent, and entered into a long conversation on the subject of nonconformity. The king went yet farther; for, after his return to London, his majesty conversed with him for the space of two hours together, and after assuring him of his favour and respect, told him he might have access to his person as often as he pleased; said that he was sensible of the wrong he had done to the dissenters; declared himself a friend to liberty of conscience, and concluded all by giving Dr. Owen a thousand guineas to distribute among those who had suffered most by the late severities. Whether the professions of the king and the duke were sincere or not, or whether this was an act of policy, or an involuntary respect paid to the talents and amiable private character of Dr. Owen, it appears that he was not afterwards molested in the exercise of his ministry.

, a controversial writer against the Jesuits, was born in Merionethshire in 1572, and educated at Christ Church, Oxford, which he left without taking a degree, “having,” as Wood says, “some petty employment bestowed on him.” He afterwards went to the continent, and entered into the society of the Jesuits in Spain, but discovering that their conduct savoured more of worldly policy than true religion, he made use of the information he had picked up among them to expose their intrigues. With this view he published, 1. “The Running Register; recording a true relation of the state of the English colleges, seminaries, and cioysters of all forraigne parts. Together with a brief and compendious discourse of the lives, practices, couzenage, impostures and deceits of all our English monks, friars, Jesuits, and seminarie priests in general,” Lond. 1626. This curious book (of which some extracts are given in the “Restituta,” vol. I. p. 141) abounds with anecdotes of those English Roman catholics who had fled for refuge to the foreign seminaries. 2. “The unmasking of all popish monks, friars, and Jesuits; or, a treatise of their genealogy, beginnings, proceedings, and present state,” &c. ibid. 1628, 4to. 3. “Speculum Jesuiticum, or the Jesuit’s Looking-glass; wherein they may behold Ignatius (their patron) his progress, their own pilgrimage,” &c. ibid. 1629, 4to. To this is added a list of all their colleges, the number of their fellows, &c. This was reprinted in sir Edward Sandys’s “Europe Speculum.” Owen was living in 1629, as appears by the date of his work, but we have no information of what became of him afterwards.

For a maintenance he first went to Lyons to teach the mathematics, in which he had considerable encouragement; and after some time his generous disposition procured him still better success elsewhere. Among his scholars were two foreigners, who expressing their uneasiness to him at being disappointed of some bills of exchange for a journey to Paris, he asked them how much would do, and being told 50 pistoles, he lent them the money immediately, even without their note for it. Upon their arrival at Paris, mentioning this generous action to M. Daguesseau, father of the chancellor, this magistrate was touched with it; and engaged them to invite Ozanam to Paris, with a promise of his favour. The opportunity was eagerly euibraced; and the business of teaching the mathematics here soon brought him in a considerable income: but he wanted prudence for some time to make the best use of it. He was young, handsome, and sprightly; and much aduicted both to gaming and gallantry, which continually drained his purse. Among others, he had a love intrigue with a woman, who lodged in the same house with him, and gave herself out for a person of condition. However, this expence in time led him to think of matrimony, and he soon after married a young woman without afortune, but for this defect she made amends by her modesty, virtue, and sweet temper; so that though the state of his purse was not amended, yet he experienced a long course of domestic happiness. He had twelve children by her, who all died young; and he was lastly rendered quite unhappy by the death of his wife also, which happened in 1701. Neither did this misfortune come single: for the war breaking out about the same time, on account of the Spanish succession, it swept away all his scholars, who, being foreigners, were obliged to leave Paris. Thus he sunk into a very melancholy state; under which, however, he received some relief, and amusement, from the honour of being admitted this same year an eleve of the royal academy of sciences.

He seems to have had a pre-sentiment of his death, from some lurking disorder within, of which no outward symptoms appeared. In that persuasion he refused to engage with some foreign noblemen, who offered to become his scholars; alleging that he should not live long enough to carry them through their intended course. Accordingly he was seized soon after with an apoplexy, which terminated his existence in less than two hours, on the 3d of April, 1717, at 77 years of age.

We are told that he knew too much of astronomy to give into judicial astrology; and obstinately refused all that was offered him to engage him to calculate nativities. Once indeed he submitted to the importunity of a count of the empire, whom he had sufficiently warned not to believe him. He drew up by astronomy the scheme of his nativity, and then without employing the rules of astrology, foretold him all the instances of good fortune, which ca.ne into his head. The count at the same time procured his horoscope to be taken by a physician, who was greatly infatuated with astrology, and who followed exactly all the rules of that art. Twenty years after the count informed Mr. Ozanam, that all his predictions were come to pass, and that none of the physician’s had their effect. This account gave him a very different satisfaction from what was intended. The count thought to compliment him upon his skill in astrology, but it only served to confirm him in his opinion of the absurdity of that pretended science.

Mr. Ozell had the good fortune to escape all those vicissitudes and anxieties in regard to pecuniary circumstances which too frequently attend on men of literary abilities; for, besides that he was, from his earliest setting out in life, constantly in possession of very good places, having been for some years auditor-general of the city and bridge accounts, and, to the time of his decease, auditor of the accounts of St. Paul’s cathedral and St. Thomas’s Hospital, all of them posts of considerable emolument; a gentleman, who was a native of the same country with him, who had known him from a school-boy, and it is said lay under particular obligations to his family, dying when Mr. Ozell was in the very prime of life, left him such a fortune as would have been a competent support for him if he should at any time have chosen to retire from business entirely, which, however, it does not appear he ever did. He died Oct. 15, 1743, and was buried in the vault of a church belonging to the parish of St. Mary Aldermanbury; but in what year he was born, and consequently his age at the time of his death, are particulars that we do not find on record. Mr. Ozell was a man of application, but of no ta’ste or genius, yet acquired some reputation for his numerous translations, and would have deserved more had he confined his labours to serious works, where a reader may be content with a literal meaning; but it was his misfortune to undertake works of humour and fancy, which were qualities he seemed not to possess himself, and therefore could not do justice to in others. Moliere, particularly, is an author of that superior genius, that it would require abilities almost equal to his own to translate him in such a manner as to give him, in the clothing of our own language, the air and manner of a native.

, a learned Englishman, was born about 1432, at or near Winchester, as is generally supposed, and was educated at the charge of Thomas Langton, bishop of that diocese, who employed him, while a youth, as his amanuensis. The bishop, pleased with his proficiency, and particularly delighted with his early turn for music, which he thought an earnest of greater attainments, bestowed a pension on him sufficient to defray the expences of his education at Padua, at that time one of the most flourishing universities in Europe. Accordingly he studied there for some time, and met with Cuthbert Tonstall, afterwards bishop of Durham, and William Latimer, whom he called his preceptors. On his return, he studied for some time at Queen’s-college, Oxford, of which his patron Langton had been provost; and was soon after taken into the service of Dr. Christopher Bambridge, who succeeded Langton in the office of provost, and became afterwards a cardinal. He attended him to Rome, about the beginning of the sixteenth' century, and continued there until the cardinal’s death in 1514. He appears, before this, to have entered into holy orders, for in the beginning of this year, and while abroad, he was made prebendary of Bugthorp, in the church of York, in the room of Wolsey, afterwards the celebrated cardinal; and in May of the same year, was promoted to the archdeaconry of Dorset, on the resignation of his friend Langton, at which time, as Willis supposes, he resigned the prebend of Bugthorp.

On his return to. England, he was sent for to court, probably in consequence of the character given of him by his deceased patron, cardinal Bambridge; and became such a favourite with Henry VIII. that he appointed him, as some say, secretary of state, which Mr. Lodge doubts; but it seems certain, that he either held that, or the office of private secretary, or some confidential situation, under Henry, who employed him in affairs of high political importance. In 1515, he was sent to the court of Vienna, where the object of his embassy was to engage the emperor Maximilian to dispossess the French king Francis 1. of the duchy of Milan, his royal master being alarmed at the progress of the French arms in Italy. Pace succeeded in his negociation, so far as to persuade the emperor to undertake this expedition; and he also engaged some of the Swiss cantons to furnish him with troops; but the scheme was ultimately so unsuccessful that Maximilian was obliged to make peace with France. Pace, however, profited so much by his acquaintance with this emperor, as to acquire a/very useful knowledge of his character; and when he afterwards offered to resign his crown in favour of Henry VIII. he was enabled to give his sovereign the best advice, and to assure him, that Maximilian had no other design, by this apparently liberal offer, than to obtain another subsidy, and that, in other respects, very little credit was due to his word. In this opinion cardinal Wolsey, at home, seems to have concurred.

In 1519, Maximilian died, and the kings of France and Spain immediately declared themselves candidates for the Imperial throne. Henry, encouraged by the pope, was also induced to offer himself as a candidate, and Pace was ordered to attend the diet of the empire, sound the opinions of the electors, and endeavour to form a judgment of the likelihood of his success. Pace, however, soon discovered that his royal master had started too late, and that tven the electors of Mentz, Cologn, and Triers, who were disposed to favour his pretensions, pleaded, with a shew of regret, that they were pre-engaged. The election fell on Charles V. In 1516, Pace was instituted treasurer of Lichfield, which he resigned in 1522, on being made dean of Exeter. In 1511), he succeeded Colet as dean of St. Paul’s; and some say, held also the deanery of Sarum, but this is not quite clear, although he is called dean of Salisbury by Herbert, in his “Life and Reign of Henry VIII.” In 1521, he was made prebendary of Combe and Harnham, in the church of Sarum, and we find mention of some other church preferments he held from 1516 to 1522, but they are so dubiously related that it is difficult to give them in due order.

It was at this time, however, that Pace fell under cardinal Wolsey’s displeasure; the effects of which are said to have been very serious. The cardinal is thought to have been enraged against him, first, because he had shewn a readiness to assist Charles duke of Bourbon with money, for whom the cardinal had no great affection: and, secondly, because he had not forwarded the cardinal’s design of obtaining the papal chair with so much zeal as Wblsey expected. Such are the reasons assigned by some historians for Wolsey’s displeasure, who is said to have ordered matters in such a manner, that for nearly the space of two years, Pace received no instructions from his court as to his proceedings at Venice; his allowance for expences was also withdrawn, and no answer returned to his letters. On one occasion, when the Venetian ambassador residing in London asked Wolsey whether he had any commands for the English ambassador at Venice, he answered Paceus decipit Begem: and this singular treatment, we are told, so affected Pace that he became insane. As soon as the king was informed of this, Pace was ordered home; and, being carefully attended by physicians at the king’s command, was restored in a short time to his senses, and amused himself by studying the Hebrew language, with the assistance of Robert Wakefield. In the interval, he was introduced to the king at Richmond, who expressed much satisfaction at his recovery; and admitted him to a private audience, in which he remonstrated against the cardinal’s cruelty to him. But the cardinal was too powerful at this time, and when urged by the king to answer the charge against him, he summoned Pace before him, and sat in judgment, with the duke of Norfolk and others, who condemned Pace, and sent him to the Tower of London; where he was confined for two years, till discharged at length by the king’s command. Pace, thus degraded, and depressed in body and mind, resigned his deanries of St. Paul and Exeter, a little before his death; and, retiring to Stepney for his health, died there, in 1532, when not quite fifty years of age.

, a celebrated abbot of Tabenna in Egypt, was born about the year 292, of heathen parents. He bore arms at the age of twenty, and was so touched with the charitable works of some Christians, that he returned to Thebais when the war ended, and embraced Christianity. He afterwards placed himself under the direction of a solitary named Palemon, and made so astonishing a progress in religion with this excellent master, that he became founder of the monastery of Tabenna, on the banks of the Nile, peopled Thebais with holy solitaries, and had above 5000 monks under his care. His sister founded a convent of nuns on the other side of the Nile, who lived in a community, and practised great austerities. St. Pachomius died May 3, 348. We have some of his “Epistles” remaining, a “Rule,” and some other pieces in the library of the fathers. M. Arnauld D'Andilly has, translated a life of him into French, which may be found among those of the fathers of the desert.

, antiquary and librarian to the duke of Parma, and historiographer of the order of Malta, was born at Turin, Nov. 13, 1710. After studying in the university of Turin, he took the religious habit in the order of the Theatins, at Venice, and then went to Bologna to study mathematics and natural philosophy under the celebrated Beccari. It appears that he began his subsequent literary career with the last-mentioned pursuit; and that as soon as he had attained the higher orders, he was appointed professor of philosophy in the college of Genoa; and was one of those who first dared, to explode, from the schools of Italy, the old rooted prejudices of fantastic systems, and to substitute for them the eternal truths discovered by Newton. He did not, however, long remain in the professorship of philosophy, at Genoa, but quitted philosophy for divinity, and devoted ten years to preaching and the composition of sermons, by neither of which he acquired much reputation; but within this period he published some orations, his “Treatise on the Antiquities of Hipa Transone,” the ancient Cupra; and three years after, his “Explanation of an ancient engraved Stone.”

From a confidential declaration to count Cayius, it appears, that Mr Paciaudi was highly satisfied with his employment. He considered it as an opportunity of rendering useful his extensive erudition, without those inconveniencies which attend the necessary intercourse with the world. He therefore engaged in the business with a zeal bordering on enthusiasm. Besides the acquisition which he made of the excellent library of count Pertusati at Home, in 1762, he went to Paris in search of other books; and such was his exertion, that, in less than six years, he collected more than sixty thousand volumes of the best xvorks of every kind, and thus erected one of the most copious libraries in Italy. He also compiled such an excellent “Catalogue raisonne*e” of its articles as deserves to be adopted as a model by all who are at the head of large bibliographical establishments.

Notwithstanding so many signal services to the court of Parma, Paciaudi fell a victim to mean intrigues, and lost the favour of his sovereign. He had been intimately connected with the minister who then happened to be disgraced, and was in some measure involved in the same misfortune. He forfeited his places. But, conscious of his own integrity, he did not choose to leave Parma, and patiently waited for the transit of the storm. His innocence being soon ascertained, he was restored to his several functions, and to the good opinion of the prince. He made, however, of this favourable event, the best use that a prudent man could do; he endeavoured to secure himself against a similar misfortune in future, by soliciting permission to retire to his native country; and this “voluntary exile,” says M. Dacier, in the eulogy of Paciaudi, “banished the last remains of suspicion against him. Nothing was now remembered but his merit and his zeal: his loss was severely felt; and the most engaging solicitations were made to him to resume his functions. In vain did he plead in excuse his advanced age, and the necessity of repose; his excuses were not admitted, and he was finally obliged to return to Parma.”

, an eminent lawyer and philosopher, called Pacius de Beriga, from the name of a country seat belonging to his father’s family, near Vicenza, was born at the latter city in 1550. His parents bestowed every pains on his education, and he is said to have made such progress in his first studies as to have composed a treatise on arithmetic at the age of thirteen. For farther proficiency he was sent to Padua, with his brother Fabius, who afterwards became a physician of eminence, and is mentioned with great honour by the medical biographers. Julius, after taking his degree of doctor in law, returned to his own country, where, in the course of his extensive reading, he became acquainted with the sentiments of the reformers, and concealed his attachment to them with so little care, that he was menaced by the horrors of the inquisition, from which he escaped to Geneva. This step being attended with the Joss of his property, he gained a livelihood for some lime by teaching youth, until his character becoming known, he was encouraged to give lectures on civil Jaw, which he did for ten years with great success and reputation. At Geneva also he married a lady whose family had fled from Lncca for the cause of religion, and had a family of ten children by her.

In 1585 he accepted the offer of the law professorship at Heidelberg, which he held lor ten years, and then removed to Sedan, where he taught logic for some time; but the war which took place induced him to return again to Geneva, and thence to Nismes, where he was appointed principal of the college. His next settlement, which he hoped would have been final, was at Montpellier, where he was made regius professor of law, and where he certainly acquired a high reputation, and brought together from all parts a numerous concourse of students, among whom was the celebrated Peiresc, who induced him to return to the Roman catholic religion. After various changes of place, however, he fixed at last at Valence in Dauphinl, where he died in 1635, at the age of eightyfive. His principal works were, 1. “Corpus Juris Civilis,” Geneva, 1580, fol. 2. “Consuetudines Feudorum,” ibid. 1580, fol. 3. “Justiniani Imperatoris institutionum Libri quatuor,” &c. ibid. fol. 4. “Aristotelis Organum, hoc est libri omnes ad logicam pertimntes, Gr. et Lat.” Morgiis, 1584, 8vo, reprinted in 1592, and at Francfort in 1598, which is the best edition of what is reckoned a very valuable translation of the Aristotelian logic. 5. “Sapientissimi Curopalatae de officialibus Palatii Constantinopolitani, et officiis magnae ecclesiae libellus, Or et Lat.” Htidelberg, 1588, 8vo. This was published by Codinus. Pacius only supplied the ms. from his library 6. “Aristotelis naturalis auscultationis libri octo.” Gr. and Lat. Francfort, 1596, 8vo. 7. “Aristotelis de anima libri tres, Gr. et Lat.” ibid. 1596, 8vo. 8. “Aristotelis de Ccelo libri quatuor,” &c. Gr. et Lat. ibid. 1601, 8vo. 9. “Doctrina Peripatetica tomi tres,” Aureliae Allobrogum (Geneva) 1606, 4to. Niceron enumerates various other works which he published, some of a temporary kind, and some compiled for the use of students; but the above appear to have contributed most to the reputation he enjoyed.

, an English poetical and miscellaneous writer, the son of John Pack, of Stoke- Ash, in Suffolk, who, in 1697 was high sheriff of that county, was born about 1680. He was educated at Merchant Taylors’ school, whence, at the age of sixteen, he removed to St. John’s college, Oxford, and remained there two years, at the end of which his father entered him of the Middle Temple, intending him for the profession of the law. His proficiency, as a law student, must have appeared in a very favourable light to the benchers of this honourable society, as he was at eight terms standing admitted barrister, when he was not much above twenty years of age. But habits of study and application to business not agreeing either with his health or inclination, he went into the army, and his first command, which he obtained in March 1705, was that of a company of foot. He served afterwards abroad under general Stanhope, and the duke of Argyle, who for his distinguished bravery promoted him to the rank of major, and ever after honoured him with his patronage and friendship. Some of the best of major Pack’s effusions were in celebration of his grace’s character, at a time when there was a jealousy between him and the du.ke of Marlborough. The major died at Aberdeen in Sept. 1728, where his regiment happened then to be quartered. He published first a miscellany of poems in 1718, dedicated to colonel Stanhope, which sold rapidly, and when it came to a second edition was enlarged by some prose pieces. In 1719 he published the “Life of Pomponius Atticus,” with remarks addressed to the duke of Aygyle; in 1720, “Religion and Philosophy, a Tale;” and in 1725, a “New Collection” of poetical miscellanies, to which he prefixed the “Lives of Miltiades and Cymon,” from Cornelius Nepos. His “Whole Works” were afterwards collected and published in one vol. 8vo, 1729. In all he discovers considerable taste, vivacity, and learning. His connections, as well as his principles, appear to have been of the superior cast.

, a Latin tragic poet, was a native of Brindisi, the ancient Brundusium, and nephew to Ennius. He flourished at Rome about 154 B. C. According to his last biographer, he was held in high esteem by C. Lelius, and particularly by Cicero, who affirmed him to be superior to Sophocles in his tragedy of “Niptra,” and classed“him in the first rank of tragic poets. They are said likewise to have looked upon every one as an enemy to Roman literature who had temerity enough to despise his tragedies, particularly his” Antiope.“We have nothing, however, of his works left except some fragments in Maittaire’s” Corpus Poetarum." Pacuvius was a painter also, as well as a poet; and Pliny speaks of one of his pictures which was placed in the temple of Hercules, and was admired by the connoisseurs of those times. He died at Tarentum, when beyond his ninetieth year. He wrote his own epitaph, which is preserved in Aulus Gellius. Annibale di Leo, who was also born at Brindisi, published in 1764 a dissertation on his life and writings, in order to do honour to his native place, which certainly would not have been less honoured if he had omitted to tell us that among the eminent men of Brindisi, was M. Lenius Strabo, the first inventor of bird-cages.

, an eminent French mathematician, was born at Avignon, in Provence, March 3, 1604, and entered the army at fourteen, for which he had been educated with extraordinary care. Ir> 1620 he was engaged at the siege of Caen, in the battle of the bridge of Ce, and other exploits, in which he signalized himself, and acquired a reputation above his years. He was present, in 1G21, at the siege of St. John d'Angeli, as also at that of Clerac and Montauban, where he lost his left eye by a musket-shot. At this siege he had another loss, which he felt with no less sensibility, viz. that of the constable of Luynes, who died there of a scarlet fever. The constable was a near relation to him, and had been his patron at court. He did not, however, sink under his misfortune, but on the contrary seemed to acquire fresh energy from the reflection that he must now trust solely to himself. Accordingly, there was after this time, no siege, battle, or any other occasion, in which he did not signalize himself by some effort of courage and conduct. At the passage of the Alps, and the barricade of Suza, he put himself at the head of the forlorn hope, consisting of the bravest youths among the guards; and undertook to arrive the first at the attack by a private way which was extremely dangerous; but, having gained the top of a very steep mountain, he cried out to his followers, “See the way to glory!” and sliding down the mountain, his companions followed him, and coming first to the attack, as they wished to do, immediately began a furious assault; and when the army came up to their support, forced the barricades. He had afterwards the pleasure of standing on the left hand of the king when his majesty related this heroic action to the duke of Savoy, with extraordinary commendations, in the presence of a very full court. When the king laid siege to Nancy in 1633, our hero had the honour to attend his sovereign in drawing the lines and forts of circumvallation. In 1642 his majesty sent him to the service in Portugal, in the post of field-marshal; but that year he had the misfortune to lose his eye-sight.

Disabled now from public service, he re-assumed, with greater vigour than ever, the study of the mathematics and fortification; and, in 1645, gave to the public his “Treatise of Fortification.” It was allowed by all who understood the science, that nothing superior had then appeared on that subject; and, whatever improvements have been made since, they have been derived in a manner from this treatise, as conclusions from their principles. In 1651 he published his “Geometrical. Theorems,” which shew a perfect knowledge of all parts of the mathematics. In 1655 he printed a paraphrase, in French, of the “Account,” in Spanish, “of the River of the Amazons,” by father de Rennes, a Jesuit; and we are assured, that blind as he was, yet he drew the chart of that river, and the parts adjacent, which is seen in this work. Of this work an English translation was published by W. Hamilton in 1661, 3vo.

His character is that of an universal genius; and, having turned himself entirely to the art of war, and particularly to the branch of fortification, he made extraordinary progress in it. He understood mathematics, not only better than is usual for a gentleman whose view is to rise in the army, but even to a degree of perfection above that of the ordinary masters who teach that science. He had so particular a genius for this kind of learning, that he obtained it more readily by meditation than by reading, and accordingly spent less time on mathematical books than he did in those of history and geography. He had also made morality and politics his particular study; so that he may be said to have drawn his own character in his “Homme Hero'ique,” and to have been one of the completes! gentlemen of his time. Louis XIII. was heard to say several times, that the count de Pagan was one of the most worthy, most adroit, and most valiant men in his kingdom. That branch of his family which removed from Naples to France in 1552, became extinct in his person.

