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

, an Italian mathematician, was born at Verona, Nov. 4, 1721, and was educated at Padua, principally in jurisprudence, in which faculty he took his doctor’s degree, but he did not confine himself to that science. The knowledge which he acquired was so general, that upon whatever subject the conversation happened to turn, he delivered his sentiments upon it as if it had formed the only object of his study. On his return from the university, he entered on the possession of a considerable fortune, and determined to devote himself entirely to literary pursuits. The Hebrew, Greek, Latin, and Italian languages occupied much of his time, his object being to understand accurately the two first, and to be able to write and speak the two last with -propriety and elegance. He also learned French, Spanish, and English, the last particularly, for he was eager to peruse the best English writers, and was enabled to enter into their spirit. Ethics, metaphysics, divinity, and history, also shared much of his attention, and he displayed considerable taste in the fine arts, music, painting, and architecture. Nor did he neglect the study of antiquities, but made himself familiarly acquainted with coins, gems, medals, engravings, &c. Scarce any monumental inscriptions were engraved at Verona which he had not either composed or corrected. With the antiquities of his own country he was so intimately acquainted, that every person of eminence, who visited Verona, took care to have him in their company when they examined the curiosities of the city.

But these pursuits he considered merely as amusements; mathematics and the belles lettres were his serious studies. These studies are in general thought incompatible; but Torelli was one of the few who could combine the gravity of the mathematician with the amenity of the muses and graces. Of his progress in mathematics we have a sufficient proof in his edition of the collected works of Archimedes, printed at Oxford in 1792, folio, Greek and Latin. The preparation of this work had been the labour of most part of his life. Having been completely ready for publication, and even the diagrams cut which were to accompany the demonstration, the manuscript was disposed of after his death to the curators of the Clarendon press, by whose order it was printed under the immediate care of Dr. Robertson, the present very learned professor of astronomy. It seems to be the general opinion that there have been few persons in any country, or in any period of time, who were better qualified, than Torelli, for preparing a correct edition of Archimedes. As a Greek scholar he was capable of correcting the mistakes, supplying the defects, and illustrating the obscure passages that occurred in treatises originally written in the Greek tongue; his knowledge of Latin, and a facility, acquired by habit, of writing in this language, rendered him a fit person to translate the Greek into pure and correct Latin, and his comprehensive acquaintance with mathematics and philosophy qualified him for conducting the whole with judgment and accuracy. Torelli wrote the Italian language with the classic elegance of the fourteenth and fifteenth centuries, as appears by his different works in that language, both in prose and verse. He translated the whole of jtsop’s fables into Latin, and Theocritus, the epithalamium of Catullus, and the comedy of Plautus, called “Pseudolus,” into Italian verse. The first two books of the Æneid were also translated by him with great exactness, and much in the style of the original. Among his other Italian tanslations was Gray’s Elegy.

, a learned Danish historian and antiquary, was born in Iceland, and partly educated there, but completed his studies in Denmark. Here he became so well known for his acquaintance with history, that when Frederick III. king of Denmark, himself a very learned prince, wanted some able scholar to translate certain Icelandic Mss. which were in his library, Torfa-us was recommended to him, and executed his task so much to the king’s satisfaction, that he retained him for several years in his court, and employed him on other affairs that had no connexion with his studies, and always admired him as a man of talent and probity. As a reward he gave him a valuable appointment in the customs, but Torfseus found it not very agreeable to one of his disposition, and was about soliciting an exchange when the king died. His successor and son, Christian V. appointed him his historiographer for Norway, with a salary of 600 German crowns. This enabled Torfaeus to reside either at Copenhagen, or at an estate he had in Stongeland, pursuing his researches into history and antiquities. He died in 1719, or 1720, nearly eighty years old. As an historian, he occupies a very high rank among his countrymen. His principal works, or those best known, although all are scarce, are, 1. “Historia rerum Norvegicarum,” Hafniae (Copenhagen) 1711, 4 vols. in 2, fol. 2. “Orcades, seu rerum Orcadensium historiae libri tres,” ibid. 1697, 1715, fol. 3 “Series Dynastarum et Regum Daniae, a Skioldo Odini filio, ad Gormum Grandaevum,” ibid. 1702, 4to. 4. “Historia VinJandiae antiquae,” 1705, 8vo. 5. “Groenlandia antiqua, seu veteris Groenlandiae descriptio,” 1706, 8vo.

, the first of a family of eminent printers and booksellers, called in French Detournes, was born at Lyons in 1504, and learned printing first in the house of Sebastian Gryphius. He appears to have established another house about 1540, and printed many books in the name and on account of Gryphius; but from 1544 we find his own name to a number of very correct editions. Among others may be mentioned, an edition of “Petrarch,” in Italian, 1545, 16mo, with a letter from him to Maurice Sceva, of Lyons, in which he gives a curious account of the discovery of Laura’s tomb, in 1533, in the chapel of the Cordeliers’ church at Avignon a “Dante,” 1547, 16mo “Les Marguerites des Marguerites de la reine de Navarre,” 1547, 8vo; “Vitruviu$,” with Philander' s commentary and woodcuts finely executed, 1552, 8vo and “Froissart’s Chronicles,” 1559—61, 4 vols. fol. Most of his editions have Latin prefaces or dedications from his pen. His talents procured him the honour of being appointed king’s printer at Lyons, where he died of the plague in 