, an English divine, was born in 1590, at Harrow on the Hill, Middlesex, and entered of Baliol College, Oxford, in 1606. Here he took his degrees in arts, and in 1619 was chosen fellow of All Souls. In 1629, by the interest of Laud, he succeeded Dr. Denison, as master of the free school of Reading. In 1634 he was admitted D. D. but ten years after was deprived of his school by the parliamentary commissioners for Berkshire. He held, however, the rectory of East Locking in that county, to which he had been presented by his college, until his death, which happened Feb. 14, 1663, at the rectory -house. He was buried in the chancel of his own church. At the restoration he had obtained a writ of restitution to the school, which was publicly read, he being present, as appears by the diary of the corporation; but, after some debate it was carried that Mr. Singleton, the then master, should have notice before an answer was resolved upon; and it appears that Mr. Singleton was confirmed in the place, being the sixth person who held it after Page.

Dr. Page was thought well versed in the Greek fathers, an able disputant, and a good preacher. He wrote “A Treatise of justification of Bowing at the name of Jesus, by way of answer to an appendix against it,” Oxford, 1631, 4to; and an “Examination of such considerable reasons as are made by Mr. Prynne in a reply to Mr. Widdowes concerning the same argument,” printed with the former. The fate of this publication was somewhat singular. The point in dispute was at this time eagerly contested. Archbishop Abbot did not think it of sufficient importance to be allowed to disturb the peace of the church, and, by his secretary, advised Dr. Page to withdraw his work from the press, if already in it. Laud, on the contrary, who was then bishop of London, ordered it to be printed, viewing the question as,a matter of importance, it being a defence of a canon of the church; and it accordingly appeared. Dr. Page was also the author of “Certain animadversions upon some passages in a Tract concerning Schism and Schismatics,” by Mr. Hales of Eton, Oxon. 1642, 4to; “The Peace Maker, or a brief motive to unity and charity in Religion,' 1 Loud. 1652, I6mo; a single sermon, and a translation of Thomas a Kempis, 1639, 12mo, with a large epistle to the reader. Wood mentions” Jus Fratrum, or the Law of Brethren," but is doubtful whether this belongs to our Dr. Page, or to Dr. Samuel Page, vicar of Deptford, who died in 1630, and was the author of some pious tracts. It belongs, however, to neither, but to a John Page, probably a lawyer, as the subject is the power 6f parents in disposing of their estates to their children.

, a famous Cordelier, and one of the ablest critics of his time, was born at Rognes, a small town in Provence, March 31, 1624. He took the monk’s habit in the convent of the Cordeliers at Aries, and professed himself there in 1641. After he had finished the usual course of studies in philosophy and divinity, he preached some time, and was at length made four times provincial of his order. These occupations did not hinder him from applying to chronology and ecclesiastical history, in which he excelled. He printed in the Journal des Savans, Nov. 11, 1686, a learned “Dissertation upon the Consular Office,” in which he pretends to have discovered the rules, according to which the Roman emperors took the dignity of consul at some certain times more than others, but in this he is not thought to have been successful. His most considerable work is “A Critique upon the Annals of Baronius;” in which he has rectified an infinite number of mistakes, both in chronology and in facts. He published the first volume of this work, containing the first four centuries, at Paris, in 1689; with a dedication to the clergy of France, who allowed him a pension. The whole work was printed after his death, in four volumes, folio, at Geneva, in 1705, by the care of his nephew, father Francis Pagi, of the same order. It is carried to the year 1198, where Baronius ends. Pagi was greatly assisted in it by the abbe* Longuerue, who also wrote the eloge of our author, which is prefixed to the Geneva edition. Another edition was published at Geneva in 1727. It is a work of great utility, but the author’s chronology of the popes of the first three centuries is not approved by the learned. He has also prefixed a piece concerning a new chronological period, which he calls “Graeco-Romana,” and uses for adjusting all the different epochas, which is not without its inconveniences. Our author wrote some other works of inferior note before his death, at Aix, in Provence, June 7, 1699. His character is that of 'a very able historian, and a learned and candid critic. His style has all the simplicity and plainness which suits a chronological narration. He held a correspondence with several learned men, as Stillingfleet, Spanheim, Cuper, Dodwell, the cardinal Noris, &c.

, or rather Paget (Eusebius), a Puritan divine, was born at Cranford in Northamptonshire, about 1542, and at the age of twelve years came to Oxford, where he was first choirister, and afterwards student of Christ Church. He made, according to Wood, a considerable progress in logic and philosophy, but, although a noted sophister, left the university without taking a degree. As Wood passes immediately to his being presented to the rectory of St. Anne’s, Aldersgate-street, that biographer seems to have known nothing of the intermediate events. On his leaving Oxford, he became vicar of Oundle, and rector of 'Langton in his native county, where, in 1573, he was first prosecuted for nonconformity. He was afterwards preferred to the rectory of Kilkhampton in Cornwall, and although he had acquainted both his patron and ordinary that there were some things in the book of Common Prayer with which he could not comply, and they had promised, that if he would accept the cure, he should not be molested on that account, yet a prosecution was commenced against him, which ended in his losing all his preferments, and even a school which he attempted to establish for his maintenance. This appeared particularly hard in his case, as, according to every authority, he was “a learned, peaceable, and good divine, who had formerly complied with the customs and devotions of the church, and had been indefatigable in the ministry.” He appears to haye remained some years under ecclesiastical censure; but at last, in September 1604, was promoted to the rectory of St. Anne and St. Agnes, Aldersgate-street, which he held till his death in May 1617, in the seventy- fifth year of his age. His remains were interred in this church. An account of his prosecution may be seen in the Harleian Mss. 813, fol. 14, b. and an abridgment of it in Neal’s “History of the Puritans.” He was the author of a sermon “on Tithes” another “of Election” a Latin “Catechism,” Lond. 1591, 8vo a translation of Calvin’s “Harmony of the Gospels,” ibid. 1584, 4to; and “The History of the Bible, briefly collected, by way of question and answer.” It does not appear when this first appeared, but it was afterwards printed at the end of several of the old editions of the Bible.

He had a son Ephraim, who was born in 1575, and educated also at Christ Church, where he became so uncommon a proficient in languages, that at the age of twenty-six, he is said to have understood and written fifteen or sixteen, ancient and modern. His only preferment was to the church of St. Edmund the King, Lombard-street, London, from which he uas driven by the usurping party, for his loyalty. In religious sentiments he does not appear to have differed from his father; but he adhered to the king and constitution, which was then an unpardonable crime. He retired to Deptford in Kent, where he died in April 1647, aged seventy-two. In addition to the other causes of his sufferings, he wrote much against the Independents, baptists, and other sectaries, as appears by his “Iferesiography” yet, in 1645, two years before his death, he united with his brethren in London, in petitioning parliament for the establishment of the Presbyterian discipline, which he thought better than none. He wrote some books that are still valued as curiosities, particularly his “Christianographia, or a description of the multitudes and sundry sorts of Christians in theworld, not subject to the pope,” &c. Lond. 1635, 4to, often reprinted, with (in some of the editions) a “Treatise of the religion of the ancient Christians in Britany;” and his " Hasresiographia, or a description of the Heresies of later times,' 7 ibid. 1645, &c. 4to. Of this there have been at least four editions,

, an Italian of great skill in Oriental languages and biblical learning, was born at Lucca in 1466, and afterwards became an ecclesiastic of the order of St. Dominic, and resided for the greater part of his life at Lyons. He was deeply and accurately skilled in the Latin, Greek, Hebrew, Chaldee, and Arabic tongues, but especially in the Hebrew. In the course of his studies he was led to conceive that the Vulgate translation of the Scriptures was either not by Jerome, or greatly corrupted; and he therefore undertook to make a new one, following Jerom only where he conceived that his version corresponded with the original. This design, so very soon after the restoration of letters, is calculated to give us a very high opinion of Pagninus’s courage and learning, and appeared in so favourable a light to pope Leo X. that he promised to furnish him with all necessary expences for completing the work; and he was likewise encouraged in his labours by the succeeding popes, Hadrian VI. and Clement VII. who licensed the printing of it. It appears, by a letter of Picus Mirandula to Pagninus, that he had spent twenty-five years upon this translation. It is the first modern translation of the Bible from the Hebrew text; and the Jews who read it affirmed, that it agreed entirely with the Hebrew, and was as faithful, and more exact than the ancient translations. The great fault of Pagninus was, that he adhered too closely and servilely to the original text; and this scrupulous attachment made his translation, says father Simon, “obscure, barbarous, and full of solecisms. He imagined, that, to make a faithful translation of the Scriptures, it was necessary to follow exactly the letter, according to the strictness of grammar. This, however, is quite contrary to his pretended exactness, because two languages seldom agree in their ways of speaking; and therefore, instead of expressing the original in its proper purity, he defaces and robs it of its ornaments.” Father Simon, nevertheless, allows the great abilities and learning of Pagninus; and all the later commentators and translators of the Scriptures have agreed in giving him his just commendation. Huetius, though he seems to think father Simon’s criticism of him well grounded, yet makes no scruple to propose his manner as a model for all translators of the sacred books: “Scripture interpretandae rationibus utile nobis exemplar proposuit Sancius Pagninus.”

He afterwards translated the “New Testament” from the Greek, and dedicated it to pope Clement VII. It was printed with the former at Lyons in 1528. He was also the author of an “Hebrew Lexicon and an Hebrew Grammar; which Buxtorf, who calls him” Vir linguarum Orientalium peritissimus," made great use of in compiling his. He died in 1536, aged seventy. Saxius places his birth in 1471, and his death in 1541. Though he appears. to have lived and died a bigoted Catholic, Luther spoke of him, and his translations, in terms of the highest applause.

, a French Protestant divine, was born in 1626, and studied, with great success and approbation, at Saumur; after which he became minister of a place called Marchenoir in the province of Dunois. He was an able advocate against the popish party, as appears by his best work, against father Nicole, entitled “Examen du Livre qui porte pour titre, Prejugez legitimes centre les Calvinistes,” 2 vols. 1673, 12mo. Mosheim therefore very improperly places him in the class of those who explained the doctrines of Christianity in such a manner as to diminish the difference between the doctrines of the reformed and papal churches; since this work shews that few men. wrote at that time with more learning, zeal, and judgment against popery. Pajon, however, created some disturbance in the church, and became very unpopular, by explaining certain doctrines, concerning the influence of the Holy Spirit, in the Arminian way, and had a controversy with Jurieu on this subject. The consequence was, that Pajon, who had been elected professor of divinity at Saumur, found it necessary to resign that office after which he resided at Orleans, as pastor, and died there Sept. 27, 1685, in the sixtieth year of his age. He left a great many works in manuscript; none of which have been printed, owing partly to his unpopularity, but, perhaps, principally to his two sons becoming Roman Catholics. A full account of his opinions may be seen in Mosheim, or in the first of our authorities.

, a political and infidel writer of great notoriety, was born in 1737, at Thetford, in Norfolk. His father was a staymaker, a business which he himself carried on during his early years at London, Dover, and Sandwich. He afterwards became an exciseman and grocer, at Lewes in Sussex; and, upon the occasion of an election at Shoreham, in 1771, is said to have written an election song. In the following year he wrote a pamphlet, recommending an application to parliament for the“increase of the salaries of excisemen; but, for some misdemeanours, was himself dismissed from his office in 1774. In the mean time, the ability displayed in his pamphlet attracted the notice of one of the commissioners of excise, who sent him to America, with a strong recommendation to Dr. Franklin, as a person who could be serviceable at that time in America. What services were expected from him, we know not, but he arrived at a time when the Americans were prepared for the revolution which followed, and which he is supposed to have promoted, by scattering among the discontented his memorable pamphlet, entitled” Common Sense."

His first engagement in Philadelphia was with a bookseller, who employed him as editor of the Philadelphia Magazine, for which he had an annual salary of fifty pounds currency. When Dr. Rush of that city suggested to Paine the propriety of preparing the Americans lor a separation from Great Britain, he seized with avidity the idea, and immediately beg^n the above mentioned pamphlet, which, when finished, was shewn in manuscript to Dr. Franklin and Mr. Samuel Adams, and entitled, after some discussion, “Common Sense,” at the suggestion of Dr. Rush. For this he received from the legislature of Pennsylvania, the sum of 500l.; and soon after this, although devoid of every thing that could be called literature, he was honoured with a degree of M. A. from the university of Pennsylvania, and vvas chosen a member of the American Philosophical Society. In the title-page of his “Rights of Man,” he styled himself “Secretary for foreign affairs to the Congress of the United States, in the late war.” To this title*, however, he had no pretensions, and so thorough a republican ought at least to have avoided assuming what he condemned so vehemently in others. He was merely a clerk, at a very low salary, to a committee of the congress; and his business was to copy papers, and number and file them. From this office, however, insignificant as it was, he was dismissed for a scandalous breach of trust, and then hired himself as a clerk to Mr. Owen Biddle of Philadelphia; and early in \1&0, the assembly of Pennsylvania chose hiii) as cierk. fn 1782 he printed at Philadelphia, a letter to the abbé Raynal on the affairs of North Amer ca, in which he undertook to clear up the mistakes in Raynal’s account of the revolution; and in the same yer he also printed a letter to the earl of Shelburne, on his speech in parliament, July 10, 1782, in which that nobleman had prophesied that, “When Great Britain shall acknowledge American independence, the sun of Britain’s glory is set for ever.” It could not be difficult to answer such a prediction as this, which affords indeed a humiliating instance of want of political foresight. Great Britain did acknowledge American independence, and what is Great Britain now? In 1785, as a compensation for his revolutionary writings, congress granted him three thousand dollars, after having rejected with great indignation a motion for appointing him historiographer to the United States, with a salary. Two only of the states noticed by gratuities his revolutionary writings. Pennsylvania gave him, as we have mentioned, 500l. currency; and NewYork gave him an estate of more than three hundred acres, in high cultivation, which was perhaps the more agreeable to him, as it was the confiscated property of a royalist. lu 1787 he came to London, and before the end of that year published a pamphlet on the recent transactions’ between Great Britain and Holland, entitled “Prospects on the Rubicon.” In this, as may be expected, he censured the Cneasures of the English administration.

He had long cherished in his mind a most cordial hatred against his native country, and was now prepared in some measure for that systematic attack on her happiness which he carried on, at intervals, during the remainder of his life. Being released, in November 1789, from a sponging-house where he was confined for debt, he beheld with delight the proceedings of the French, and hastened to that country, but made no long stay at this time; and finding, on his return to London in 1790, Mr. Burke’s celebrated work on the French revolution, he produced, within a tew months, the first part of his “Rights of Man,” and in 17.')2, the second part. Had these been left to the natural demand of the public, it is probable they might have passed unnoticed by government, but the industry with which they were circulated by the democratic societies of that period, among the lower classes of society, betrayed intentions which it would have been criminal to overlook; and prosecutions were accordingly instituted against the author and publishers. The author made his escape to France, and never returned to this country more. His inveteracy against her establishments, however, continued unabated, and perhaps was aggravated by the verdict which expelled him from the only nation where he wished to propagate his disorganizing doctrines, and where he had at that time many abettors. When the proceedings of the latter had roused the loyal part of the nation to address the throne in behalf of our constitution, Paine published “A Letter to the Addressers,” the object of which was to procure a national convention in contempt of the parliament. This likewise was circulated by his partizans with no small industry. In the mean time, although ignorant of the French language, he was chosen a member of the French convention, and in consistency with his avowed malignity, gave his vote for a declaration of war against Great Britain. His adopted country, however, was not very grateful for his services, for when Robespierre gained the ascendancy, he sent Paine, with that mad enthusiast Anacharsis Cloots, to prison at the Luxemburgb, and Paine narrowly escaped being guillotined, amidst the hundreds who then underwent that fate, or were murdered in other ways.

The closing scene of his life, as related by his medical attendant, Dr. Manley, is too instryctive and admonitory to be omitted. “During the latter part of his life,” says this physician, “though his conversation was equivocal, his conduct was singular. He would not be left alone night or day. He not only required to have some person with him, but he must see that he or she was there, and would not allow his curtain to be closed at any time; and if, as it would sometimes unavoidably happen, he was left alone, he would scream and holla, until some person came to him. When relief from pain would admit, he seemed thoughtful and contemplative, his eyes being generally closed, and his hands folded upon his breast, although he never slept without the assistance of an anodyne. There was something remarkable in his conduct about this period (which comprises about two weeks immediately preceding his death), particularly when we reflect, that Thomas Paine was author of the” Age of Reason." He would call out during his paroxysms of distress, without intermission, ‘ O Lord help -me, God help me, Jesus Christ help me, O Lord help me,’ &c. repeating the same expression without any the least var ation, in a tone of voice that would alarm the house. It was this conduct which induced me to think that he had abandoned his former opinions; and I was more inclined to that belief, when I understood from his nurse (who is a very serious, and, I believe, pious woman,) that he would occasionally inquire, when he saw her engaged with a book, what she was reading, and being answered, and at the same time asked whether she should read aloud, he assented, and would appear to give particular attention. The book she usually read was * Hobart’s Companion for the Altar/

On the 8th of June, 1809, about nine in the morning, died this memorable man, aged seventy-two years and five months; who at the close of the eighteenth century had well nigh persuaded the common people of England to think> that all was wrong in that government and that religion which their forefathers had transmitted to them, and under which they had enjoyed so many blessings. He had the merit of discovering, that the best way of diffusing discontent and revolutionary fanaticism was by a broad display, in their naked and barbarous forms, of those infidel and anarchical elements, which sophistry had, till his time, refined above the perceptions of the vulgar. By stripping the mischief of the dress, though still covering it with the name and boast of philosophy, he rendered it as familiar to the capacity as it was flattering to the passions of the mob; and easy to be understood in proportion to the ascendancy of the baser qualities of the mind.

In perusing a man’s writings, a picture of the author himself is sometimes insensibly drawn in the imagination of the reader. By the perusal of the works of Thomas Paine, a most disgusting idea is presented to our thoughts both of the man and his manners. This idea is completely verified by the account which Mr. Cheetham has given us of his person and deportment. The paintings of Zeuxis attained a sort of ideal perfection by combining the scattered excellencies of the human countenance to conceive the countenance, or the mind, of Mr. Thomas Paine, now that death has withdrawn the living model, we must condense into an imaginary focus all the offensiveness and malignity that are dispersed throughout actual existence. Mr. Cheetham seems to have no hostility towards the man, and to be disposed to draw no inferences against him but what fairly arise from the facts. We may add too, that his facts appear to be collected from very credible sources of intelligence; from persons with whom Paine passed great part of his existence; and who, though not appearing to have much intercourse together, agree in the substance of their communications on this subject.

was a Greek philosopher, of whom a treatise in explication of ancient fables has been several times reprinted in Greek and Latin; the best edition is that of Fischer, Lips. 1761. But little is known of him, and there are several ancient writers of this name; one an Athenian, placed by the poets before the time of Homer; one a native of Puros, who lived under Artaxerxes Mnemon; and one, a grammarian and philosopher, born at Athens or in Egypt, posterior to Aristotle. Which of these is author of the work already noticed, is not at all certain.

, an excellent writer in the sixteenth century, was born at Veroli, in the Campagna di Roma, and descended of noble and ancient families by both his parents. He was baptised by the name of Anthony, which according to the custom of the times, he altered to the classical form of Aonius. He applied himself early to the Greek and Latin languages, in which he made great progress, and then proceeded to philosophy and divinity. The desire he had of knowledge, prompted him to travel through the greatest part of Italy; and to listen to the instructions of the most famous professors in every place he visited. His longest residence was at Rome, where he continued for six years, till that city was taken by Charles V. when the disorders committed by the troops of that prince leaving no hopes of enjoying tranquillity, he resolved to depart, and retire to Tuscany. He had at this time a great inclination to travel into France, Germany, and even as far as Greece; but the narrowness of his fortune would not admit of this. On his arrival in Tuscany, he chose Sienna for his abode, to which he was induced by the pleasantness of the situation, and the sprightliness and sagacity of the inhabitants: and accordingly he sold his estate at Veroli, with the determination never to see a place any more, where, though he was born, yet he was not beloved. He purchased a country-house in the neighbourhood of Sienna, called Ceciniano, and pleased himself with the fancy of its having formerly belonged to Cecina, one of Cicero’s clients. Here he proposed to retire on his leisure- days, and accordingly embellished it as much as. possible. At Sienna he married ajoung woman, of whom he was passionately fond, and who brought him four children, two boys and two girls. He was also professor of polite letters, and had a great number of pupils.

But his career was disturbed by a quarrel he had with one of his colleagues, who was enraged to see his own reputation eclipsed by the superior lustre of Palearius. We are not told the particular point upon which the contest commenced; but it is certain that our professor was defended by Peter Aretin, who, perhaps more to revenge his own cause, or gratify a detracting humour, than from any respect for Palearius, composed, against his envious rival, an Italian comedy or farce, which was acted upon the stage at Venice; and so poignant was the ridicule, that the subject of it thought proper to quit Sienna, and retire to Lucca. Hither he was followed some time after, though with much reluctance, by Palearius, concerning which we have the following account: Anthony Bellantes, a nobleman of Sienna, being impeached of several misdemeanors, employed Palearius to plead his cause, who made so excellent a speech before the senate of that city in his defence, that he was acquitted and dismissed; but, the same nobleman having some time after accused certain monks of robbing his grandmother, employed his advocate again to support the charge. The monks accused, making oath of their innocence, were cleared by the court, but were incensed at the prosecution, and aspersed Palearius both in their sermons, and on all other occasions, as an impious wretch, unfit to be harboured in a Christian country. They also declared him a heretic, because he disapproved several superstitious practices; neither did they approve of the book he had written on the “Death of Christ.” Palearius, however, defended himself with so much strength of reason and eloquence, that the accusations were dropped. Yet finding himself still exposed to vexatious persecutions, he thought proper to accept of an invitation to teach polite literature at Lucca.

Although he had here a handsome gratuity, and was only to attend his scholars one hour in the twenty-four, yet it was entirely owing to the expences of his family that he engaged in this employment, which was otherwise irksome to him. He passed, however, some years at Lucca, before he obtained the offer of several immunities, and a handsome stipend from the magistrates of Milan, where he hoped that he was now settled in peace for life, but the event proved otherwise. Paul V. who had been a Dominican monk, coming to the pontificate in 1566, determined to show his bigotry against every thing that had the appearance of heresy, and therefore ordered the cause of Palearius to be re-heard. On which Palearius was suddenly arrested at Milan, and carried to Rome, where they found it not difficult to convict him of having said “That the German doctors who followed Luther were to be commended in respect to some points; and that the court of the inquisition was erected for the destruction of men of learning.” He was then condemned to be burnt, which sentence was executed the same year, 1566. He was greatly respected by the most eminent scholars of his time, such as Bembusj Sadoletus, Sfondratus, Philonardus, cardinals; Benedictus Lampridius, Anthony Flaminius, and Andreas Alciatus; besides others, whose names may be seen in the catalogue to the last edition of his “Letters,” containing the names of his literary correspondents.

, a learned Italian cardinal, descended from an illustrious family, was born at Bologna, Oct. 4, 1524. He was intended for the profession of the civil and canon law, in which some of his family had acquired fame, and he made great progress in that and other studies. His talents very early procured him a canonry of Bologna; after which he was appointed professor of civil law, and obtained the title of the new Alciatus from his emulating the judgment and taste of that learned writer. Some business requiring his presence at Rome, he was appointed by ca'rdinal Alexander Farnese, who had been his fellow-student at Bologna, and who was then perpetual legate of Avignon, governor of Vaisson, in the county of Venaissin, but hearing of the death of his mother, he made that a pretence for declining the office, and therefore returned to his professorship at Bologna. The Farnese family were, however, determined to serve him in spite of his modesty, and in 1557 obtained for him the post of auditor of the rota. When Pope Pius IV. opened the council of Trent, Paleotti was made proctor and counsellor to his legates, who, in truth, did nothing of importance without his advice. Of this council Paleotti wrote a history, which still remains in ms. and of which Pallavicini is said to have availed himself in his history. After this council broke up he resumed his functions at Rome, where in 1565 he was raised to the dignity of the purple by Pius IV. and by Pius V. he was created bishop of Bologna, but the see upon this occasion was erected into an archbishopric to do honour both to Paleotti and his native country. Being a conscientious man, he was always so assiduous in the duties of his diocese, that it was with the greatest reluctance the popes summoned him to attend the consistories and other business at Rome. He died at Rome, July 23, 1597, aged seventy-three. He was author of several works of considerable merit, on subjects in antiquities, jurisprudence, and morals. Of these the most considerable are the following: “Archiepiscopale Bonnoniense” “De imagiriibus Sacris, et Profanis,” 1582, 4to, in Italian; and in Latin, 1594; “De Sacri Consistorii Consultationibus” “De Nothis, Spuriisque Filiis,” Francfort, 1573, 8vo; “De Bono Senectutis” Pastoral Letters, &c.

, called by Dr. Burney the Homer of the most ancient music that has been preserved, was, as his name imports, a native of the ancient Proeneste, now corruptly called Palestrina, and is supposed to have been born some time in 1529. All the Italian writers who have mentioned him, say he was the scholar of Gaudio Mell. Fiamingo, by which name they have been, generally understood to mean Claude Goudimel, of whom we have given some account in vol. XVI.; but this seems doubtful, nor is there any account of his life on which reliance can be placed. All that we know with certainty is, that about 1555, when he had distinguished himself as a composer, he was admitted into the Pope’s chapel, at Rome; in 1562, at the age of thirty three, he was elected maestro di capella of Santa Maria Maggiore, in the same city; in 1571 was honoured with a similar appointment at St. Peter’s; and lastly, having brought choral harmony to a degree of perfection that has never since been exceeded, he died in 1594, at the age of sixty-five. Upon his coffin was this inscription, “Johannes Petrus Aloysius Praenestinus Musicae Princeps.”

By the assistance of signor Santarelli, Dr. Burney procured at Rome a complete catalogue of all the genuine productions of Palestrina, which may be classed in the following manner: masses in four, five, and six parts, twelve books; of which lib i. appeared at Rome in folio, 1554, when the author was in the twenty-fifth year of his age; and in that city only went through three several editions during his life. Lib. ii. of his masses, which includes the celebrated composition entitled “Missa Papse Marcelli,” was published likewise at Rome, in 1567. -Of this production it has been related by Antimo Liberati, and after him by Adami, Berardi, and other musical writers, that the pope and conclave having been offended and scandalized at the light and injudicious manner in which the mass had been long set and performed, ^determined to banish music in parts entirely from the church; but that Palestrina, at the age of twenty-six, during the short pontificate of Marcellus Cervinus, intreated his holiness to suspend the execution of his design till he had heard a mass composed in what, according to his ideas, was the true ecclesiastical style. His request being granted, the composition, in six parts, was performed at Easter 1555, before the pope and college of cardinals, who found it so grave, noble, elegant, learned, and pleasing, that music was restored to favour, and again established in the celebration of sacred rites. This mass was afterwards printed, and dedicated to the successor of Marcellus, pope Paul IV. by whom Palestrina was appointed chapel-master.

, a very celebrated English divine, and one of the most successful writers of his time, was born at Peterborough in July 1743, and was educated by his father, who was the head master of Giggleswick school, in Yorkshire, vicar of Helpstone in Northamptonshire, and a minor canon of Peterborough. In his earliest days he manifested a taste for solid knowledge, and a peculiar activity of mind. In Nov. 1758 he was admitted a sizar of Christ’s college, Cambridge, and before he went to reside there was taught the mathematics by Mr. William Howarth, a master of some eminence at Dishworth, near Rippon. In December 1759, soon after he took up his residence in the university, he obtained a scholarship, and applied to his studies with such diligence as to make a distinguished figure in the public schools, particularly when he took his bachelor’s degree in 1763. He was afterwards employed for about three years as assistant at an academy at Greenwich; in 1765 he obtained the first prize for a prose Latin dissertation; the subject proposed was “A comparison between the Stoic and Epicurean philosophy, with respect to the influence of each on the morals of a people,” in which he took the Epicurean side.

While at Appleby, he published a small volume selected from the Book of Common Prayer, and the writings of some eminent divines, entitled “The Clergyman’s Comr panion in visiting the Sick.” This useful work at first appeared without his name, but it has passed through nine editions, and is now printed among his works. In June 1780, he was collated to the fourth prebendal stall in the cathedral church of Carlisle, and thus became coadjutor in the chapter to his friend Mr. Law, who was now archdeacon; but in 1782, upon Dr. Law’s being created an Irish bishop, Mr. Paley was made archdeacon of the diocese, and in 1785, he succeeded Dr. Burn, author of “The Justice of Peace,” in the chancellorship. For these different preferments he was indebted either to the venerable bishop of Carlisle, Dr. Law, or to the dean and chapter of the cathedral church. While his residence was divided between Carlisle and Dalston, Mr. Paley engaged in the composition of his celebrated work, “The Elements of Moral and Political Philosophy;” but hesitated long as to the publication, imagining there would be but fewreaders for such a work; and he was the more determined on this point after he had entered on the married state, thinking it a duty that he owed his family to avoid risking any extraordinary expense. To remove this last objection, Dr. John Law presented a living then in his gift to Mr. Paley, on the promise that he would consider it as a compensation for the hazard of printing, and he immediately set about preparing his work for the press, which appeared in 1785, in quarto. Of a work * so generally known and admired, and so extensively circulated, it would be unnecessary to say much. Although the many editions which came rapidly from the press stamped no ordinary merit on it, yet some of his friends appear to have not been completely gratified. They expected, that from his intimacy with Jebb, and the latitudinarian party at Cambridge, he would have brought forward those sentiments which Jebb in vain endeavoured to disseminate while at the university; and they were surprized to find that his reasoning on subscription to articles of religion, and on the British constitution, in which he not only disputes the expediency of reform in the House of Commons, but vindicates the influence of the crown in that branch of parliament, was diametrically opposite to their opinions and wishes.

, an Italian poet, who flourished in the sixteenth century, was born at Stellada, in Ferrara, upon the bank of the Po. We are told by some, that his true name was Pietro Angelo Manzolli, of which “Marcello Palingenio” is the anaigram . He is chiefly known by his “Zodiacus Vitae,” a poem in twelve books, dedicated to Hercules II. of Este, duke of Ferrara. Some say he was physician to that prince, but this will admit of a doubt; at least it is certain he was not so when he wrote the dedication to his “Zodiac.” This poem, on which he had employed several years, brought him into trouble, as it contained many sarcastic attacks on monks and church-abuses and his name therefore appears in the “Index librorum prohibitorum,” as a Lutheran heretic of the Brst class, and as an impious author. It is thought, he carries too far the objections of libertines and scoffers at religion; otherwise his work is interspersed with judicious maxims, and some have considered it as a truly philosophical satire against immorality and prejudice. In the close of the dedication, he declares himself a good catholic, so far as to submit all his opinions to the censure of the church; and this declaration might perhaps have secured him against the inquisition, had the affair related only to some particular tenet; but it could not acquit him of that impiety, which Palingenius was, not without reason, suspected to teach. In his third book, for instance, he inculcates the doctrine of Epicurus without the least reserve. He published this book in 1536, and again at Basil, in1537 ; and seems not to have lived long after that date. Gyraldus, who wrote about 1543, relates, that, after his burial, his body was ordered to be dug up, in order to be burnt; which execution was prevented by the duchess of Ferrara, who, it is thought, had received him at her court among the Lutherans.

, an ingenious artist, was born at Agen in France, about 1524. He was brought up as a common labourer, and was also employed in surveying. Though destitute of education, he was a very accurate observer of nature; and in the course of his surveys, he conceived the notion that France had been formerly covered by the sea, and propagated his opinion at Paris, against a host of opponents, with the greatest boldness. It was considered as a species of heresy. For several years after, he employed himself in trying different experiments, in order to discover the method of painting in enamel. But some person presenting him with a beautiful cup of that kind of stone-ware called by the French faience, because it was first manufactured in a city of Italy called Faenza, the sight of this cup inflamed him with an insurmountable desire to discover the method of applying enamel to stoneware. At this time he was ignorant of even the first rudiments of the art of pottery, nor was there any person within, his reach from whom he could procure information. His experiments were, therefore, unsuccessful, and he wasted his whole fortune, and even injured his health, without gaining his object. Still he gave it up only for a time, and when a few years of industry and frugality had put it in his power, he returned to his project with more ardour than ever. The same fatigues, the same sacrifices, the same expences Were incurred a second time, but the result was different. He discovered, one after another, the whole series of operations, and ascertained the method of applying enamel to stone-ware, and of making earthenware superior to the best of the Italian manufacture. He was now treated with respect, and considered as a man of genius. The court of France took him under its protection, and enabled him to establish a manufactory, where the manufacture of the species of stone-ware which he had invented was brought to a state of perfection. The only improvement which was made upon it afterwards in France, was the application of different colours upon the enamel, and imitating the paintings which had been executed long before on porcelain vessels. This improvement scarcely dates farther back than thirty or forty years. It was first put in practice by Joseph Hanon, a native of Strasbourg, and was suggested by a German, who sold to Hanon the method of composing the colours applied upon the porcelain of Saxony. These vessels were soon after superseded by the Queen’s ware of the celebrated Wedgewood, which both in cheapness, beauty, and elegance of form, far surpassed any thing of the kind that had appeared in Europe.

After Palissy had thus succeeded in his favourite object, he pursued the science of chemistry, and applied his knowledge to the improvement of agriculture. He was the first person who formed a collection of natural history at Paris, upon which he gave lectures at the rate of half a crown each person, a large sum for that period, but he entered into an obligation to return the money fourfold, provided it were found that he taught any thing that proved false. In 1563 he printed at Rochelle “Recepte veritable par laquelle tous les hommes de la France pourront apprendre a augmenter leur tresors,” &c. which, after his death, was reprinted under the title of “Moyen de devenir riche,” in 2 vols. 8vo. In 1580 he published “Discours admirable de la Nature des Eaux, et Fontaines, de Metaux, des Sols, des Saline, des Pierres, des Terres,” &c. This work was exceedingly valuable in the then existing state of knowledge, and in it he first taught the true theory of springs, and asserted that fossil-shells were real sea- shells deposited by the waters of the ocean. He also pointed out the use of marie and of lime in agriculture.

, a celebrated Italian architect, was born in 1518 at Vicenza in Lombardy. As soon as he had learned the principles of art from Trissino, the celebrated poet, who was his townsman, he went to Rome, and applying himself with great diligence to study the ancient monuments, he entered into the spirit of their architects, and formed his taste upon them. On his return he was employed to construct various edifices, and obtained great reputation throughout Italy, which abounds in monuments of his skill, particularly the palace Foscari, at Venice, and the Olympic theatre at Vicenza, where he died in 1580. He excelled likewise in the theory of his art, as appears by his publications, which are still in the highest reputation. His first was his treatise on architecture, “I quattro libri dell' Architettura,” Venice, 1570. This has been often reprinted, and our country has the merit of a very splendid edition, published at London in 1715, in English, Italian, and French, 2 or 3 vols. fol. This edition, published by Leoni, is enriched with the most valuable of the notes which Inigo Jones wrote on his copy of the original, now in the library of Worcester college, Oxford. A French edition of the London one was published by Nic. du Bois, at the Hague in 1726, 2 vols. fol.; and in 1740, one much enlarged in Italian and French, at Venice, 5 vols. fol. This has been more recently followed by Scamozzi’s fine edition in Italian and French, printed at Vicenza, 1776—83, 4 vols. fol. In 1730, our countryman, lord Burlington, printed an elegant work, entitled “Fabriche antiche designate da Andrea Palladio, e date in luce da Riccardo Conte de Burlington,” fol. This collection of Palladio' s designs is very scarce, as the noble editor printed only a limited number of copies for his friends. Palladio also composed a small work, entitled “Le Antichita di Roma,” not printed till after his death. He illustrated Caesar’s “Commentaries,” by annexing to Badelli’s translation of that work, a preface on the military system of the Romans, with copper-plates, designed, for the most part, by his two sons, Leonida and Orazio, who both died soon after. Palladio was modest in regard to his own merit, but he was the friend to all men of talents; his memory is highly honoured by the votaries of the fine arts; and the simplicity and purity of his taste have given, him the appellation of the Raphael of architects.

, a celebrated naturalist, the son of Simon Pallas, professor of surgery at Berlin, was born in that city, Sept. 22, 1741, and educated at first under private tutors, who spoke with astonishment of the progress he made. So early as the fifteenth year of his age, he entered upon a course of lectures on medicine and the branches connected with it; and two years afterwards was enabled to read a course of public lectures on anatomy. Yet while thus occupied in his professional labours, he found leisure to prosecute the study of insects, and other classes of zoology, for which he seems to have very early conceived a predilection, and in which he particularly excelled. In the autumn of 1758 he went to the university of Halle, and in 1759 to Gottingen; and during his residence at the latter, among other ingenious researches, his attention was drawn to the worms which breed in the intestines. This produced a treatise entitled “De infestis viventibus intra viventia,” in which he has with singular accuracy described those worms which are found in the human body.

The intimacy he now contracted with the most celebrated naturalists in Holland, and particularly with those of the Hague, who had just begun to form a literary society the free access which he had to the museum of the prince of Orange, and other curious cabinets; the systematic catalogues of those collections that he drew up, and several of which he gave to the public; contributed to advance his knowledge of the productions of nature in the various parts of the globe, and enabled him to collect such materials as gave birth to those accurate compositions on zoology, which have deservedly distinguished him as the first zoologist of Europe. One of his earliest works in this branch of science, which rendered him eminently conspicuous, was his “Elenchus- Zoophytorum.” In a dedication prefixed to his “Miscellanea Zoologica,” published in the same year, the author lays before the prince of Orange a plan for a voyage to the Cape of Good Hope, and to the other Dutch settlements in the East Indies, and which, impelled by his wonted ardour for scientific knowledge, he offered to undertake and superintend. This project was strongly recommended by Gaubius, and approved by the prince; but was prevented from being carried into execution by the author’s father; who not only refused his consent to his taking such a distant expedition, but even recalled him to Berlin: in obedience to his father’s wishes, but with great reluctance, he quitted Holland in November 1766.

He made his appearance among the Russians at a critical period. The empress had already ordered the Academy of Sciences to send astronomers into various parts of the Russian empire, to observe the transit of Venus over the sun’s disk in 1769. Being just returned from a voyage down the Volga, and from visiting the interior provinces of European Russia, she had perceived the deficiencies of the topographical and geographical accounts, and anticipated the advantage of deputing learned and skilful men to visit the distant provinces of her extensive dominions. For this purpose Catharine had directed the academy to send, in company with the astronomers, the most able naturalists and philosophers. Pallas instantly offered to accompany this expedition; and was as eagerly accepted. He was immediately charged with drawing out general instructions for the naturalists, and was gratified with the choice of his associates. To him was submitted, at his own request, the conduct of the expedition to the east of the Volga, and towards the extreme parts of Siberia; and he was the most calculated for that expedition, as the elder Gmelin, who had been his precursor in those regions, had almost entirely neglected the zoology of those remote districts. Pallas employed the winter previous to his departure in forming a systematic catalogue of the animals in the cabinet of the Academy of Sciences; in putting into order the celebrated collection of professor Breyn of Dantzic, lately purchased by prince Orlof; in preparing for the press six numbers of his “Spicilegia Zoologica,” which were printed during his absence, under the direction of Dr. Martin; and in forming the necessary arrangements and notices for his intended expedition.

The account of this extensive and interesting tour was published by Dr. Pallas in five volumes, 4to, which greatly extended his fame, and established his character. The author, in this valuable work, has entered into a geographical and topographical description of the provinces, towns, and villages, which he visited in his tour, accompanied with an accurate detail of their antiquities, history, productions, and commerce. He has discriminated many of the tribes who wander over the various districts, and near the confines of Siberia; and specified with peculiar precision their customs, manners, and languages; he has also rendered his travels invaluable to the naturalist, by the many important discoveries in the animal, vegetable, and mineral kingdoms, with which he has enriched the science of natural history.

Two years afterwards, in 1776, the professor published his collections relative to the political, physical, and civil history of the Mongul tribes; in which he throws new light on the annals of a people, whose ancestors conquered Russia, China, Persia, and Hindoostan, and, at more than one period, established perhaps a larger empire than ever was possessed by any single nation. Mr. Pallas here proves unquestionably that the Mongul tribes are a distinct race from the Tartars; that they differ from them in their features, language, and government; and resemble them in nothing except in a similar propensity to a roving life. He intended a second volume, describing their religious establishment, consisting in the worship of the Dalai Lama. It is the religion of Thibet and of the Mandshur sovereigns who now sit upon the throne of China. “A work,” as Mr. Tooke, in his Russia Illustrata, Introd. p. cxi. justly observes, " that will enrich the stock of human knowledge with discoveries, the greatest part entirely new, and which no person but Mr. Pallas is able to communicate. 1 * Whether, however, this second volume ever made its appearance, we have our doubts.

In the same year in which Dr. Pallas printed his “Elenchus Zoophytorum,” he also published a treatise under the title of “Miscellanea Zoologica quibus novae imprimis atque obscurae animalium species describuntur, et observationibus iconibusque illustrantur.” This work is in a great measure incorporated into a subsequent publication made the next year on his return to Berlin, entitled “Spicilegia Zoologica,” and was continued in numbers, or fasciculi, till 1780. The works of count Buffon, the illustrious French zoologist, amply attest the labours of Pallas; and our countryman Mr. Pennant makes frequent acknowledgments of his obligations to the same source, particularly for his history of quadrupeds and arctic zoology. In June 1777, the learned professor read before the academy of Petersburgh, in a meeting at which the king of Sweden was present, a dissertation on the formation of mountains, and the changes which this globe has undergone, more particularly as it appears in the Russian empire. This treatise appeared so curious to Mr. Tooke, who was also, as a member of the academy, present at that sitting, that he has given 3 translation of it in his “Russia Illustrata.” In 1778 the doctor published “Novae species quadrupedum e Gliriumordine,” describing numbers of the rat genus and their anatomy. In 1781 he brought out “Enumeratio plantarum quae in horto Procopii & Demidof Moscua vigent,” or catalogue of the plants in M Demidofs gardens at Moscow. His newnorthern collections on various subjects in geography, natural history, and agriculture, came forth the same year; to which were afterwards added two more volumes. In 1782 he put forth two fasciculi or numbers of “Icones insectarum prsesertim Russiae Siberieeque peculiarium.” In 1784 he published the first number of his “Flora Russica;” a splendid work, executed at the empress Catharine’s expence. About this period her majesty conceived the idea of collecting from all quarters of the globe a universal vocabulary, the superintendance whereof she committed to our author, which necessarily for a time retarded his zoological researches. Exclusive of these separate publications, he printed in the acts of the imperial academy of sciences, various zoological and botanical dissertations.

Not long after this he was distinguished by a peculiar mark of imperial favour, in being appointed member of the board of mines, with an additional salary of 200l. per annum, and honoured with the order of St. Vlodimir. The empress also purchased his ample collection of natural history, in a manner highly flattering to the author, and honourable to herself. She riot only gave hi.n five thousand rubles more than he had valued it at, but informed him that it should remain in his possession during his life. In 1784 the care of putting in order and publishing the papers of Gmelin and proft ssor Gultenstaedt, was consigned to Dr. Pallas, which he executed with great diligence and accuracy; but, for some reason, the first volume only of Gultenstaedt’s remains has appeared. In 1794, Dr. Palias travelled to the Crimea, and on his return published his “Physical and Topographical picture of Tauri;!a.” On his’ return, finding his health, by long and incessant labours, upon the decline, so as to render it necessary for him to remove to a warm climate, he pitched upon Taurida, and his munificent patroness, the empress, granted him an estate in that province, and gave him a present of 10,000 rubles towards his establishment. Here in 1800 he was visited by Dr. Clarke, who in his late travels, has given some interesting particulars of his interviews with him. It does not appear that Dr. Pallas was judicious in selecting this place as one in which health could be promoted, nor was he in other respects without disappointments which embittered his declining days. He survived Dr. Clarke’s departure, however, upwards of ten years, when determining once more to see his brother and his native city, he took a journey to Berlin, where he died Sept. 8, 1811, in the 71st year of his age. The collection of dried plants, made by Pallas for his own use, was purchased of him by Mr. Cripps, the companion of Dr. Clarke, and now forms a part of the valuable museum of A. B. Lambert, esq.

, one of the wits of Italy, the son of Jerome Pallavicino, was born at Placentia about 1615, or from that to 1620. Less from inclination, than from some family reasons, he entered the congregation of the regular canons of Latran, and took the habit, with the name of Mark Anthony, in their house at Milan. After commencing his studies here with much success, he went to Padua for further proficiency. He then settled at Venice, where he was chosen a member of the academy of the Incogniti. Here he became captivated by a courtezan, whoso charms proved irresistible; and, in order to have the lull enjoyment of them without restraint, he obtained leave from his general to make the tour of France, but in fact continued privately at Venice, while he had the art to impose upon his friends, by sending them frequently, in letters, feigned accounts of his travels through France. He afterwards went to Germany, about 1639, with duke Amalfi in the character of his chaplain. During this residence in Germany, which lasted about sixteen months, he addicted himself to every species of debauchery; and having a turn for satire, employed his pen in repeated attacks on the court of Rome in general, and on the Barbarini family in particular. The chief vehicle of his satire was a publication called “The Courier robbed of his mail,” and this as well as his other works contained so many just censures of the abuses of the court of Rome, that he might have been ranked among those honourable men who had contributed to enlighten his countrymen, had he not been as remarkable for his indecencies, which were so gross that many of his works were obliged to be published under concealed names. His personal attacks on the pope, and the Barbarini family, naturally roused their indignation; and after much search for him, one Charles Morfu, a Frenchman of a vile character, engaged to ensnare him, and having insinuated himself into his friendship, at length exhorted him to go with him to France. He flattered him with the extraordinary encouragement which was given to men of letters by cardinal Richelieu; and, to deceive him the more, even produced feigned letters from the cardinal, inviting our author to France, and expressing a desire he had to establish in Paris an academy for the Italian tongue, under the direction of Pallavicino. Pallavicino, young, thoughtless, and desperate, and now fascinated by the prospect of gain, left Venice much against the advice of his friends, and went first to Bergamo, where he spent a few days with some of his relations, who entertained his betrayer. They then set out for Geneva, to the great satisfaction of our author, who proposed to get some of his works printed there, which he had not been able to do in Italy. But Morfu, instead of conducting him to Paris, took the road to Avignon; where, crossing the bridge of Soraces, in the county of Venaissin (in the pope’s territories), they were seized by officers on pretence of carrying contraband goods, and confined. Morfu was soon discharged, and liberally rewarded; but Pallavicini, being carried to Avignon, was thrown into prison; and, after being kept there for some months, was brought to trial, and was beheaded in 1643 or 1644. Those who are desirous of farther information respecting this young man’s unfortunate history, may be amply gratified in the prolix: articles drawn up by Bayle, and particularly Marclmnd. His works were first published collectively at Venice, in 1655, 4 vols. 12mo. This edition, according to Marchand, contains only such of his works as had been permitted to beprinted in his life-time. Those which had been prohibited were afterwards printed in 2 vols. 12 mo, at Villafranca, a fictitious name for Geneva, 1660. Among these is a piece called “II divortio Celeste,” which some deny to be his. It is a very coarse satire on the abuses of the Romish church, and was translated and published in English in 1679, under the title of “Ciirist divorced from the church of Rome because of their lewdness,” Lond. 8vo.

, an eminent cardinal, was the son of the marquis Alexander Pallavicini and Frances Sforza, and born at Rome in 1607. Although the eldest son of his family, yet he chose the ecclesiastical life, and was very early made a bishop by pope Urban VIII. to whom his conduct was so acceptable, that he was appointed one of those prelates who assist in the assemblies called congregations at Rome. He was also received into the famous academy of the Humoristi, among whom he often sat in quality of president. He was likewise governor of Jesi, and afterwards of Orvietto and Camerino, under the above pontiff. But all these honours and preferments were insufficient to divert him from a design he had for some time formed of renouncing the world, and entering into the society of the Jesuits, where he was admitted in 1638. As soon as he had completed his noviciate he taught philosophy, and then theology. At length Innocent X. nominated him to examine into divers matters relating to the pontificate; and Alexander VII. created him a cardinal in 1657. This pope was an old friend of Pallavicino, who had been serviceable to him when he came to Rome with the name of Fabio Chigi. Pallavicino had even contributed to advance his temporal fortune, and had received him into the academy of the Humoristi; in gratitude for which, Chigi addressed to him some verses, printed in his book entitled “Philomathi Museb juveniles.” When Pallavicino obtained a place in the sacred college, he was also appointed at the same time examiner of the bishops; and he was afterwards a member of the congregation of the holy office, i. e. the inquisition, and of that of the council, &c. His promotion to the cardinalate wrought no change in his manner of life, which was devoted to study or to the duties of his office. He died in 1667, in his sixtieth year.

, was of the same family with the preceding cardinal, and merits a brief notice here, as being in some degree connected with our history, although the figure he makes in it has not been thought the most reputable. The family of Pallavicino, or, as sometimes spelt, Palavicini, is one of the most noble and ancient in Italy, and its branches have extended to Rome, Genoa, and Lombardy. Many of them appear to have attained the highest ranks in church, state, and commerce. Sir Horatio, the subject of this article, belonged to the Genoese branch, and was born in that city, but leaving Italy, went to reside in the Low Countries, whence, after marrying two wives, one a person of low birth, whom he did not acknowledge, and the other a lady of distinction, he came over to England, with a recommendation to queen Mary, probably from a relation, one Rango Pallavicino, who belonged to Edward Vlth’s household. Mary, who had then restored the Roman catholic religion, appointed Horatio collector of the papal taxes to be gathered in this kingdom; but at her death, having a large sum of money in his hands, he abjured the religion of Rome, and thought it no harm to keep the money. This transaction, however, does not appear to have much injured his character, or perhaps time had effaced the remembrance of it, for in 1586 queen Elizabeth gave him a. patent of denization, and in the following year honoured him with knighthood. He appears to have been a man of courage, and warmly espoused the interests of the nation at a most critical period. In 1588 he fitted out and commanded a ship against the Spanish armada, and must have rendered himself conspicuous on that occasion, as his portrait is given in the tapestry in the House of Lords, among the patriots and skilful commanders who assisted in defeating that memorable attack on the liberty of England. The queen also employed him in negociations with the German princes, and in raising loans, by which he very opportunely assisted her, and improved his own fortune. He died immensely rich, July 6, 1600, and was buried in the church of Baberham, in Cambridgeshire, near which, at Little Shelford, he had built a seat, in the Italian style, with piazzas. He had likewise two considerable manors in Essex, and provbably. landed property in other counties. His widow, about a year after his death, married sir Oliver Cromwell, K. B. and his only daughter, Baptina, was married to Henry Cromwell, esq. son to this sir Oliver, who was uncle to the usurper. He left three sons, but the family is now unknown in England.

, historiographer, printer, and bookseller to the king, and genealogist of the duchy of Burgundy, was born at Paris, March 19, 1608. In his youth he showed a taste for genealogy, and heraldic studies, in which he appears to have been instructed and encouraged by his relation, Louvain Gelliot, who published a work on armorial bearings. In his twenty -fifth year he settled at Dijon, where he married Vivanda Spirinx, the daughter of a printer and bookseller, with whom he entered into business. At his leisure hours, however, he still continued his heraldic researches, and laboured with so much perseverance in this study as to produce the following works: 1. “Le parlement de Bourgogne, avec les armoiries,” &c. 1660, fol. 2. “Genealogie des comtes d'Amanze,” fol. 3. “La vraie et parfaite science des Armoiries de Gelliot, avec de plus de 6000 ecussons,” 1660, fol. 4. “Histoire genealogique de comtes de Chamilli.” 5. " Extraits de la hambre des comptes de Bourgogne, fol. He left also thirteen volumes of ms collections respecting the families of Burgundy. It is an additional and remarkable proof of his industry and ingenuity, that he engraved the whole of the plates in these volumes with his own hand. His history of the parliament of Burgundy was continued by Petitot, and published in 1733. Palliot died at Dijon in 1698, at the age of eighty-nine.

, the Young, so called in contradistinction of the preceding Jacob, his great-uncle,^ may be considered as the last master of the good, and the first of the bad period of art at Venice. Born in 1544, he left the scanty rudiments of his father Antonio, a weak painter, to study the works of Titian, and particularly those of Tintoretto, whose spirit and slender disengaged forms were congenial to his own taste. At the age of fifteen he was taken under the protection of the duke of Urbino, carried to that capital, and for eight years maintained at Rome, where, by copying the antique, Michael Angelo, Raphael, and more than all, Polidoro, he acquired ideas of correctness, style, and effect: these he endeavoured to embody in the first works which he produced after his return to Venice, and there are who have discovered in them an union of the best maxims of the Roman and Venetian schools: they are all executed with a certain facility which is the great talent of this master, but a talent as dangerous in painting as in poetry. He was not, however, successful in his endeavours to procure adequate employment: the posts of honour and emolument were occupied by Tintoretto and Paul Veronese, and he owed his consideration as the third in rank to the patronage of Vittoria, a fashionable architect, sculptor, and at that time supreme umpire of commissions: he, piqued at the slights of Paul and Robusti, took it into his head to favour Palma, to assist him with his advice, and to establish his name. Bernini is said to have done the same at Rome, in favour of Pietro da Cortona and others, against Sacchi, to the destruction of the art; and, adds Mr. Fuseli, as men and passions resemble each other in all ages, the same will probably be related of some fashionable architect of our times. Palma, overwhelmed by commissions, soon relaxed frdnl his womed diligence; and his carelessness increased when, at the death of his former competitors, and of Leonardo Corona, his new rival, he found himself alone and in possession of the field. His pictures, as Cesare d'Arpino told him, were seldom more than sketches; sometimes, indeed, when time and price were left to his own discretion, in which he did not abound, he produced some work worthy of his former fame; such as the altar-piece at S. Cosmo and Datniano; the celebrated Naval Battle of Francesco Bembo in the public palace; the S. Apolloniaat Cremona; St. Ubaldo and the Nunziata at Pesaro; the Finding of the Cross at Urbino: works partly unknown to Ridolfi, but of rich composition, full of beauties, variety, and expression. His tints fresh, sweet, and transparent, less gay than those of Paul, but livelier than those of Tintoretto, though slightly laid on, still preserve their bloom. In vivacity of expression he is not much inferior to either of those masters; and his Plague of the Serpents at St. Bartolomeo may vie for features, gestures, and hues of horror, with the same subject by Tintoretto in the school of St. Rocco: but none of his pictures are without some commendable part; and it surprises that a man, from whom the depravation of style may be dated in Venice, as from Vasari at Florence, and Zuccari at Rome, should still preserve so many charms of nature and art to attract the eye and interest the heart. He died in 1628, in the eighty-fourth year of his age.

, a dissenting writer of the last century, was born in Southwark, where his father was an undertaker, and of the Calvinistic persuasion. Under whom he received his classical education is not known. In 1746 he began to attend lectures, for academical learning, under the rev. Dr. David Jennings, in Wellclose square, London. Soon after, leaving the academy, about 1752, he was, on the rev. James Read’s being incapacitated by growing disorders, chosen as assistant to officiate at the dissenting meeting in New Broad-street, in conjunction with Dr. Allen; and on the removal of the latter to Worcester, Mr. Palmer was ordained sole pastor of this congregation in 1759. He continued in this connection till 1780, when the society, greatly reduced in its numbers, was dissolved. For a great part of this time he filled the post of librarian, at Dr. Williams’s library, in Red- Cross-street. After the dissolution of his congregation he wholly left off preaching, and retired to Islington, where he lived privately till his death, on June 26, 1790, in the sixty-first year of his age. He married a lady of considerable property, and during the latter years of his life kept up but little connection with the dissenters. He was a man of considerable talents, and accounted a very sensible and rational preacher. His pulpit compositions were drawn up with much perspicuity, and delivered with propriety. He allowed himself great latitude in his religious sentiments, and was a determined enemy to any religious test whatever. Tests, indeed, must have been obnoxious to one who passed through all the accustomed deviations from Calvinism, in which he had been educated, to Socinianism.

He published, besides some occasional sermons, 1. “Prayers for the use of families and persons in private; with a preface, containing a brief view of the argument for prayer,” 1773, 12mo. There has been a second edition of these prayers, which are much admired by those who call themselves rational dissenters. 2. “Free thoughts on the inconsistency of conforming to any religious test, as a condition of Toleration, with the true principle of Protestant Dissent,” 1779. 3. “Observations in defence of the Liberty of Man, as a moral agent; in answer to Dr. Priestley’s Illustrations of Philosophical Necessity,” 1779, 8vo. As the doctor replied to it, “In defence of the Illustrations of Philosophical Necessity,” Mr. Palmer published, 4. “An Appendix to the Observations in defence of the Liberty of Man, as a moral agent, &c.” 1780, 8vo. The controversy terminated with “A second Letter to the rev. John Palmer,” by Dr. Priestley. 5. “A summary view of the grounds of Christian Baptism; with a more particular reference to the baptism of infants; containing remarks, argumentative and critical, in explanation and defence of the rite. To which is added, a form of service made use of on such occasions,” 8vo.

, an Italian chronicler, was born in 1405, at Florence; and after being educated under the best masters, arrived at high political rank in the republic, was frequently employed on embassies, and was promoted to the great dignity of gonfalonier. He died in 1475. He compiled a general “Chronicle” from the creation to his own time; of which a part only has been published, including the events from the year 447 to 1449. The first edition was published, at the end of Eusebius’ Chronicle, without date or place, but, as supposed, at Milan iti 1475, 4to. It was reprinted at Venice in 1483, 4to. It was continued to the year 1482, by Matthias Palmieri, who, although almost of the same names, was neither his relation nor countryman. This Matthias was a native of Pisa, was apostolical secretary, and accounted a very able Greek and Latin scholar. He died in his sixtieth year, in 1483.

Besides his “Chronicle,” Matthew, or Matteo, Palmieri wrote in Latin the life of Nicolas Acciajuoli, grandseneschal of the kingdom of Naples, which is printed in the thirteenth volume of Muratori’s “Script. Rer. Ital.;” a work on the taking of Pisa by the Florentines, “De captivitate Pisarum,” printed in Muratori’s nineteenth volume, and, in Italian, “Libro della vita civile,” written in the form of dialogues, and printed at Florence in 1529, 8vo. It was translated into French by Claude des Hosiers, Paris, 1557, 5vo. Palmieri was also a poet. He composed in the terza rima, in imitation of Dante, a philosophical, or rather a theological, poem, which had great celebrity in his day: its title was “Citta di Vita,” and was divided into three books, and an hundred chapters. But having advanced, among other singular opinions, that human souls were formerly those angels who remained neuter during the rebellion in heaven against their Creator, and were sent to the world below as a punishment, the Inquisition, after his death, ordered his poem to be burnt, although it had never been published, but read in manuscript. Some assert, that he was burnt along with his poem but Apostolo Zeno has proved that he died peaceably in 1475, and was honoured with a public funeral, by order of the state of Florence, that Rinuccini pronounced his funeral oration, and that, during the ceremony, his poem was laid on his breast, as his highest honour.

, a Spanish painter and writer on the art, was born at Bujalance, and studied at Cordova in grammar, philosophy, theology, and jurisprudence. The elements of art he acquired of Don Juan de Valdes Leal; and to acquaint himself with tht? style of different schools, went, in company of Don Juan de Alfaro, in 1678, to Madrid. Here the friendship of Carrenno procuring him the commission of painting the gallery del Cierzo, he pleased the king and the minister, and in 1688 he was made painter to the king. He was now overwhelmed with commissions, for many of which, notwithstanding the most surprising activity, he could furnish only the designs; their ultimate finish was left to the hand of his pupil Dionysius Vidal hut whatever was designed and terminated by himself, in fresco or in oil, possesses invention, design, and colour, in the essential; and what taste and science could add, in the ornamental parts. His style was certainly more adapted to the demands of the epoch in which he lived, than to those of the preceding one, and probably would not have obtained from Murillo the praises lavished on it by Luca Giordano; but of the machinists, who surrounded him, he was, perhaps, the least debauched by manner.

, a polite scholar, who flourished in the reigns of Henry VII. and VIII. was a native of London, and educated there in grammar. He afterwards studied logic and philosophy at Cambridge, at which university he resided till he had attained the degree of bachelor of arts; after which he went to Paris, where he spent several years in the study of philosophical and other learning, took the degree of master of arts, and acquired such excellence in the French tongue, that, in 1514, when a treaty of marriage was negotiated between Louis XII. kinpr of France, and the princess Mary, sister of king Henry VIII. of England, Mr. Palsgrave was chosen to be her tutor in that language. But Louis XII. dying almost immediately after his marriage, Palsgrave attended his fair pupil back to England, where he taught the French language to many of the young nobility, and was appointed by the king one of his chaplains in ordinary. He is said also to have obtained some church preferments, but we know only of the prebend of Portpoole, in the church of St. Paul’s, which was bestowed upon him in April 1514, and the living of St. Dunstan’s in the East, given to him by archbishop Cranmer in 1553. In 1531, he settled at Oxford for some time, and the next year was incorporated master of arts in that university, as he had before been in that of Paris; and a few days after was admitted to the degree of bachelor of divinity. At this time he was highly esteemed for his learning; and was the first author who reduced the French tongue under grammatical rules, or that had attempted to fix it to any kind of standard. This he executed with great ingenuity and success, in a large work which he published in that language at London, entitled “L'Eclaircissement de la Language Fran9ois,” containing three books, in a thick folio, 1530, to which he has prefixed a large introduction in English. This work is now extremely scarce. In the dedication he says that he had written two books on the subject before; one dedicated to his pupil Mary, the other to Charles Brandon duke of Suffolk. He made a literal translation into English of a Latin comedy called “Acolastus,” written by Fullonius, and published it in 1540. He is said also to have written some “Epistles.”

, the son of Albert Pancirolus, a famous lawyer in his time, and descended from an illustrious family at Reggio, was born there April 17, 1523. He learned Latin and Greek under Sebastian Corrado and Bassiano Lando, and made so speedy a proficiency in them, that his father, thinking him fit for the study of the law at fourteen, taught him the first elements of that faculty himself; and Guy studied them incessantly under his father for three years, but without neglecting the belles lettres. He was afterwards sent into Italy, in order to complete his law-studies under the professors of that country. He went first to Ferrara; and, having there heard the lectures of Pasceto and Hyppolitus Riminaldi, passed thence to Pavia, where he had for his master the famous Alciat, and to Bologna and Padua, where he completed a course of seven years study, during which he had distinguished himself in public disputations on several occasions: and the fame of his abilities having drawn the attention of the republic of Venice, he was nominated by them in 1547, while only a student, second professor of the Institutes in the university of Padua. This nomination obliged him to take a doctor’s degree, which he received from the hands of Marcus Mantua. After he had filled this chair for seven years, he was advanced to the first of the Institutes in 1554; and two years after, on the retirement of Matthew Gribaldi, who was second professor of the Roman law, Pancirolus succeeded him, and held this post for fifteen years. At length, having some reason to be dissatisfied with his situation, he resigned it in 1571, when Emanuel Philibert duke of Savoy offered him the professorship of civil law, with a salary of a thousand pieces of gold. Here his patron the prince shewed him all imaginable respect, as did also his son Charles Emanuel, who augmented his appointments with a hundred pieces. The republic of Venice soon became sensible of the loss sustained by his departure, and were desirous of recalling him to a vacant professorship in 1580. This Pancirolus at first refused, and would indeed have been content to remain at Turin, but the air of the place proved so noxious to him, that he lost one eye almost entirely, and was in danger of losing the other; the dread of which induced him to hearken to proposals that were made afresh to him in 1582; and having a salary of a thousand ducats offered to him, with the chair he had so much wished for, he returned to Padua. The city of Turin, willing to give him some marks of their esteem, at his departure, presented him with his freedom, accompanied with some pieces of silver plate. He then remained at Padua, where his stipend was raised to the sum of twelve hundred ducats. Here he died in June 1599, and was interred in the church of St. Justin, after funeral service had been performed for him in the church of St. Anthony; where Francis Vidua of that university pronounced his funeral oration. He was author of a number of learned works, of which the principal are: 1. “Commentarii in Notitiam utriusque Imperii et de Magistratibus,” Venice, 1593, fol. often reprinted, and inserted in the Roman Antiquities of Gracvius; 2. “De Numismatibus antiquis;” 3. “De quatuordecim Regionibus Urbis Romae,” printed in the Leyden edition of the Notitia, 1608; 4. “Rerum Memorabiliuui jam olim deperditarum, et contra recens atque ingeniose inventarum,” 1599, 2 vols. 8vo, often reprinted and translated. He wrote also a valuable treatise, which was not published till 1637, entitled “De Claris Legum Interpretibus.”!

, a Christian philosopher, of the Stoic sect, flourished in the second century. Some say he was born in Sicily, others at Alexandria, of Sicilian parents. He is said to have taught the Stoic philosophy in the reign of Commodus, from A. D. 180, in the school of Alexandria; where from the time of St. Mark, founder of that church, there had always been some divine who explained the Holy Scriptures. The Ethiopians having requested Demetrius, bishop of Alexandria, to send a proper person to instruct them in the Christian religion, he sent Pantænus who gladly undertook the mission, and acquitted himself very worthily in it. It is said, that he found the Ethiopians already tinctured with the truth of Christian faith, which had been declared to them by St. Bartholomew; and that he saw the gospel of St. Matthew in Hebrew, which had been left there by that apostle. St. Jerome says, that Pantænus brought it away with him, and that it was still to be seen in his time in the Alexandrian library; but this story is not generally credited, since no good reason can be given, why St. Bartholomew should leave a Hebrew book with the Ethiopians. Pantænus, upon his return to Alexandria, continued to explain the sacred books under the reign of Severus and Antoninus Caracalla, and did great service to the church by his discourses. He composed some “Commentaries” upon the Bible, which are lost. Theodoret informs us that Pantænus first started the remark, which has been followed by many interpreters of the prophecies since, “That they are often expressed in indefinite terms, and that the present tense is frequently used both for the preterite and future tenses.” We may form a judgment of the manner in, which Pantænus explained the Scriptures, by that which Clemens Alexandria as, Origen, and all those have observed, who were trained up in the school of Alexandria. Their commentaries abound with allegories; they frequently leave the literal sense, and find almost every where some mystery or other; in the explaining of which, they usually shew more erudition than judgment. Mil ner observes, that the combination of Stoicism with Christianity must have very much debased the sacred truths; and we may be assured that those who were disposed to follow implicitly the dictates of such an instructor as Pantænus, must have been furnished by him with a clouded light of the gospel. Cave is of opinion that Pantænus’s death occurred in the year 213.

, a learned physician and historian, was born at Basil June 13, 1522. In his early education he made very considerable proficiency, but it ap pears that his friends differed in their opinions as to his profession, some intending him for a learned profession, and some for a printer, which they conceived to be connected with it. At length after a due course of the languages and polite literature, he studied divinity according to the principles of the reformed religion, but changing that design, he taught dialectics and natural philosophy at Basil for about forty years. He then, at an advanced age, studied medicine, took the degree of doctor in that faculty, and practised with much reputation until his death, March 3, 1595, in the seventy-third year of his age. He composed various works both in medicine and history, some in Latin and some in German, and translated certain authors into the latter language. His most useful work, nowscarce, was an account of the eminent men of Germany, published at Basil in 1565, fol. under the title of “Posographia heroum et illustrium virorum Germanise,” dedicated to the emperor Maximilian II. who honoured him with the title of Count Palatin. He published also a Latin history of the order of St. John of Jerusalem, 1581, folio. ' Historia Militaris ordinis Johannitarum, Rhodiorum aut Melitensium Equitum;“” Chronographia Ecclesiae Christi,“ibid, 1568;” Diarium Historicum,“1572; and, in his youth,” Comoedia de Zaccheo publicanorum principe," 1546, 8vo.

, an eminent bibliographer, was born at Sulzbach in the Upper Palatinate, March 16, 1729, and having been educated for the church, took his doctor’s degree in divinity and philosophy, and became pastor of the cathedral church of St. Sebaldus at Nuremberg, where he died in 1805. No farther particulars have yet reached us of this learned and laborious writer, who has long been known here by his “Annales Typographiei, ab artis inventæ origine ad annum M. D. post Maittairii, Denisii, aliorumque doctissimorum virorum curas in ordinem redacti, emendati et aucti,” Nuremberg, 1793—1803, 11 vols. 4to. This is unquestionably a work of the very first importance to bibliographers, and is thought to exceed Maittaire’s in clearness of arrangement and accuracy. It comes down, beyond his original intention, to 1536; but is not quite complete without another work of his printed in German, “Annals of ancient German Literature, or an account of books printed in Germany frpm the invention of the art to 1520,” Nuremberg, 1788, 4to. His other works, also unfortunately in German, are an “Account of the most ancient German Bibles, printed in the fifteenth century, which are in the library at Nuremberg,” 1777, 4to; “History of Bibles printed at Nuremberg, from the invention of the Art,” Nuremberg, 1778, 4to. And a “History of early Printing at Nuremberg to the year 1500,” ibid. 1789, 4to.

, a very distinguished character in modern times, born at Rostino, in the island of Corsica, in 1726, was the son of Hiacente Paoli, a Corsican patriot, who, despairing of the freedom of his country, had retired with his family to Naples. Pascal was educated among the Jesuits, and at their college he made a rapid progress in his studies, and displayed an understanding equally solid and capacious. He appeared in so favourable a light to his countrymen, that he was unanimously chosen generalissimo, in a full assembly of the people, when he had attained but to the 29th year of his age. He began with new-modelling the laws of Corsica, and established the appearance, if not the reality, of subordination: he also instituted schools, and laid the foundation of a maritime power. In 1761 the government of Genoa, perceiving the change lately effected among the natives, sent a deputation to a general council, convoked at Vescovato, for the express purpose of proposing terms of accommodation; but it was unanimously resolved never to make peace with them, unless upon the express condition of Corsica being guaranteed in the full enjoyment of its independence. A memorial to the same effect was also addressed, at tfie same time, to all the sovereigns of Europe. But nothing was gained by this step; and in 1768, the Genoese, despairing of rendering the Corsicans subservient to their will, transferred the sovereignty of their island to France, on condition of receiving in lieu of it 40,000,000 of livres. Notwithstanding this, Paoli remained firm to his cause: and a vigorous war commenced, in which, for some time, the French were beaten, and in one instance their general was obliged to capitulate, with all his infantry, artillery, and ammunition; but an immense force bing now sent from France, overwhelmed the Corsican patriots; they were defeated with great slaughter, and Paoli, left with only about 500 men, was surrounded by the French, who were anxious to get possession of his 'person: he, however, cut his way through the enemy, and escaped to England with his friends, where they were received with every degree of sympathy and respect. Paoli was introduced at court, and the duke of Grafton, then prime minister, obtained for him a pension of 1200l. a-year, which he liberally shared with his companions in exile. From this time he lived a retired life, devoting himself chiefly to the cultivation of literature. During his retirement, which lasted more than twenty years, he was introduced to Dr. Johnson by Mr. Boswell, and lived in habits of intimacy with that eminent scholar. Much of their conversation is recorded by Mr. Boswell.

When the French revolution took place, the national convention passed a decree by which Corsica was numbered among the departments of France, and entitled to all the privileges of the new constitution, and Paoli was induced, by the promising appearance of affairs, and the solicitations of the French assembly, to return to the island. Accordingly he resigned his pension from the English court, took a grateful leave of the country in which he had been so hospitably entertained, and in the month of April 1790, presented himself at the bar of the national assembly at Paris, together with the Corsican deputies. Soon after this he embarked for Corsica, where he was received with an extraordinary degree of attachment and respect. He was elected mayor of Bastia, commander-in-chief of the national guard, and president of the department; and, in short, he at once acquired more authority in the island, than before its subjugation by the French. He was, however, not quite contented; he was ambitious of seeing Corsica wholly independent, which, upon the execution of Louis XVI. was the prevailing wish of the Corsicans. The French convention, however, meant nothing less, and at length declared Paoli a traitor. On this he resolved upon an expedient which, though it was a renunciation of independence, promised to secure all the advantages of real liberty. This was an union of Corsica with the crown of Great Britain; after effecting which, he returned to England, having unfortunately lost all his property, by the failure of a mercantile house at Leghorn, and passed the remainder of his life in great privacy. He died in London, February. 5, 1807, in the eighty-first year of his age. Few foreigners, however distinguished, have been so much caressed in England as general Paoli. By living in habits of familiarity with men of letters, his name and exploits acquired high celebrity: and Goldsmith, Johnson, and many others, equally eminent in the literary world, although differing in almost every thing else, cordially united in his praise. On the continent his reputation was greatly respected: it was usual to compare Paoli to Timoleon and Epaminondas. He was unquestionably a great man; but it is the opinion of those who have enjoyed the opportunity of studying his character, that he was a politician rather than a soldier: that he shone more in council than inarms; and that the leading feature of his public conduct was a certain degree of Italian policy, which taught him to refine and speculate on every event.

, bishop of Hierapolis, a city of Phrygia in Asia Minor, near to Laodicea, was the disciple of St. John the Evangelist, or of another of that name; but Irenaeus says positively, that he was the disciple of St. John the Evangelist; for Polycarp was his disciple, and he says, Papias was Polycarp’s companion. Papias wrote five books, entitled “The Expositions of the Discourses of the Lord;” of which there are only some fragments left in the writings of Irenaeus and Eusebius. He made way for the opinion several of the ancients held touching the temporal reign of Christ, who they supposed would come upon earth a thousand years before the day of judgment, to gather together the elect, after the resurrection, into the city of Jerusalem, and let them there enjoy all felicity during that period. Irenaeus, who was of the same judgment, relates a fragment he took out of Papias’s fourth book, where he endeavours to prove that opinion from a passage in Isaiah; and Eusebius, after having quoted a passage taken out of Papias’s Preface, adds, “That that author relates divers things which he pretended he had by unwritten tradition; such as were the last instructions of our Lord Christ, which are not set down by the Evangelists, and some other fabulous histories, amongst which number his opinion ought to be placed touching the personal return of Christ upon earth after the resurrection.” The occasion of his falling into that error,“says Eusebius again,” was his misunderstanding of the discourses and instructions of the Apostles, as not thinking that those expressions ought to bear a mystical sense; and that the Apostles used them only for illustration, for he was a man of a mean genius, as his books manifest, and yet several of the ancients, and, among the rest, Irenaeus, maintained their opinions on the authority ofPapias."

, was one of a family of engravers on wood, who obtained considerable reputation in the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries. He flourished about 1670, but attained less fame than his son John, who was born at St. Quentin in 1661. The grandson John Baptist Michel was the most successful in his art, especially in those engravings which represent foliage and flowers, many beautiful specimens of which are inserted in his publication on the art of engraving in wood; and the whole prove that he was a very skilful master in every branch of the art he professed. The human figure he seems to have been the least acquainted with, and has consequently failed most in those prints into which it is introduced. He died in 1776; about ten years before which event he published in 2 vols. 8vo, his “Traite historique et pratique de la gravure en bois,” a work of great merit as to the theory of an art, which, it is almost needless to add, has of late years been brought to the highest perfection by some ingenious men of our own country, led first to this pursuit by the excellent example and success of the Messrs. Bewickes.

, some time a minister of the church of England, and afterwards reconciled to that of Rome, was the author of some pieces which made a great noise in the seventeenth century. From an account of his life, published by himself, it appears that he was born at Blois in 1657, and descended from a family of the reformed religion. He passed through his studies in divinity at Geneva. That university was then divided into two parties upon the subject of grace, called “particularists” and “universalists,” of which the former were the most numerous and the most powerful. The universalists desired nothing more than a toleration; an J M. Claude wrote a letter to M. Turretin, the chief of the predominant party, exhorting him earnestly to grant that favour. But Turretin gave little heed to it; and M. de Maratiz, professor at Groningen, who had disputed the point warmly against Mr. Daille, opposed it zealously; and supported his opinion by the authority of those synods who had determined against such toleration. There happened also another dispute upon the same subject, which occasioned Papin to make several reflections. M. Pajon, who was his uncle, admitted the doctrine of efficacious grace, but explained it in a different manner from the reformed in general, and Juneu in particular; and though the synod of Anjou in 1667, after many long debates upon the matter, dismissed Pajon, with leave to continue his lectures at Saumur, yet as his inU rest there was not great, his nephew, who was a student in that university in 1633, was pressed to con iemn the doctrine, which was branded with the appellation of Pajonism. Papin declared, that his conscience would not allow him to subscribe to the condemnation of either party; on which the university refused to give him a testimonial in the usual form. All these disagreeable incidents put him out of humour with the authors of them, and brought him to view the Roman catholic religion w;th less dislike than before. In this disposition he wrote a treatise, entitled “The Faith reduced to its just hounds;” in which he maintained, that, as the papists professed that they embraced the doctrine of the Holy Scriptures, they ought to be tolerate' I by the most zealous protestants. He also wrote several letters to the reformed of Bourdeaux, to persuade them that they might be saved in the Romish church, if they would be reconciled to it,

This work, as might be expected, exasperated the protestants against him; and to avoid their resentment, he crossed the water to England, in 1686, where James II. was endeavouring to re- establish popery. There he receive 1 deacon’s and priest’s orders, irom the hands of Turner, bishop of Ely; and, in 16S7, published a book against Jurieu, entitled “Theological Essays concerning Providence and Grace, &c.” This exasperated that minister so much, that when he knew Papin was attempting to obtain some employ as a professor in Germany, he dispersed letters every where in order to defeat his applications; and, though he procured a preacher’s place at Hamburgh, Jurieu found means to get him dismissed in a few months. About this time his “Faith reduced to just bounds” coming into the hands of Bayle, that writer added some pages to it, and printed it. These additions were ascribed by Jurieu to our author, who did not disavow the principal maxims laid down, which were condemned in the synod of Bois-le-duc in 1687. In the mean time, an offer being made him of a professor’s chair in the church of the French refugees at Dantzic, he accepted it: but it being afterwards proposed to him to conform to the synodical decrees of the Walloon churches in the United Provinces, and to subscribe them, he refused to comply; because there were some opinions asserted in those decrees which he could not assent to, particularly that doctrine which maintained that Christ died only for the elect. Those who had invited him to Dantzic, were highly offended at his refusal; and he was ordered to depart, as soon as he had completed the half year of his preaching, which had been contracted for. He was dismissed in 168^, and not long after embraced the Roman catholic religion; delivering his abjuration into the hands of Bossuet, bishop of Meaux, Nov. 15, 1690.

Upon this change, Jurieu wrote a pastoral letter to those of the reformed religion at Paris, Orleans, and Blois; in which he pretended that Papin had always looked upon all religions as indifferent, and in that spirit had returned to the Roman church. In answer to this letter, Papin drew up a treatise, “Of the Toleration of the Protestants, and of the Authority of the Church.” The piece, being approved by the bishop of Meaux, was printed in 1692: the author afterwards changed its title, which was a little equivocal, and made some additions to it; but, while he was employed in making collections to complete it farther, and finish other books upon the same subject, he died at Paris the 19th of June, 1709. His widow, who also embraced the Roman catholic religion, communicated these papers, which were made use of in a new edition printed at large in 1719, 12mo. M. Pajon of the Oratory, his relation, published all his “Theological Works,” 1723, 3 vols. 12mo they are all in French, and written with shrewdness and ability.

, a man of a strange and paradoxical genius, and classed by Brucker among the Theosophists, was born, as is generally supposed (for his birth-place is a disputed matter), at Einfidlen near Zurick, in 1493. His family name, which was Bombastus, he afterwards changed, according to the custom of the age, into Paracelsus. His father, who was a physician, instructed him in that science, but, as it would appear, in nothing else, for he was almost totally ignorant of the learned languages. So earnest was he, however, to penetrate into the mysteries of nature, that, neglecting books, he undertook long and hazardous journeys through Germany, Italy, Spain, Denmark, Hungary, Moscovy, and probably several parts of Asia and Africa. He not only visited literary and learned men, but frequented the workshops of mechanics, descended into mines, and thought no place mean or hazardous, if it afforded him an opportunity of increasing his knowledge of nature. He also consulted barber-surgeons, monks, conjurors, old women, quacks of every description, and every person who pretended to be possessed of any secret art, particularly such as were skilled in metallurgy. Being in this manner a self-taught philosopher and physician, he despised the medical writings of the ancients, and boasted that the whole contents of his library would not amount to six folios. He appears indeed to have written more than he ever read. His quackery consisted in certain new and secret medicines procured from metallic substances by the chemical art, which he administered with such wonderful success, that he rose to the summit of popular fame, and even obtained the professorship of medicine at Bail. One of his nostrums he called Azoth, which he said was the philosopher’s stone, the medical panacea, and his disciples extolled it as the tincture of life, given through the divine favour to man in these last days. But while his irregular practice, and arrogant invectives against other physicians, created him many enemies, his rewards were by no means adequate to his vanity and ambition; and he met frequently with mortifications, one of which determined him to leave Basil. A wealthy canon who happened to fall sick at that place, offered him a hundred florins to cure his disease, which Paracelsus easily effected with three pills of opium, one of his most powerful medicines. The canon, restored to health so soon, and apparently by such slight means, refused to stand to his engagement. Paracelsus brought the matter before the magistrate, who decreed him only the usual fee. Inflamed with violent indignation at the contempt which was thus thrown upon his art, he railed at the canon, the magistrate, and the whole city, and leaving Basil, withdrew into Alsace, whither his medical fame and success followed him. After two years, during which time he practised medicine in the principal families of the country, about the year 1530 he removed into Switzerland, where he conversed with Bullinger and other divines. From this time, he seems for many years to have roved through various parts of Germany and Bohemia. At last, in the year 1541, he died in the hospital of St. Sebastian, in Saltsburg.

Different and even contradictory judgments have been formed by the learned concerning Paracelsus. His admirers and followers have celebrated him as a perfect master of all philosophical and medical mysteries, have called him the medical Luther, and have even been weak enough to believe that he was possessed of the grand secret of converting inferior metals into gold. But others, and particularly some of his contemporaries, have charged his whole medical practice with ignorance, imposture, and impudence. J. Crato, in an epistle to Zwinger, attests, that in Bohemia his medicines, even when they performed an apparent cure, left his patients in such a state, that they soon after died of palsies or epilepsies. Erastus, who was for two years one of his pupils, wrote an entire book to detect his impostures. We have mentioned his want of education, and it is even asserted, that he was so imperfect a master of his vernacular tongue, that he was obliged to have his German writings corrected by another hand. His adversaries also charge him with the most contemptible arrogance, the most vulgar scurrility, the grossest intemperance, and the most detestable impiety. Still it appears, that with all these defects, by the mere help of physical knowledge and the chemical arts, he obtained an uncommon share of medical fame; while to support his credit with the ignorant, he pretended to an intercourse with invisible spirits, and to divine illuminations.

With regard to his system of chemistry, in which his real merit lies, the fundamental doctrines of it resolved every thing into three elements, salt, sulphur, and mercury, and were for a long time received, although in fact they were borrowed from his predecessor, Basil Valentine. His medical skill consisted principally in the bold administration of some powerful remedies, which had been heretofore thought too dangerous to be used, particularly opium, a drug with which, it is obvious, he would be able in many instances to afford great and speedy relief; but with which also few permanent cures could be effected, and much mischief would necessarily be produced, when it was misapplied. Antimony and mercury were also medicines which he liberally prescribed, and he used various preparations of them of the most active kind. He deserves the praise, however, of having been one of the first to employ mercury for the cure of the venereal disease, and of course he must have been successful in a degree, to which none of his contemporaries, who did not resort to that remedy, could attain. From his total ignorance of anatomy and rational physiology, his inability from want of literature to investigate the doctrines of the ancients, which he nevertheless boldly impugned, and his employment of a barbarous jargon, as well as his infatuated notions of magic, astrology, geomancy, and all the other branches of mystical imposture, he is, as a theorist, beneath contempt. We shall not pretend, therefore, to enter into any detail of the unintelligible jargon and absurd hypotheses which he employed, or to enumerate the immense farrago of treatises, which made their appearance under his name after his death, the notices of which occupy above nine quarto pages in the Bibliotheca of Haller: for the first we are unable to comprehend, and the latter would be a waste of time. The most complete edition is that of Geneva, 1658, 3 vols. folio.

, or rather Deparcieux (Anthony), an able mathematician, was born in 1703, at a hamlet near Nismes, of industrious but poor parents, who were unable to give him education; he soon, however, found a patron, who placed him in the college at Lyons, where he made astonishing progress in mathematics. On his arrival at Paris, he was obliged to accept of humble employment from the mathematical instrument makers, until his works brought him into notice. These were, 1. “Table astronomiques,” 1740, 4to. 2. “Traite” de trigonometric rectiligne et spherique, avec un trait6 de gnomonique et des tables de logarithmes,“1741, 4to. 3.” Essai sur les probabilites de la dnre de la vie humame,“1746, 4to. 4.” Reponse aux objections contrtr ce livre,“1746, 4to. 5.” Additions a I'essai, c.“1760, 4to. 6.” Memoires sur la possibility et la facilit^ d‘amener aiipres de PEstrapade, a Paris, les eaux de la riviere d’Yvette,“1763, 4to, reprinted, with additions, in 1777. It was always Deparcieux’s object to turn his knowledge of mathematics to practical purposes, and in the memoirs of the academy of sciences are many excellent papers which he contributed with this view. He also introduced some ingenious improvements in machinery. He was censor- royal and member of the academy of sciences at Paris, and of those of Berlin, Stockholm, Metz, Lyons, and Montpelher. He died at Paris Sept. 2, 1768, aged sixty-five. He had a nephew of the same name, born in 1753, who was educated at the college of Navarre at Paris, where he studied mathematics and philosophy, and at the age of twentyfour gave public lectures. In 177y he began a course of experimental philosophy, in the military school of Brienne; after which, he occupied the philosophical professorship at the Lyceum in Paris, where he died June 23, 1799, in a state bordering on indigence. He wrote a” Traité elementaire de Mathematiques,“for the use of students; ”Traite* des annuites, ou des rentes a terme,“1781, 4to” Dissertation snr le moyen d‘elever l’eau par la rotation d'une curde verticale sans fin,“Amst. 1782, 8vo” Dissertation sur ies globes areostatiques,“Paris, 1783, 8vo. He left also some unfinished works; and a” Cours complet de physique et de chimie," was in the press when he died.

, an ingenious French mathematician and philosopher, was born at Pau, in the province of Gascony, in 1636; his faiher being a counsellor of the parliament of that city. At the age of sixteen he entered into the order of Jesuits, and made so great proficiency in his studies, that he taught polite literature, and composed many pieces in prose and v< rse with considerable delicacy of thought and style before he was well arrived at the age of manhood. Propriety and elegance of language appear to have been his first pursuits, lor which purpose he studied the belles lettres; but afterwards he devoted himself to mathematical and philosophical studies, and read, with due attention, the most valuable authors, ancient and modern, in those sciences. By such assiduity in a short time he made himself master of the Peripatetic and Cartesian philosophy, and taught them both with great reputation. Notwithstanding he embraced Cartesianism, yet he affected to be rather an inventor in philosophy himself. In this spirit he sometimes advanced very bold opinions in natural philosophy, which met with opposers, who charged him with starting absurdities: but he was ingenious enough to give his notions a plausible turn, so as to clear them seemingly from contradictions. His reputation procured him a call to Paris, as professor of rhetoric in the college of Louis the Great. He also taught the mathematics in that city, as he had before done in other places; but the high expectations which his writings very reasonably created, were all disappointed by his early death, in 1673, at thirty-seven years of age. He fell a victim to his zeal, having caught a contagious disorder by preaching to the prisoners in the Bicetre.

, a French surgeon of eminence, was born at Laval, in the district of the Maine, in 1509. He commenced the study of his profession early in life, and practised it with great zeal both in hospitals and in the army; and when his reputation was at its height, he was appointed surgeon in ordinary to king Henry II. in 1552; and he held the same office under the succeeding kings, Francis II. Charles IX. and Henry III. To Charles IX. especially he is said to have on one occasion conferred great professional benefits, when some formidable symptoms had been produced by the accidental wound of a tendon in venesection, which he speedily removed. His services appear to have been amply acknowledged by the king; who spared him in the horrible massacre of St. Bartholomew’s, although a protestant. “Of all those,”' says the duke of Sully, <c who were about the person of this prince (Charles IX.) none possessed so great a share of his confidence as Ambrose Pare“, his surgeon. This man, though a Huguenot, lived with him in so great a degree of familiarity, that, on the day of the massacre, Charles telling him, the time was now come when the whole kingdom would be catholics; he replied, without being alarmed, * By the light of God, sire, I cannot believe that you have forgot your promise never to command me to do four things namely, to enter into my mother’s womb, to be present in the day of battie, to quit your service, or to go to mass.‘ The king soon after took him aside, and disclosed to him freely the trouble of his soul: * Ambrose,’ said he, * I know not what has happened to me these two or three days past, but I feel my mind and body as much at enmity with each other, as if I was seized with a fever; sleeping or waking, the murdered Huguenots seem ever present to my eyes, with ghastly faces, and weltering in blood. I wish the innocent and helpless had been spared!' The order which was published the following day, forbidding the continuance of the massacre, was in consequence of this conversation.” Pare", after having been long esteemed as the first surgeon of his time, and beloved for his private virtues, died Dec. 20, 1590, at the age of eighty-one; and as he was buried in the church of St. Andrew, Eloy would from that circumstance infer that he died a Roman catholic, of which we have no proof.

Pare was not a man of learning, although we meet with learned references and numerous quotations from the ancients, in his writings; but he must be considered as a bold and successful operator, and a real improver of his art; particularly in the practice of tying divided arteries, which he effected by drawing them out naked, and passing a ligature over them; and in the treatment of gun-shot wounds. Even in anatomy, in which he did not excel, he was, by frequent dissections, enabled to add some observations of his own to what he had borrowed from Vesalius. As an author he had high fame, and his works were universally read and translated into most of the languages of Europe. His first treatise, “Maniere de trailer les playes faites par harquebuses, fleches, &c.” was published at Paris in 1545, and again in 1552 and 1564. He afterwards laboured strenuously to put his brethren in possession of a body of surgical science in their native tongue; and in 1561 published the first edition of his works, in folio. This was translated by Thomas Johnson, Lond. 1634, and reprinted with additions in 1649. His treatise on gun-shot wounds was published by Walter Hammond in 1617, and that on the plague in 1630. Numerous editions of his whole works were afterwards printed io German, Dutch, and French; and his pupil, Guillemeau, who was also surgeon to Charles IX. and Henry IV. translated them into Latin. This translation has been frequently reprinted at variousplaces, with the title of “Ambrosii Paraei, Opera, novis iconibus elegantissimis illustrata, et Latinitate donata.” This volume contains twenty -six treatises, and there is no branch of surgery which is not touched upon in the collection.

, a French mathematician, was born at Paris in 1666. He shewed early a propensity to mathematics, eagerly perusing such books as fell in his way. His custom was to write remarks upon the margins of the books which he read; and he had filled some of these with a kind of commentary at the age of thirteen. At fourteen he was put under a master who taught rhetoric at Chartres. Here he happened to see a Dodecaedron, upon every face of which was delineated a sun-dial, except the lowest, on which it stood. Struck immediately with the curiosity of these dials, he set about drawing one himself; but, having a book which only shewed the practical part without the theory, it was not till some time after, when his rhetoric-master came to explain the doctrine of the sphere to him, that he began to understand how the projection of the circles of the sphere formed sundials. He then undertook to write a “Treatise upon Gnomonics,” anr the piece was rude and unpolished enough; but it was entirely his own. About the same time he wrote also a book of “Geometry,” at Beauvais.

At length his friends sent for him to Paris, to study the law; and, in obedience to them he went through a course in that faculty, but this was no sooner finished, than, his passion for mathematics returning, he shut himself up in the college of Dormans, and, with an allowance of less than 200 livres a year, he lived content in this retreat, which he never left but to go to the royal college, in order to hear the lectures of M. de la Hire, or M. de Sauveur. As soon as he found himself able enough to teach others, he took pupils; and, fortification being a part of mathematics which the war had rendered very necessary, he turned his attention to that branch; but after some time began to entertain scruples about teaching what he knew only in books, having never examined a fortification elsewhere, and communicating these scruples to M. Sauveur, that friend recommended him to the marquis d'Aligre, who happened at that time to want a mathematician in his suite. Parent accordingly made two campaigns with the marquis, and instructed himself thoroughly by viewing fortified places, of which he drew a number of plans, though hq had never received any instruction in that branch. From this time he assiduously cultivated natural philosophy, and the mathematics in all its branches, both speculative and practical; to which he joined anatomy, botany, and chemistry, and never appears to have been satisfied while there was any thing to learn. M. de Billettes being admitted into the academy of sciences at Paris in 1699, with the title of their mechanician, nominated for his eleve or disciple, Parent, who excelled chiefly in that branch. It was soon found in this society, that he engaged in all the various subjects which were brought before them, but often with an eagerness and impetuosity, and an impatience of contradiction, which involved him in unpleasant disputes with the members, who, on their parts, exerted a pettish fastidiousness in examining his papers. He was in particular charged with obscurity in his productions; and indeed the fault was so notorious, that he perceived it himself, and could not avoid correcting it.

, a celebrated divine of the reformed religion, was born Dec. 30, 1548, at Frankenstein in Silesia, and put to the grammar-school there, apparently with a design to breed him to learning; but his father marrying a second time, a capricious and narrow-minded woman, she prevailed with him to place his son apprentice to an apothecary at Breslau; and afterwards changing her mind, the boy was, at her instigation, bound to a shoemaker. Some time after, however, his father resumed his first design, and his son, about the age of sixteen, was sent to the college-school of Hirchberg, in the neighbourhood of Frankenstein, to prosecute his studies under Christopher Schilling, a man of considerable learning, who was rector of the college. It was customary in those times for young students who devoted themselves to literature, to assume a classical name, instead of that of their family. Schilling was a great admirer of this custom, and easily persuaded his scholar to change his German name of Wangler for the Greek one of Pareus, from wa^ice, a cheek, which Wangler also means in German. Pareus had not lived above three months at his father’s expence, when he was enabled to provide for his own support, partly by means of a tutorship in the family, and partly by the bounty of Albertus Kindler, one of the principal men of the place. He lodged in this gentleman’s house, and wrote a poem upon the death of his eldest son, which so highly pleased the father, that he not only gave him a gratuity for it, but encouraged him to cultivate his poetical talents, prescribing him proper subjects, and rewarding him handsomely for every poem which he presented to him.

In the mean time, his master Schilling, not content with making him change his surname, made him also change his religious creed, that of the Lutheran church, with regard to the doctrine of the real presence, and effected the same change of sentiment throughout his school; but this was not at first attended with the happiest effects, as Schilling was expelled from the college, and Pareus’s father threatened to disinherit him; and it was not without the greatest difficulty, that he obtained his consent to go into the Palatinaie, notwithstanding he conciliated his father’s parsimony by assuring him that he would continue his studies there without any expence to his family. Having thus succeeded in his request, he followed his master Schilling, who had been invited by the elector Frederic III. to be principal of his new college at Amberg, and arrived there in 1566. Soon after he was sent, with ten of his school-fellows, to Heidelberg, where Zachary Ursinus was professor of divinity, and rector of the college of Wisdom. The university was at that time in a most flourishing condition, with regard to every one of the faculties; and Pareus had consequently every advantage that could be desired, and made very great proficiency, both in the learned languages and in philosophy and divinity. He was admitted into the ministry in 1571, and in May that year sent to exercise his function in a village called Schlettenbach, where very violent contests subsisted between the Protestants and Papists. The elector palatine, his patron, had asserted his claim by main force against the bishop of Spire, who maintained, that the right of nomination to the livings in the corporation of Alfestad was vested in his chapter. The elector allowed it, but with this reserve, that since he had the right of patronage, the nominators were obliged, by the peace of Passaw, to present pastors to him whose religion he approved. By virtue of this right, he established the reformed religion in that corporation, and sent Pareus to propagate it in the province of Schlettenbach, where, however, he met with many difficulties before he could exercise his ministry in peace. Before the end of the year he was called back to teach the third class at Heidelberg, and acquitted himself so well, that in two years’ time he was promoted to the second class; but he did not hold this above six months, being made principal pastor of Hemsbach, in the diocese of Worms. Here he met with a people more ready to receive the doctrines of the Reformation than those of Schlettenbach, and who cheerfully consented to destroy the images in the church, and other remains of former superstition. A few months after his arrival he married the sister of John Stibelius, minister of Hippenheim; and the nuptials being solemnized Jan. the 5th, 1574, publicly in the church of Hemsbach, excited no little curiosity and surprize among the people, to whom the marriage of a clergyman was a new thing. They were, however, easily reconciled to the practice, when they came to know what St. Paul teaches concerning the marriage of a bishop in his epistles to Timothy and Titus. Yet such was the unhappy state of this country, rent by continual contests about religion, that no sooner was Popery, the common enemy, rooted out, than new disturbances arose, between the Lutherans and Calvinists. After the death of the elector Frederic III. in 1577, his son Louis, a very zealous Lutheran, established every where in his dominions ministers of that persuas.nn, to the exclusion of the Sarramentariane, or Calvinists, by which measure Pareus lost his living at Hemsbach, and retired into the territories of prince John of Casimir, the elector’s brother. He was now chosen minister at Ogersheim, near Frankenthal, where he continued three years, and then removed to Winzingen, near Neustadt, at which last place prince Casimir, in 1578, had founded a school, and settled there all the professors that had been driven from Heidelberg. This rendered Winzingen much more agreeable, as well as advantageous; and, upon the death of the elector Louis, in 1583, the guardianship of his son, together with the administration of the palatinate, devolved upon prince Casimir, who restored the Calvinist ministers, and Pareus obtained the second chair in the college of Wisdom at Heideiberg, in Sept. 1584. He commenced author two years afterwards, by printing his “Method of the Ubiijuitarian controversy;” “Methodus Ubiquitariae coniroversise.” He also printed an edition of the “German Bible,” with notes, at Neustadt, in 1589, which occasioned a warm controversy between him and James Andreas, an eminent Lutheran divine of Tubingen.

In 1591, he was made first professor in his college; in 1592, counsellor to the ecclesiastical senate; and in 1593, was admitted doctor of divinity in the most solemn manner. He had already held several disputes against the writers of the Augsburg Confession, but that of 1596 was the most considerable, in which he had to defend Caivin against the imputation of favouring Judaism, in his Commentaries upon several parts of Scripture. In 1595, he was promoted to the chair of divinity professor lor the Old Testament in his university; by which he was eased of the great fatigue he had undergone for fourteen years, in governing the youth who were educated at the college of Wisdom. Tossanus, professor of divinity for the New Testament, dying in 1602, Pareus succeeded to that chair, and a few years after he bought a house in the suburbs of Hei(lelburg, and built in the garden an apartment for his library, which he called his “Pareanum.” In this ru- took great delight, and the whole house went uitfrw;irds by that name, the elector having, out of respect to him, honouivd it with several privileges and immunities. At the same time, his reputation spreading itself every where, brought young students to him from the remotest parts of Hungary and Poland. In 1617 an evangelical jubilee was instituted in memory of the church’s deliverance from popery an hundred years before, when Luther began to preach. The solemnity lasted three days, during which orations, disputations, poems, and sermons, were delivered on the occasion. Pareus also published some pieces on the subject, which drew upon him the resentment of the Jesuits of Mentz; and a controversy took place between them. The following year, 1618, at the instance of the States General, he was pressed to go to the synod of Dort, but excused himself on account of age and infirmities. After this time he enjoyed but little tranquillity. The apprehensions he had of the ruin which his patron the elector Palatine would bring upon himself by accepting the crown of Bohemia, obliged him to change his habitation. He appears to have terrified himself with a thousand petty alarms, real or imaginary, and therefore his friends, in order to relieve him from this timidity of disposition, advised him to take refuge in the town of Anweil, in the dutchy of DeuxPonts, near Landau, at which he arrived in Oct. 1621. He left that place, however, some months after, and went to Neustadt, where his courage reviving, he determined to return to Heidelberg, wishing to pass his last moments at his beloved Pareanum, and be buried near the professors of the university. His wish was accordingly fulfilled; for he died at Pareanum June 15, 1622, and was interred with all the funeral honours which the universities in Germany usually bestow on their members.

He left a son named Philip, who wrote the life of his father. Although Pareus was a great enemy to innovations, yet his “Irenicum” proves that he was a friend to conciliation, and his services in promoting the reformed religion were very extensive. His exegeticai works were published by his son at Francfort in 1647, in 3 vols. folio. Among these are his “Commentary upon St. Paul’s Epistle to the Romans,” in 1617, which gave such offence to James I. of England, as containing some anti-monarchical principles, that he caused it to be burnt by the common hangman; and the university of Oxford also condemned it. It was refuted by David Owen, who was D. D. and chaplain to John Ramsay, viscount Haddington and earl of Holderness, in a piece entitled “Anti-Paraeus, sive determinatio de jure regio habita Cantabrigiae in scholis theologicis, 19 April, 1619, contra Davidem Paroeum, caeterosque reformats religionis antimonarchos,” Cantab. 1632, 8vo. He had before published “The Concord of a Papist and Puritan, for the coercion, deposition, and killing of kings,” Camb. 161O, 4to.

, son of the preceding, trod in the steps of his father, applied himself vigorously to the study of the classics, and published several laborious pieces; for which he was obliged to Vossius, who had a great respect for him, and made it his business to procure booksellers who would print his works. He was unfortunately killed, in 1635, by a gang of highwaymen, or, as others say, by some soldiers at the siege of Keiserslauteren. He was a considerable master of Greek. His publications are, 1. “The Poem of Musseus upon the Loves of Hero and Leander, with notes,” 1627. 2. “Mellificium Atticum,” a thick 4to, being a collection of sentences extracted from Greek authors, which he dedicated to the university of Oxford. 3. MeduHa Historise Ecclesiastics,“in 1631; to which he added” Notes.“4. An edition of Lucretius, Francfort, 1631, 8vo. 5.” Historia Bavarico-Palatina,“1633. 6.” Spicilegium subsecivum," or notes upon Quintilian, published in an edition of that author at London, in 1641, 8vo.

, usually called the Abbe Paris, would not have deserved notice here unless for certain impostures connected with his name, in which, however, he had no hand. He was born at Paris, and was the eldest son of a counsellor to the parliament, whom he was to have succeeded in that office; but he preferred the ecclesiastical profession; and, when his parents were dead, resigned the whole inheritance to his brother, only reserving to himself the right of applying for necessaries. He was a man, says the abb UAvocat, of the most devout temper, and who to great candour of mind joined great gentleness of manners. He catechized, during some time, in the parish of St. Come; undertook the direction of the clergy, and held conferences with them. Cardinal de Noailles, to whose cause he was attached, wanted to make him curate of that parish, but found many obstacles to his plan; and M. Paris, after different asylums, where he had lived extremely retired, confined himself in a house in the fauxbourg St. Marcoul, where, sequestered from the world, he devoted himself wholly to prayer, to the practice of the most rigorous penitence, and to labouring with his hands, having for that purpose learnt to weave stockings. He was one of those who opposed the bull Unigenitus, and was desirous also to be an author, and wrote “Explications of St. Paul’s Epistle to the Romans,” to the “Galatians,” and “An Analysis of the Epistle to the Hebrews;” but acquired no reputation by these. He died May I, 1727, at Paris, aged thirty-seven, and was interred in the little church-yard belonging to St. Medard’s parish. Though M. Paris had been useless to the Jansenists while alive, they thought proper to employ him in working miracles after his death; and stories were invented of miraculous cures performed at his tomb, which induced thousands to flock thither, where they practised grimaces and convulsions in so ridiculous and disorderly a manner, that the court was at last forced to put a stop to this delusion, by ordering the church-yard to be walled up, January 27, 1732. Some time before, several curates solicited M. de Vintimille, archbishop of Paris, by two requests, to make judicial inquiry into the principal miracles attributed to M. Paris; and that prelate appointed commissioners who easily detected the impostnre, which would not deserve a place here had it not served Hume and some other deists with an argument against the real miracles of the gospel, the fallacy of which argument has been demonstrated with great acuteness by the late bishop Douglas, in his “Criterion.”

, an English historian, was a Benedictine monk of the congregation of Clugny, in the monastery of St. Alban’s, the habit of which order he took in 1217. He was an universal scholar; understood, and had a good taste both in painting and architecture. He was also a mathematician, a poet, an orator, a divine, an historian, and a man of distinguished probity. Such rare accomplishments and qualities as these, did not fail to place him very high in the esteem of his contemporaries; and he was frequently employed in reforming some monasteries, visiting others, and establishing the monastic discipline in all. He reproved vice without distinction of persons, and did not even spare the English court itself; at the same time he shewed a hearty affection for his country in maintaining its privileges against the encroachments of the pope. Of this we have a clear, though unwilling, evidence in Baronius, who observes, that this author remonstrated with too sharp and bitter a spirit against the court of Rome; and that, except in this particular only, his history was an incomparable work. He died at St. Alban’s in 1259. His principal work, entitled “Historia Major,” consists of two parts: The first, from the creation of the world to William the Conqueror; the second, from that king’s reign to 1250. He carried on this history afterwards to the year of his death in 1259. Rishanger, a monk of the monastery of St. Alban’s, continued it to 1272 or 1273, the year of the death of Henry III. It was first printed at London in 1571, and reprinted 1640, 1684, fol. besides several foreign editions. There are various ms copies in our public libraries, particularly one which he presented to Henry III. and which is now in the British Museum. From Jiis Mss. have also been published “Vitas duorum Offarum, Merciae regum, S, Albani fundatorum” <c Gesta viginti duo abbatum S. Albani“”Additamenta chronicorum ad historian) majorern,“all which accompany the editions of his” Historia Major“printed in 1640 -and 1684. Among his unpublished Mss. are an epitome of his” Historia Major," and a history from Adam to the conquest, principally from Matthew of Westminster. This is in the library of Bene't college, Cambridge. The titles of some other works, but of doubtful authority, may be seen in Bale and Pits.

Parker (Henry) Lord Morley, a nobleman of literary taste in the reign of Henry VIII. was the son and heir of sir William Parker, knight, by Alice, sister and heir of Henry Lovel, and daughter of William Lovel, a younger son of William lord Lovel of Tichmersh, by Alianore, daughter and heir of Robert Morley, lord Morley, who died 21 Henry Vlth. He was educated at Oxford, but at what college, or at what time, does not appear. After leaving the university, he retired to his estate in Northamptonshire, and in the 21st year of the reign of Henry VIII. was summoned to parliament by the title of lord Morley. He was one of the barons, who, in the year following, signed the memorable declaration to pope Clement Vji. threatening him with the loss of his supremacy in England, unless he consented to the king’s divorce, but he still remained a bigoted adherent to the popish religion. In the 25th of the same reign, having a dispute for precedence with lord Dacre of Gillesland, his pretensions were confirmed by parliament. Anthony Wood says, that “his younger years were adorned with all kind of superficial learning, especially with dramatic poetry, and his elder with that which was divine.” Wood adds, that he was living, “an ancient man, and in esteem among the nobility, in the latter end of Henry VIII.” But from his epitaph, which is inserted in Collins’s Peerage, it appears that he died in Nov. 1556, aged eighty. His great grandson, Edward lord Morley, who married Elizabeth, sole daughter and heir of William Stanley, lord Montegle, had issue Mary, who by her husband Thomas Habington, of Henlip in Worcestershire, was mother of William Habington the poet, and was supposed to have been the person who wrote to her brother William, lord Morley and Montegle, the famous letter of warning respecting the gun-powder plot.

, the second protestant archbishop of Canterbury, a very learned prelate, and a great benefactor to the literature of his country, was born in the parish of St. Saviour’s, Norwich, Aug. 6, 1504. He was of ancient and reputable families both by the father’s and mother’s side. His father dying when he was only twelve years of age, the care of his education devolved on his mother, who appears to have spared no pains in procuring him the best tutors in such learning as might qualify him for the university, to which he was removed in September 1521. He was entered of Corpus Christi or Bene't college, Cambridge, and was at first maintained at his mother’s expense, but in six months after admittance that expense was in some measure relieved, by his being chosen, a scholar of the house, called a bible clerk. In 1524 he took his degree of bachelor of arts, and in 1526 was made subdeacon, under the titles of Barnwell, and the chapel in Norwich fields. While at college, he had for his contemporaries Bacon and Cecil, Bradford and Ridley, afterwards men of great eminence in state and church, and the two latter distinguished sufferers for the sake of religion.

In 1533, when Mr. Parker had reached his twenty-ninth year, Cranmer, who was now promoted to the archbishopric, granted him a licence to preach through his province, as the king did a patent for the same throughout the kingdom, good and solid preachers being at that time very rare, The university, likewise, as he was much afflicted with a head-ache, readily passed a grace that he might preach covered, and showed him other marks of their regard. We have already noticed some of his celebrated contemporaries, and it may now be added, that he lived in great intimacy and friendship with Bilney, Stafford, Arthur, friar Barnes, Sowode, master of the college, Fowke, and many others, by whose means religion and learning were beginning to revive at Cambridge. For Bilney he had so great a veneration, that he went down to Norwich to attend his martyrdom, and afterwards defended him against the misrepresentations of sir Thomas More, who had asserted that he recanted at the stake. In the abovementioned year (1533) he was sent for to court, and made chaplain to queen Anne Boleyn, with whom he soon became a great favourite, she admiring his piety, learning, and prudence. A short time before her death, she gave him a particular charge to take care of her daughter Elizabeth, that she might not want his pious and wise counsel; and at the same time laid a strict charge upon the young princess, to make him a grateful return, if it should ever be in her power.

In July 1535 he proceeded B. D. and in the same year was preferred by the queen to the deanry of the college of Stoke-Clare in Suffolk, which was the more acceptable, as affording him an agreeable retirement for the pursuit of his studies. His friend Dr. Walter Haddon used to call it Parker’s Tusculanum. Meeting here with many superstitious practices and abuses that stood in need of correction, he immediately composed a new body of statutes, and erected a school for the instruction of youth in grammar and the study of humanity, which by his prudent care and management soon produced the happiest effects. These regulations were so generally approved, that when the duke of Norfolk was about to convert the monastery at Thetford, of his own foundation, into a college of secular priests, he requested a sight of them for his direction. Mr. Parker now continued to be an assiduous preacher, often preaching at Stoke, and at Cambridge, and places adjacent, and sometimes at London, at St. Paul’s-cross. At what time he imbibed the principles of the reformers we are not told, but it appears that in these sermons he attacked certain Romish superstitions with such boldness, that articles were exhibited against him by some zealous papists, against whom he vindicated himself with great ability before the lord Chancellor Audley, who encouraged him to go on without fear. On the death of queen Anne in 1537, the king took him under his more immediate protection, appointed him one of his chaplains, and, upon new-modelling the church of Ely, nominated him to one of the prebends in the charter of erection.

In 1538 he made a visit to the university, where, after having performed his exercises with general applause, he commenced D. D. In 1542 he was presented by the chapter of Stoke to the rectory of Ashen in Essex, which he resigned in 1544, and was presented to the rectory of Birmingham All Saints, in the county of Norfolk; but his most important promotion that year, was to the mastership of Bene't college, Cambridge, where he had been educated. On this occasion he was recommended to the society by the king, as the fittest person in every respect; and they knowing his character, did not hesitate to elect him, and he was admitted accordingly Dec. 4, 1544. He began his government of the college with making some useful orders concerning certain benefactions and foundations belonging to the college; and, to prevent the college goods from being embezzled, he caused exact inventories of them to be made, and deposited in the common chest, ordering at the same time that they should be triennially inspected and renewed by the master and fellows. Finding likewise their accounts in great confusion, occasioned principally by the neglect of registering them in books belonging to the society, he put them into such a method, that by comparing the rentals, receipts, expenses, &c. together, they might at any time appear as clear as possible, and these he caused to be annually engrossed on parchment for their better preservation. He also undertook the revisal of the statutes, and reduced them to nearly their present form, being assisted in this by his friend Dr. Mey, the civilian, and one of the visitors who confirmed them in the second year of Edward VI. All these regulations and transactions, with some other matters relating both to the college and university, he caused to be registered in a book, called the Black Book, which has ever since been in the custody of the master. The old statutes were indeed once more introduced in the time of queen Mary, but continued no longer in force than to the first year of Elizabeth’s reign, when the former were again revived, and in 1568 finally reviewed, corrected, and approved by her visitors. In 1545 he was elected vice-chancellor, in which office he had an opportunity of exerting himself still farther for the welfare of his college and the university at large; and he gave such satisfaction, that within the space of three years he was elected to the same office. On his election, Dr. Haddon, the public orator, gave him this character to his friend Cheke, “cujus tu gravitatem, consilium, literas, nosti, nos experimur;” adding, “Catonem aut Quintum Fabium renatum putes.”

In the same year, 1545, the society presented him to the rectory of Land-Beach; but to his great mortification, he was obliged to resign his beloved college of Stoke in 1547, although he laboured as much as possible to prevent its dissolution. To preserve, however, as far as he could, the memory of its founder Edmund Mortimer, earl of March, he brought away with him his arms painted on glass, and placed them in a window of the master’s lodge; and secured the books of history and antiquities, which made part of that invaluable collection with which he afterwards enriched his college. The same year, and in the forty-third of his age, he married Margaret the daughter of Robert Harlstone, gent. of Mattishall in Norfolk, and sister of Simon Harlstone, who had lived some time at Mendlesham in Suffolk, where he was distinguished for his piety and sufferings in the reign of queen Mary. Dr. Parker had been attached to this lady for about seven years, but they were prevented from marrying by the statute of Henry VIII. which made the marriage of the clergy felony. Mr. Masters conjectures that it was about this time he drew up, in his defence, a short treatise still preserved in the college library “De conjugio Sacerdotum,” and another against alienation of the revenues of the church, which Strype has printed in his Appendix, No. VII. It is also probable that, on the increase of his family, he added the long gallery to the master’s lodge. The lady he married proved a most affectionate wife, and had so much sweetness of temper and amiable disposition, that bishop Ridley is said to have asked, “If Mrs. Parker had a sister?” intimating that he would have been glad to have married one who came near her in excellence of character.

In 1549, when Kett’s rebellion broke out, Dr. Parker happened to be on a visit to his friends at Norwich, where he did great service by his exhortations and sermons; and even ventured into the camp of the rebels, and, without regarding the imminent danger to which this exposed him, boldly inveighed against their rebellion and cruelty, exhorted them to temperance, sobriety, and submission, and placed in the strongest light every argument and warning that was likely to prevail. To give a faithful account of this affair, he afterwards employed Mr. Nevile (see Nevile, Alexander), who wrote it in elegant Latin, and received for his reward an hundred pounds. In 1550 he lost his most intimate friend Dr. Martin Bucer, who left him one of his executors; and to testify his great regard for that eminent reformer, he preached his funeral sermon. In this, with great modesty and diffidence, he has drawn a most excellent character of him, and indeed the whole is written in a style so plain and uniform, as to be much superior to the common rate of sermons in those days. It was printed by Jugge, under the title, “Howe we ought to take the death of the godly, a sermon made in Cambridge at the burial of the noble clerck, D. M. Bucer. By Matthew Parker, D. of Divinitie.”

In 1552 the king presented him to the canonry and prebend of Covingham, in the church of Lincoln, where he was soon after elected dean, upon Dr. Taylor’s promotion to that see. He had before been nominated to the mastership of Trinity-college, probably on the death of Dr. Redman in 1551, but this did not take effect. It is also said that he declined a bishopric in this reign. On the accession of queen Mary, however, the scene was changed, and he, with all the married clergy who would not part with their wives, and conform to those superstitious rites and ceremonies they had so lately rejected, were stript of their preferments. He bore this reverse of fortune with pious resignation. “After my deprivation” (he says, in his private journal) “I lived so joyful before God in my conscience, and so neither ashamed nor dejected, that the most sweet leisure for study, to which the good providence of God has now recalled me, gave me much greater and more solid pleasures, than that former busy and dangerous kind of life ever afforded me. What will hereafter befall me, I know not; but to God, who takes care of all, and who will one day reveal the hidden things of men’s hearts, I commend myself wholly, and my pious and most chaste wife, with my two most dear little sons.” It appears also by a ms. in the college, quoted by Strype, that Dr. Parker “lurked secretly in those years (the reign of queen Mary) within the house of one of his friends, leading a poor life, without any men’s aid or succour; and yet so well contented with his lot, that in that pleasant rest, and leisure for his studies, he would never, in respect of himself, have desired any other kind of life, the extreme fear of danger only excepted. And therein he lived as all other good men then did. His wife he would not be divorced from, or put her away all this evil time (as he might, if he would, in those days, which so rigorously required it), being a woman very chaste, and of a very virtuous behaviour, and behaving herself with all due reverence toward her husband.”

It may seem extraordinary that one who had so early imbibed the sentiments of the reformers, and had adhered to them so constantly, should have escaped the vigilance of the persecutors; and it is certain that strict search was sometimes made for him, and that on one occasion, when obliged to make his escape on a sudden, he got a fall from his horse, by which he was so much hurt, that he never recovered it. Yet either from the remissness of his enemies, or the kindness of his friends, he was enabled to secrete himself, and notwithstanding the danger he was in, he employed his time in study. Among other things, it was during this alarming interval, that he wrote or rather enlarged a treatise, supposed to be drawn up by bishop Ponet, in defence of priests’ marriages, against a book of Dr. Martin’s, which he caused to be printed, but without his name, in 1562. The title was “A Defence of Priests’ Marriages, established by the Imperial laws of the realm of England; against a civilian, naming himself Thomas Martin, doctor of the civil laws,” &c. This work is noticed in our account of Dr. Martin, and a full account of it is given by Strype, p. 504. Dr. Parker also employed some part of his time in translating the book of Psalms into various and elegant English metre, which was likewise afterwards printed, but in what year is uncertain, unless in 1567, as minuted with a pen in the copy which is in the college library. This book, which Strype says he never could get a sight of, is divided into three quinquagenes with the argument of each psalm in metre placed before it, and a suitable collect full of devotion and piety at the end. Some copies of verses, and transcripts from the fathers and others on the use of the psalms are prefixed to it, with a table dividing them into Prophetici, Eruditorii, Consolatorii, &c. and at the end are added the eight several tunes, with alphabetical tables to the whole.

On the accession of queen Elizabeth, he left his retreat in Norfolk, and being on a visit to his friends at Cambridge, was sent for up to town by his old acquaintance and contemporaries at the university, sir Nicholas Bacon, now lord-keeper of the great seal, and sir William Cecil, secretary of state, who well knew his worth. But he was now become enamoured of retirement, and suspecting they designed him for some high dignity in the church, of which however no intimation had yet been given, he wrote them many letters, setting forth his own inabilities and infirmities, and telling the lord-keeper in confidence, “he would much rather end his days upon some such small preferment as the mastership of his college, a living of twenty nobles per ann. at most, than to dwell in the deanry of Lincoln, which is 200 at the least.” These statesmen, however, still considered him as in every respect the best fitted for the archbishopric of Canterbury; and the reluctance he showed to accept it, and the letters he wrote both to them and the queen, only served to convince all parties that they had made a proper choice. He was accordingly consecrated on Dec. 17, 1559, in Lambeth chapel, by William Barlow, late bishop of Bath and Wells, and then elect of Chichester; John Story, late bishop of Chichester, and then elect of Hereford; Miles Coverdale, bishop of Exeter, and John Hodgkin, suffragan bishop of Bedford. An original instrument of the rites and ceremonies used on this occcasion, corresponding exactly with the archbishop’s register, is still carefully preserved in Bene't college library, and proved of great service, when the papists, some years after, invented a story that Parker was consecrated at the Nag’s head inn, or tavern, in Cheapside. That this was a mere fable has been sufficiently shown by many authors, and is acknowledged even by catholic writers. Being thus constituted primate and metropolitan, Dr. Parker endeavoured to fill the vacant sees with men of learning and piety, who were well affected to the reformation; and soon after his own consecration, he consecrated in his chapel at Lambeth, Grindal, bishop of London; Cox, bishop of Ely; Sandys, bishop of Worcester; Jewell, bishop of Salisbury; and several others. The subsequent history of archbishop Parker is that of the church of England. He had assisted at her foundation, and for the remainder of his life had a principal hand in the superstructure. Referring, however, to ecclesiastic history, and particularly to Strype’s invaluable volume, for the full details of the archbishop’s conduct, we shall confine ourselves to a few of the most prominent of those measures in which he was personally concerned. Soon after his consecration he received a letter from the celebrated Calvin, in which that reformer said that “he rejoiced in the happiness of England, and that God had raised up so gracious a queen, to be instrumental in propagating the true faith of Jesus Christ, by restoring the gospel, and expelling idolatry, together with the bishop of Rome’s usurped power.” And then in order to unite protestants together, as he had attempted before in king Edward’s reign, he intreated the archbishop to prevail with her majesty, to summon a general assembly of all the protestant clergy, wheresoever dispersed; and that a set form and method (namely of public service, and government of the church) might be established , not only within her dominions, but also among all the reformed and evangelical churches abroad. Parker communicated this letter to the queen’s council, and they took it into consideration, and desired the archbishop to return thanks to Calvin; and to signify that they thought his proposals very fair and desireable, but as to church-government, to inform him, that the church of England would adhere to the episcopal form. The death of Calvin prevented any farther intercourse on this subject, but Strype has brought sufficient evidence that Calvin was not absolutely averse to episcopacy, and that he was as zealous for uniformity as our archbishop, who has been so much reproached for his endeavours to promote it.

In 1561, archbishop Parker and some of the other prelates made an application to the queen against the use of images, to which her majesty still discovered a very great inclination, and it may be inferred that they induced her to change her opinion on this matter, from the anecdote given in our account of dean Nowell, who incurred her displeasure by only presenting her with a prayer-book, illustrated with engravings. In other respects she adhered to many of her father’s notions, and when about this time she took a journey into Essex and Suffolk, she expressed great displeasure at finding so many of the clergy married, and at observing so many women and children in cathedrals and colleges. She had, indeed, so strong an aversion to matrimony in the clergy, that it was owing to Cecil’s courage and dexterity, as appears by a letter of his to Parker, that she did not absolutely prohibit the marriage of all ecclesiastics. He was, however, obliged to consent to an injunction, “that no head or member of any college or cathedral, should bring a wife, or any other woman, into the precincts of it, to abide in the same, on pain of forfeiture of all ecclesiastical promotions.” Archbishop Parker took the liberty to remonstrate with the queen against this order, and on this interview she treated the institution of matrimony with contempt, declared to him that she repented her making any of them bishops, and wished it had been otherwise; nay, threatened him with injunctions of another nature, which his grace understood to be in favour of the old religion. In his letter to Cecil on this occasion, he assures him that the bishops have all of them great reason to be dissatisfied with the queen; that he repents his having engaged in the station in which he was; and that the reception which he had from her majesty the day before, had quite indisposed him for all other business, and he could only mourn to God in the bitterness of his soul; but if she went on to force the clergy to any compliance, they must obey God rather than men, and that many of them had conscience and courage enough to sacrifice their lives in defence of their religion.

But, whatever our archbishop might suffer from the despotic caprices of the queen, he had yet more trouble with the dissentions which appeared in the church itself, and never ceased to prevail, in a greater or less degree, until the whole fabric was overturned in the reign of Charles I. These first appeared in the opposition given to the ecclesiastic habits by a considerable number of divines, and those men of worth and piety, who seemed to be of opinion that popery might consist in dress as well as doctrine. By virtue of the clause in the act of uniformity, which gave the queen a power of adding any other rites and ceremonies she pleased, she set forth injunctions ordering that the clergy should wear seemly garments, square caps, and copes, which had been laid aside in the reign of king Edward. Many conformed to these in every circumstance, but others refused the cap and surplice, considering them as relics of popery, and therefore both superstitious and sinful. The queen, enraged at this opposition, which was favoured even by some of her courtiers, wrote a letter to the two archbishops, reflecting with some acrimony on it, as the effect of remissness in the bishops; and requiring them to confer with her ecclesiastical commissioners, that an exact order and uniformity might be maintained in all external rites and ceremonies; and that none hereafter should be admitted to any ecclesiastical preferment, but those who were disposed to obedience in this respect. Archbishop Parker, accordingly, with the assistance of several of his brethren, drew up ordinances for the due order in preaching and administering the sacraments, and for the apparel of persons ecclesiastical. According to these, the preachers were directed to study edification, and to manage controversy with sobriety; exhorting the people to frequent the communion, and to obey the laws, and the queen’s injunctions. All the licences for preaching were declared void and of no effect, but were to be renewed to such as their bishops thought worthy of the office; and such as preached unsound doctrine were to be denounced to the bishop, and not contradicted in the church. These who had licences were to preach once in three months; and those who were unlicensed, were to read homilies. In administering the sacrament, the principal minister was to wear a cope, but at all other prayers only the surplice; in cathedrals they were to wear hoods, and preach in them; the sacrament was to be received by every body kneeling; every minister saying the public prayers, or administering the sacraments, was to wear a surplice with sleeves; and every parish was to provide a communion-table, and to have the ten commandments set on the east wall above it. The bishops were to give notice when any persons were to be ordained, and none were to be ordained without degrees. Then followed some rules about wearing apparel, caps, and gowns; to all which was added, a form of subscription to be required of all who were admitted to any office in the church; that they would not preach without licence, that they would read the Scriptures intelligibly, that they would keep a register-book, that they would use such apparel in service-time especially as was appointed, that they would keep peace and quiet in their parishes, that they would read some of the Bible daily, and in conclusion, that they would observe uniformity, and conform to all the laws and orders already established for that purpose; and to use no sort of trade, if their living amounted to twenty nobles.

It might have been expected that these ordinances would have pleased the queen, as being in conformity with her wishes, and, in fact, in answer to her orders; but the opponents of the habits, who began to be called Puritans, applied to their friends at court, and especially to her great favourite Robert Dudley, earl of Leicester, who prevailed so far with her majesty, that all her former resolution disappeared, and she refused to sanction the ordinances with her authority, telling the archbishop, that the oath of canonical obedience was sufficient to bind the inferior clergy to their duty, without the interposition of the crown. The archbishop, hurt at such capricious conduct, and at being placed in such a situation between the court and the church, told Cecil, that if the ministry persisted in their indifference, he would “no more strive against the stream, fume or chide who would;” and it is most probable his remonstrances prevailed, for the above ordinances were a few days after published, under the name of Advertisements; and he then proceeded upon them with that zeal which procured him from one party the reproach of being a persecutor, and from the other the honour of being a firm friend and supporter of the church-establishment. The particular steps he took, the trials he instituted, and the punishments he inflicted, are detailed at length by Strype and other church-historians; but on the merit of his conduct there is great diversity of opinion. It has been said, both in excuse and in reproach of his measures, that he was too subservient to the queen. To us it appears, that he took as much liberty in advising the queen, and in contending with her humours, as any prelate or statesman of her reign, and that what he did to promote uniformity in the church arose from a sincere, however mistaken opinion, that uniformity was necessary to the advancement of the reformation, and in itself practicable. All that is wrong in this opinion must be referred to the times in which he lived, when no man conceived that an established church could flourish if surrounded by sectaries, and when toleration was not at all understood in its present sense.

He continued to struggle with the difficulties attending his office and measures, until his seventy-first year, when, finding himself in a declining condition, he signed his will April 5, 1575, and died on May 17 following. He was buried in his own chapel at Lamleth, with a Latin inscription by his friend Dr. Walter Haddon: but this was demolished, and his bones taken up and scattered, during the usurpation; nor was it known what became of them till they were discovered by Dugdale, in archbishop Sancroft’s time, who again replaced them in the midst of the area of the chapel, as a small marble stone facing the altar, with this inscription upon it, now denotes, "Corpus Matthæi archiepiscopi tandem hie quiescit:" the monument itself, with an epitaph upon it of his own drawing up, being since removed into the anti-chapel.

Concerning his learning and zeal for the promotion of learning, there is no difference of opinion. His skill in ancient liturgies was such, that he was one of the first selected to draw up the Book of Common Prayer; and when he came to be placed at the head of the church, he laboured much to engage the bishops, and other learned men, in the revisal and correction of the former translations of the Bible. This was at length undertaken and carried on under his direction and inspection, who assigned particular portions to each of his assistants, which he afterwards perused and corrected, and spared no pains in getting it completed. It was first published in 1568, and has usually been called the “Bishop’s Bible,” and ran its course with the Geneva translation, until the present version was executed, in the reign of king James. He also published a "Saxon homily on the Sacrament,“translated out of Latin into that language, by Ælfric a learned abbot of St. Alban’s, about 900 years before; with two epistles of the same, in which is not the least mention of the doctrine of transubstantiation. He was the editor also of editions of the histories of Matthew of Westminster and Matthew of Paris, and of various other works, enumerated by Tanner; some of which were either composed by him, or printed at his expence. The work on which he is thought to have spent most time was that” De Antiquitate Britanniæ Ecclesiæ;“but his share in this is a disputed point among antiquaries. In his letter to the lord treasurer, to whom he presented a copy, he speaks of it as his own collection, which had been the employment of his leisure hours. Dr. Drake likewise, in the preface to his edition of it, quotes a letter of the archbishop’s in the college-library, in which he expressly styles it,” My book of Canterbury Predecessors;“and archbishop Bramhall was of opinion, that the conclusion of the preface proved Parker himself to have been the author. But notwithstanding these testimonies, the matter is doubtful. Selden was the first who called it in question, although without giving his reasons; and sir Henry Spelman considered Dr. Ackworth to have been either the author or collector of the work. Archbishop Usher thinks that Ackworth wrote only the first part, concerning the British antiquities; and he, Selden, and Wharton, ascribe the lives of the archbishops to Josselyn, and make Parker little more than the director or encourager of the whole. And this certainly seems to be confirmed by the copy now in the Lambethlibrary. This copy, which originally belonged to that library, but was missing from the year 1720, was replaced in 1757 by Dr. Trevor, bishop of Durham, who found it in the Sunderland-library. This, which Dr. Ducarel thought the only perfect one existing, contains many manuscript papers, letters, and notes, respecting archbishop Parker and the see of Canterbury; and, among these, some proofs that Ackworth and Josselyn had a considerable share in the composition of the work. At the beginning of St. Augustine’s life we find this note:” These 24 pages of St. Augustine’s life were thus begun by George Acworth Dr. of laws, at the appointment of Matthew Parker Abp.of Cant, and the lives of all the archbishops should have in this course been perfected—(some words not intelligible)—but deth prevented it.“This Dr. Ackworth, as we have mentioned in our account of him (vol. I.) was alive in 1576, but how long after is not known, but as this is a year after our prelate’s death, there seems some difficulty in understanding the latter part of this note, without adopting archbishop Usher’s opinion above mentioned. We also find in the Lambeth copy, on the title-page of the history, the following note:” This Historie was collected and penned by John Josselyn, one of the sons of sir Thomas Josselyn, knight, by the appointment and oversight of Matthew Parker archbishop of Cant. the said John being entertained in the said archb. house, as one of his antiquaries, to whom, besides the allowance afforded to him in his howse, he gave to hym the parsonage of Hollinborn in Kent," &c.

, was a puritan divine of considerable learning and reading, but his early history is very variously represented. Mr. Brook, in his late “Lives of the Puritans,” places him as rector of North- Benflete, in Essex, in 1571, on the authority of Newcourt, but Newcourt is evidently speaking of a Robert Parker, who held Bardfield-parva in 1559, and must have been a different person. On the other hand, Mr. Masters, in his History of C. C. C. C informs us that he was in 1581 a pensioner of Bene't college, Cambridge, and was made scholar of the house in 1583, at which time he published a copy of Latin verses on the death of sir William Buttes, and succeeded to a fellowship in the latter end of the year following. He was then A. B. but commenced A. M. in 1585, and left the university in 1589. Both his biographers agree that the person they speak of was beneficed afterwards at Wilton, in Wiltshire, and the author of “A scholastical Discourse against symbolizing with Anti-christ in ceremonies, especially in the sign of the Cross,” printed in 1607, without a printer’s name, consisting of near 400 pages closely printed in folio. In this he appears to have employed very extensive reading to very little purpose, according to Dr. Grey; and even Mr. Pierce, in his “Vindication of the Dissenters,” owns that “his fancy was somewhat odd as to his manner of handling his argument.” It contained at the same time matter so very offensive, that a proclamation was issued for apprehending the author, who, after many narrow escapes, was enabled to take refuge in Holland. Here some of his biographers inform us that he was chosen minister of the English church at Amsterdam; but the magistrates of the city, being unwilling to disoblige the king of England by continuing him their pastor, he removed to Doesburgh, where he became chaplain to the garrison. Others tell us that he would have been chosen pastor to the English church at Amsterdam, had not the magistrates been afraid of disobliging king James. According to Mr. Brook, it would appear that he had published his work “De Descensu” before he left England, but we can more safely rely on Mr. Masters, who had seen the book, and who informs us that it was while he was at Amsterdam that he published a treatise, “De Descensu domini nostri Jesu Christi ad Inferos,” 4to, which had been begun by his learned friend Hugh Sandforcl, who finding death approaching, committed the perfecting of it to him. This he was about to do when compelled to leave England. His preface is dated Amsterdam, Dec. 30, 1611. He was also the author of a treatise “De Politia Ecclesiastica Christi et Hierarchicaopposita,” published in 1616, at which time he had been dead two years. He is indeed here represented “as an Eminent servant of Christ, called home to rest from his labours in the midst of his course.” The Bodleian catalogue assigns to him two other posthumous works, “A Discourse concerning Puritans,” 1641, 4to, and “The Mystery of the Vials opened in the 16th chapter of the Revelations.” He left a son, Thomas, author of a work called “Methodus gratioe divinse in traductione hominis peccatoris ad vitam,” Lond. 1657, 8vo, which the editor considered as a work of importance by the care he took to collate four ms copies. Brook says he wrote also “Meditations on the Prophecy of Daniel,” and died in 1677, in New England, to which he went in 1634, to avoid the consequences of nonconformity at home.

, a man of some learning, and no contemptible writer, but of despicable character, was born in Sept. 1640, at Northampton, where his father, John Parker, then practised the law. John had been bred to that profession in one of the Temples at London, and inclining to the parliament against the king, was preferred to be a member of the high court of justice in 1649, in which office he gave sentence against the three lords, Capel, Holland, and Hamilton, who were beheaded. During Oliver’s usurpation he was made an assistant committeeman for his county. In 1650, be published a book in defence of the new government, as a commonwealth, without a king or house of lords, entitled “The Government of the People of England, precedent and present,” with an emblematical engraved title-page. In June 1655, when Cromwell was declared protector, he was appointed one of the commissioners for removing obstructions at Worcesterhouse, in the Strand, near London, and was sworn serjeant at law next day. In Jan. 1659, he was appointed by the rump-parliament one of the barons of the exchequer; but, upon a complaint against him, was soon after displaced. His character, however, appears to have been such, that he was again made regularly serjeant at law, by the recommendation of chancellor Hyde, at the first call after the return of Charles II.

In 1665 he was elected a fellow of the royal society, and published about the same time some physico-theological essays, in Latin, with the title “Tentamina Physico-Theologica de Deo; sive Theologia Scholastica, ad normarn novae et reformats philosophise concinnata,” Lond. 1665, 4to. This he dedicated to archbishop Sheldon. The work was attacked by N. Fairfax, M. D. in a treatise with the whimsical title of “The Bulk and Selvedge of the World.” In 1666 he published “A free and impartial Censure of the Platonic Philosophy;” and shortly after “An account of the nature and extent of the Divine Dominion and Goodness, especially as they refer to the Origenian hypothesis concerning the pre-existence of souls, together with a special account of the vanity and groundlessness of the hypothesis itself,” Oxon. 166o, 4to. About Michaelmas, 1667, archbishop Sheldon appointed him one of his chaplains, a proof that at this time he was in estimation; and this seems to have led the way to higher preferment. He now left Oxford, and resided at Lambeth, under the eye of his patron; who, in June 1670, collated him to the archdeaconry of Canterbury, in the room of Dr. Sancroft, afterwards archbishop. On Nov. 26, the same year, having accompanied William prince of Orange on his visit to Cambridge, he bad the degree of D. D. conferred upon him. On Nov. 18, 1672, he was installed prebendary of Canterbury and had the rectories of Ickham and Chartham, in Kent, conferred upon him by the archbishop about the same time. About this time he published some of those writings against the presbyterians which involved him in a controversy. The first of these was his “Discourse of Ecclesiastical Polity, wherein the authority of the civil magistrate over the consciences of subjects in matters of external religion is asserted.” This was first answered by the anonymous author of “Insolence and Impudence triumphant,” &c. 1669; and by Dr. John Owen, in “Truth and Innocence vindicated.” He then published “A Defence and Continuation of Ecclesiastical Polity (against Dr. Owen),” Lond. 1671, 8vo “Toleration discussed,” &c. 1670, 4to “A Discourse in Vindication of bishop Bramhall and the Church of England, from the fanatic charge of Popery,” &c. This was prefixed to a “Treatise” of the said bishop, written in his own defence, 1672, 8vo. A humourous censure of this piece being published by Andrew Marvell, entitled '< The Rehearsal Transprosed,“&c. our author, in the same humourous taste, wrote” A Reproof to the Rehearsal Transprosed,“1673, 8vo. Wood, however, observes, that,” finding himself beaten in this cudgelling way, his high spirit was abated for ever after, and though Marvell replied to his ‘ Reproof,’ yet he judged it more prudent to lay down the cudgels. It put him upon a more sober, serious, and moderate way of writing.“(See Marvell.) Parker’s last publication in this controversy was” A free and impartial Inquiry into the causes of that very great esteem and honour the Nonconformist Ministers are in with their followers,“1673, 8vo. In 1678 he published his” Disputationes de Deo et providentia divina,“&c. 4to, which is highly commended by Dr. Henry More in the general preface to his works. This was followed by other works, entitled” Demonstration of the divine authority of the Law of Nature, and of the Christian Religion,“1681, 4to” The Case of the Church of England briefly stated in the three first and fundamental principles of a Christian Church. I. The Obligation of Christianity by Divine Right. II. The Jurisdiction of the Church by Divine Right. III. The institution of Episcopal Superiority by Divine Right,“London, 8vo;” An account of the Government of the Christian Church, in the first six hundred years; particularly shewing, I. The Apostolical practice of Diocesan and Metropolitical Episcopacy. II. The usurpation of patriarchal and papal authority. III. The war of two hundred years between the bishops of Rome and Constantinople, of universal supremacy,“London, 1683, 8vo;” Religion and Loyalty, or, a demonstration of the power of the Christian Church within itself, supremacy of sovereign powers over it, and duty of passive obedience and nonresistance to all their commands, exemplified out of records,“&c. 8vo and the year following, the second part of the same work, containing” the history of the concurrence of the imperial and ecclesiastical jurisdiction in the Government of the Church, from the beginning of the reign of Jovian to the end of Justinian," 1685, 8vo.

Having now openly rejected the church of England, which he had sacrificed to his ambition, he became one of the Romish mercenaries, prostituting his pen in defence of transubstantiation, and the worship of saints and images. The papists, it is certain, made sure of him as a proselyte; one of whom, in a letter from Liege, informs his correspondent that he even proposed in council, whether it was not expedient that at least one college in Oxford should be allowed to be catholics, that they might not be forced to be at such charges by going beyond the seas to study. In the same spirit, having invited two popish noblemen, with a third of the church of England, to an entertainment, he drank the king’s health, wishing a happy success to all his affairs; adding, that the religion of the protestants in England seemed to him to be in no better a condition than Buda was before it was taken, and that they were next to Atheists who defended that faith. So very notorious was his conduct, that the more prudent and artful of the popish party condemned it. Father Peter, a Jesuit, and privy-counsellor to king James, in a letter to father la Chaise, confessor to Louis XIV. uses these expressions: “The bishop of Oxford has not yet declared himself openly; the great obstacle is his wife, whom he cannot rid himself of; his design being to continue a bishop, and only change communion, as it is not doubted but the king will permit, and our holy father confirm; though I don't see how he can be farther useful to us in the religion he is in, because he is suspected, and of no esteem among the heretics of the English church; nor do I see that the example of his conversion is like to draw many others after him, because he declared himself so suddenly. If he had believed my counsel, which was to temporize for some longer time, he would have done better; but it is his temper, or rather zeal, that hurried him on to it.” These two letters were first printed in a “Third Collection of Papers relating to the present juncture of affairs in England,” &c. \6S9 9 4to, and have been since inserted in Echard’s and Rapin’s histories.

It must have been as the last effort of a desperate cause when he sent a “Discourse” to James, persuading him to embrace the protestant religion, with a “Letter” to the same purpose, which was printed at London in 1690, 4to. His works have but few readers at this day; and Swift observes, that “MarvelPs remarks on Parker continued to be read when the book which occasioned them was long ago sunk.” He left a son of his own name, who was an excellent scholar, and a man of singular modesty. He never took the oaths after the revolution. He married a bookseller’s daughter at Oxford, where he resided with a numerous family of children to support which he published some books, particularly, 1 “An English Translation of Tully de finibus, 1702,” 8vo, in the preface to which he has some animadversions upon Locke’s Essay concerning Human Understanding. 2. “An abridgment of the Ecclesiastic Histories of Eusebius, Socrates, Sozornen, and Theotloret,” 1729. He also published a Latin manuscript of his father, containing the history of his own time, under this title, “Reverendi admodum in Christo patris Samuelis Parkeri episcopi de rebus sui temporis commentariorum libri quatuor,” 1726, 8vo, of which,' two English translations were afterwards published, one by the rev. Thomas Newlin, fellow of Magdalen college. But Mr. Parker’s last and greatest work was entitled “Bibliotheca Biblica,” printed at Oxford in 5 vols. 4to, the first of which appeared in two parts in 1720, and the fifth in 1735, with an account of the other writings of the author, and some particulars of his life, drawn up by Dr. Thomas Haywood, of St. John’s college, to whom were attributed most of the dissertations in the work. He describes it as “being a new Comment upon the five Books of Moses, extracted from the ancient fathers, and the most famous critics both ancient and modern, with occasional annotations or dissertations upon particular difficulties, as they were often called for.” Mr. Parker died July 14, 1730, in his fiftieth year, leaving a widow and children. The metrical paraphrase of Leviticus xi. 13, &c. in vol. Hi. was written by Mr. Warton, of Magdalen college, father to the late learned brothers, Joseph and Thomas Warton; and the “Fragment of Hyppolitus, taken out of two Arabic Mss. in the Bodleian,” in the fourth vol. was translated by the late Dr. Hunt. Mr. Parker never was in orders, as he could not reconcile his mind to the new government; but he associated much and was highly respected by many divines, particularly nonjurors, as Dr. Hickes, Mr. Collier, Mr. Dodwell, Mr. Leslie, Mr. Nelson, and Dr. Grabe, whose liberality lessened the difficulties which a very large family occasioned. He appears to have had a place in the Bodleian library, as Mr. Wheatly, in a letter to Dr. Rawlinson, dated Dec. 1739, says, “Sam. Parker’s son I had heard before was apprenticed to Mr. Clements: but the account you give me of his extraordinary proficiency is new. If it be true also, I hope some generous patron of learning will recall him from the bookseller’s shop, and place him in his father’s seat, the Bodleian library.” This son, Sackville Parker, was afterwards for many years an eminent bookseller at Oxford, and one of the four Octogenarian booksellers, who died in 1795 and 1796, namely, James Fletcher, at eighty-six; Sackville Parker, at eightynine; Stephen Fletcher, at eighty -two, and Daniel Prince, at eighty-five. They were all born at Oxford, except James Fletcher. The present worthy bookseller, Mr. Joseph Parker, is nephew and successor to Mr. Sackville Parker.

, an eminent prelate of the sixteenth century, was born at Guild ford, in Surrey, in 1511, and was the son of Mr. George Parkhurst of that place. He was educated there in the grammar school adjoining to Magdalen college gate, under Thomas Robertson, a very famous teacher. He was elected fellow of Merton college in 1529, and three years after, proceeding in arts, entered into holy orders. Anthony Wood says that he was at this time better esteemed for poetry and oratory than divinity. Yet we find him recorded in the life of Jewell, as the tutor of that excellent prelate, who entered of Merton college in 1535, and as “prudently instilling, together with his other learning, those excellent principles into this young gentleman, which afterwards made him the darling and wonder of his age.” Among other useful employments, we find him collating Coverdale and Tindal’s translations of the Bible along with his pupil, of whom he conceived a very high opinion, and on one occasion exclaimed “Surely Paul’s Cross will one day ring of this boy,” a prophecy which was remarkably fulfilled in Jewell’s celebrated sermon there in 1560. Parkhurst, it is true, was a poet and an orator, but he had very early examined the controversy that was about to end in the reformation, and imbibed the spirit of the latter. In 1548, according to a ms note of Baker, he was presented by Thomas lord Seymour to the rich benefice of Bishop’s Cleve in Gloucestershire, which he held three years in commendam, and where he did much good by his hospitality and charity; but the author of Jewell’s life says that he held this living in 1544, and when in that year Jewell commenced master of arts, he bore the charges of it. Nor, says Jewell’s biographer, “was this the only instance wherein he (Jewell) did partake of this good man’s bounty, for he was wont twice or thrice in a year to invite him to his house, and not dismiss him without presents, money, and other things that were necessary for the carrying on his studies. And one time above the rest, coming into his chamber in the morning, when he was to go back to the university, he seized upon his and his companions purses, saying, What mo'ney, I wonder, have these miserable, and beggardly Oxfordians? And finding them pityfully lean and empty, stuffed them with money, till they became both fat and weighty.”

Strype, on the authority of his contemporary Becan, who knew him well, gives him this character: “He was naturally somewhat hasty; but soon appeased again. He would speak his mind freely, and fear none in a good cause. A true friend, and easily reconciled to any against whom he had taken a displeasure. He appointed in his diocese (that was large) for the better oversight thereof, ten commissaries, to whom he, as occasion served, sent instructions for the regulation and order of his see. He could have been willing to allow a liberty of officiating in the church, to such as could not conform to some of the ceremonies of it, looking upon them as indifferent matters; but upon command from above, he readily obeyed his prince’s and metropolitan’s authority. He was a friend to prophesies; that is, to the meetings of the ministers in several appointed parish churches in his diocese, as in St. Edmund’s Bury, &c. to confer together about the interpretation and sense of the scriptures. But the queen forbidding it, upon some abuses thereof, the archbishop signified to him her will, and he in obedience sent to his archdeacons and commissaries, to have them forborn for the future.” “As for his life and conversation, it was such as might be counted a mirror of virtue; wherein appeared nothing but what was good and godly; an example to the flock in righteousness, in faith, in love, in peace, in word, in purity. He preached diligently, and exhorted the people that came to him. He was a learned man, as well in respect of human learning, as divine, well seen iti the sacred Scriptures; an earnest protestant, and lover of sincere religion; an excellent bishop, a faithful pastor, and a worthy example to -all spiritual ministers in his diocese, both for doctrine, life, and hospitality.” This character is confirmed by Bale, in the dedication to Parkhurst, of his “Reliques of Rome,” printed in 1563.

His works have not much connexion with his profession, all, except his letters, being Latin poetry on sundry occasions. He was indeed one of the translators of the Bishops’ Bible, of which his share was the Apocrypha from the book of Wisdom to the end; but he is best known to the curious by his “Ludicra, sive Epigrammata juvenilia.” In T572 he sent a copy of these to his old and dear friend Dr. Wilson, master of St. Catherine’s, as a new-year’s gift, and styled them his “good, godly, and pleasant epigrams;” and they were in the following year printed by Day, in a small 4to volume. Why Anthony Wood should give the report that these epigrams were as indecent as Martial’s, when he adds at the same time that “he cannot perceive it,” seems unaccountable; but even Blomefield has adopted this false accusation. Many of them appear to have been first printed at Zurich in 1558, where they were written, and republished now. Among the commendatory verses is a copy by dean Nowell, to whom two of the epigrams are addressed, and who was not likely to have commended indecencies, if we could suppose our pious prelate capable of publishing such. “His epigrams,” says archdeacon Churton, “affording notices of persons and things not elsewhere easily found, are on the Grecian rather than the Roman model, not sparkling with wit, but grave and didactic.” The other works attributed to bishop Parkhurst are, 1. “Epigrammata in mortem duorum fratrum Suffolciensium, Caroli et Henrici Brandon,” Lond. 1552, 4to. These were the sons of Charles Brandon, duke of Suffolk, and died of the sweating-sickness. 2. “Epigrammata seria,” ibid. 1560, which seem to be a part of his larger collection; and some of them had been long before published at Strasburgh, along with Shepreve’s “Summa et synopsis Nov. Test, distichis ducentis sexaginta comprehensa.” 3. “Vita Christi, carm. Lat. in lib. precum privat.” ibid. 1578. He also addressed Henry VIII. and queen Catherine in some complimentary verses, when they were about to visit Oxford in 1543; and there is an epitaph of his on queen Catherine in the chapel of Sudley-castle. Several of his letters have been published by Strype, and more in ms. are in the British Museum.

, a late learned divine and lexicographer, was the second son of John Parkhurst, esq. of Catesby, in Northamptonshire, by Ricarda Dormer, daughter of judge Dormer. He was born in June 1728, was educated at Rugby school in Warwickshire, and was afterwards of Clare-hall, Cambridge, where he took his degree of B. A. in 1748, that of M. A. in 1752, and was many years fellow of his college. Being a younger brother, he was intended for the church, and entered into orders, but becoming heir to a very considerable estate, he was relieved from the usual anxieties respecting preferment, and was now a patron himself. Still he continued to cultivate the studies becoming a clergyman and in the capacity of a curate, but without any salary, he long did the duty, with exemplary diligence and zeal, in his own chapel at Catesby, which, after the demolition of the church of the nunnery there, served as a parish-church, of which also he was the patron. When several years after, in 178 4, it fell to his lot to exercise the right of presentation, he presented to the vicarage of Epsom in Surrey, the late rev. Jonathan Boucher (see Boucher), as one who in his opinion had given the best proofs of his having a due sense of the duties of his office. It was by marriage he had become patron of this living, having in 1754 married Susanna Myster, daughter, and, we believe, heiress of John Myster, esq. of Epsom.

His first publication was his “Paradisi in Sole Paradisus terrestris, or a choice Garden of all sorts of Rarest Flowers, &c.; to which is annexed a Kitchen Garden,” &c. This was printed at London, anno 1629, in a folio of 612 pages. A second edition, “much corrected and enlarged,” appeared in 1656, after the decease of the author. Both editions are dedicated “to the Queen’s most excellent Majesty,” which could hardly have been, as Dr. Pulteney supposed, queen Elizabeth; but rather the queen of Charles I.; and it is to the honour of those who edited the new impression, in 1656, that this dedication was not then suppressed. About a thousand plants, either species or varieties, are described in this book, of which 780 are figured, in wood cuts, partly copied from Clusius and Lobel, partly original, but all of them coarse and stiff, though sometimes expressive. Numerous remarks are interspersed, respecting the botanical history or medical virtues of the plants, as well as their culture; but the latter subject is, for the most part, given in the introductory chapters, which display no small degree of intelligence and experience. This book affords a very correct and pleasing idea of the gardens of our ancestors, at the time it was written -, and has been considered, by the learned authors of the Hortus Kewensis," unequivocal authority as to the time when any particular species was introduced or cultivated among us. Though our kitchen-gardens had not arrived at such perfection as they attained in king William’s days, and have since preserved, there is reason to think the science of horticulture declined considerably after the time of Parkinson, previous to its restoration at the end of the seventeenth century. It is no small praise to Parkinson’s work, that the late Mr. Curtis held it in particular estimation, always citing it in his Magazine with peculiar pleasure and respect.

In 1640 our author published his principal work, the “Theatrum Botanicum, or Theatre of Plants, or an Herbal of large extent;” &c. a ponderous folio of 1746 pages, with innumerable wooden cuts. This work and the Herbal of Gerarde were the two main pillars of botany in England till the time of Ray; one or other, or both, being the inexhaustible resource of all who had any love for plants, or any interest in inquiring into their qualities. Of these two writers it is justly observed that Parkinson was by far the most original and the most copious, but his cuts being of vastly inferior merit to those admirable ones prepared for Conrad Gesner, with which Gerarde had the means of adorning his publication, the latter has greatly prevailed in popularity, as a book of reference. It is indeed chiefly for the figures that we now cite these works. Nice distinctions of species, or any discrimination between species and varieties, are not to be expected; still less, any ideas of classification or scientific arrangement, worthy a moment’s consideration or comparison. It is not to be wondered at if these great works contain some hundreds of repetitions, when we consider how obscurely many plants had been described, or even figured, by previous authors; insomuch that it was in many cases next to impossible to discover whether a given plant had been described before. Parkinson, however, is entitled to superior praise on this head, having taken all possible pains to avoid such mistakes, by his deep study of synonyms. Some papers of Lobel are said to have fallen into the hands of Parkinson, after the death of the former, which proved of use to his undertaking; but it does not appear that he implicitly confided in such, any more than in previously printed authorities, without a due investigation, and therefore they became in some measure his own.

, a French author and poet, whose works are now scarce, as well as obsolete, was originally a merchant at Dieppe, where he was born in 1494, and became famous by means of his voyages, and his taste for the sciences. He died in the island of Sumatra, A. D. 1530, being then only thirty-six. The collection of his verses in 4to, printed in 1536, is entitled “Description nouvelle des Dignites de ce Monde, et de la Dignite de l'homme,” composee en rithme Franchise et en maniere d‘exhortation, par Jean Parmentier: avec plusieur chants Royaulx, et une Moralite a l’Honneur de la Vierge, mise par personaiges; plus la deploration sur la mort dudit Parmentier et son frere, composee par Pierre Crignon.“This book is very rare. Crignon, who published it, was Parmentier' s particular friend, and thus speaks of him” From the year 1522, he had applied to the practice of cosmography, on the great fluctuations of the sea he became very profound in astrology he composed several maps, spherical and plain, which have been used with success in navigation. He was a man worthy to be known by all the learned; and capable, if he had lived, of doing honour to his country by great enterprises. He was the first pilot who conducted vessels to the Brasils, and the first Frenchman who discovered the Indies, as far as the island Samothra or Sumatra, named Taprobane by the ancients. He reckoned also upon going to the Moluccas; and he has told me several times, that when he should return to France, his intention was to seek a passage to the North, and to make discoveries from thence to the South.“Another work by him is entitled” Moralites tres-excellens en Thonneur de la benoiste Vierge Marie; mise en rime Franchise et en personnaiges, par Jehan Parmentier,“Paris, 1531,4to, black letter. This also is extremely scarce, but is reprinted in the” Description nouvelle," &C.

, whose family name was Francis Mazzuoli, is more generally called Parmigiano, from Parma, where he was born in 1503. He studied under two uncles, Michele and Philip, but the chief modelof his imitation was Correggio, from whose works, compared with those of Michael Angelo, Raphael, and Julio, he formed that peculiar style for which he is celebrated. He displayed his natural genius for painting so very early, that at sixteen he is said to have produced designs which would have done honour to an experienced painter. His first public work, the St. Eustachius, in the church of St. Petronius, in Bologna, was done when he was a boy. In 1527, when Rome was sacked by the emperor Charles V. Parmigiano was found, like Protogenes at Rhodes, so intent upon his work as not to notice the confusion of the day. The event is variously related; some say that he escaped, like the ancient artist, from all violence, by the admiration of the soldiers; others, that he was plundered by them of his pictures, though his person was safe the first party who came taking only a few, while those who followed swept away the rest. His turn for music, and particularly his talent for playing on the lute, in some degree seduced him from his principal pursuit; and Vasari says he was much diverted from his art by the quackery of the alchymists; but this fact has by some writers been questioned. He died of a violent fever, in 1540, at the early age of 36.

Parmigiano had a cousin and pupil, G. Mazzuoli, who is little known beyond Parma and its districts, though for “impasto,” and the whole mystery of colour, he has few equals. There is reason to believe that several pictures ascribed to Francis, especially those of a stronger and gayer tone, have been painted by this artist. He was more attached to the style of Correggio than Francis, and seized its character with great felicity in the Nuptials of St. Catherine, in the church del Carmine. He excelled in perspective, and in the Last Supper, in the refectory of S. Giovanni, placed and painted a colonnade with all the illusion of Pozzo. To the most harmonious chiaro-scuro, he added grandeur, variety, vivacity, in fresco. None of his fellow artists equalled him in copiousness, fertility, and execution; and to these perhaps we may ascribe the inequality perceptible in his works. He flourished about 1580, and had a son Alexander, who painted in the dome of Parma, in 1571. He was a feeble imitator of the family style.

, a very pleasing English poet, was descended from an ancient family, settled for some centuries at Congleton, in Cheshire. His father, of the same name, wns attached to the republican party in the reign of Charles I.; and on the restoration found it convenient to go over to Ireland, carrying with him a large personal fortune, with which he purchased estates in that kingdom. These, with the lands he had in Cheshire, descended to the poet, who was horn in 1679, in Dublin. In this city he was educated, and entered of Trinity-college, Dublin, at the age of thirteen. He became M. A. in 1700, and in the same year was ordained deacon, although under the canonical age, by a dispensation from the primate. Three years after he was admitted into priest’s orders, and in 1705, Dr. Ashe, bishop of Clogher, conferred upon him the archdeaconry of Clogher. About the same time, he married miss Anne Minchin, an amiable lady, by whom he had two sons, who died young, and a daughter who long survived him.

Having been warmly recommended by Swift to archbishop King, this prelate gave him a prebend in 1713, and in May 1716, presented him to the vicarage of Finglass, in the diocese of Dublin, worth 400l. a-year. “Such notice,” says Dr. Johnson, “from such a man, inclines me to believe, that the vice of which he has been accused was not gross, or not notorious.” But he enjoyed these preferments little more than a year, for in July 1717 he died at Chester, on his way to Ireland, in his thirty-eighth year. Dying without male issue, his estate, but considerably embarrassed by his imprudence, devolved to his nephew, sir John Parnell, bart. one of the justices of the King’s-bt-nch in Ireland, and father to the Irish chancellor of the Exchequer, sir John Parnell, who died in 1801. justly founded, are, his “Rise of Woman;” the “Fairy Tale;” the “Hymn to Contentment;” “Health;” the “Vigil of Venus” the “Night-piece on Death” the <c Allegory on Man,“and” The Hermit.“These have been respectively criticised by his biographers Goldsmith and Johnson, and have stood the test of nearly a century.” His praise,“says Dr. Johnson,” must be derived from the easy sweetness of his diction,; in his verses there is more happiness than pains: he is sprightly without effort, and always delights, though he never ravishes: every thing is proper, yet every thing seems casual."

, an English divine, was the son of Richard Parr, likewise a divine, and was born at Fermoy, in the county of Cork, where, we presume, his father was beneficed, in 1617; and this singularity is recorded of his birth, that his mother was then fifty-five years of age. He was educated in grammar at a country school, under the care of some popish priests, who were at that time the only schoolmasters for the Latin-tongue. In 1635, he was sent to England, and entered as a servitor of Exeter college, Oxford, where his merit procured him the patronage of Dr. Piideaux, the rector, by whose interest, as soon as he had taken his bachelor’s degree in arts, in 1641, he was chosen chaplain-fellow of the college. He found here another liberal patron and instructor in the celebrated archbishop Usher, who, in 1643, retired to this college from the tumult then prevailing through the nation and observing the talents of Mr. Parr as a preacher, made him his chaplain; and, about the end of that year, took him with him to Glamorganshire. On his return with this prelate, he obtained the vicarage of Ryegate in Surrey, on the presentation of Mr. Roger James, gent, son of sir Roger James, knight, whose sister he married, a widow lady of considerable property. In doctrinal points he appears to have concurred with the assembly of divines, who were mostly Calvinists; but it seems doubtful whether he ever took the Covenant. In 1649, he resigned his fellowship of Exeter college, and continued chaplain to archbishop Usher, while that prelate lived. In 1653, he was instituted to the living of Camberweli in Surrey, and appears to have been some time rector of Bermondsey, where his signature occurs in the register of 1676, and he is thought to have resigned it in 1682. At the Restoration he was created D. D. and had the deanery of Armagh, and an Irish bishopric, offered to him, both which he refused; but accepted a canonry of Armagh. He remained vicar of Camberweli almost thirty-eight years, and was greatly beloved and followed. Wood, in his quaint way says, “He was so constant and ready a preacher at Camberweli, that his preaching being generally approved, he broke two conventicles thereby in his neighbourhood that is to say, that by his out- vying the Presbyterians and Independents in his extemporarian preaching, their auditors would leave them, and flock to Mr. Parr.” All who speak of him indeed concur in what is inscribed on his monument, that <c he was in preaching, constant in life, exemplary in piety and charity, most eminent a lover of peace and hospitality and, in fine, a true disciple of Jesus Christ.“He died at Camberweli Novembers, 1691, and was buried in the church-yard, where the above monument was erected to his memory. His wife died before him. Dr. Parr wrote” Christian Reformation: being an earnest persuasion to the speedy practice of it: proposed to all, but especially designed for the serious consideration of his dear kindred and countrymen of the county of Cork in Ireland, and the people of Ryegate and Camberweli in Surrey,“Lond. 1660, 8vo. He published also three occasional sermons; but the most valuable present he made to the publick was his” Life of Archbishop Usher," prefixed to that prelate’s Letters, printed in folio, 1686. It is the most ample account we have of Usher; and few men could have enjoyed better opportunities of knowing his real character. Wood mentions Dr. Thomas Marshall’s intention of enlarging this, as noticed in oiir account or' him.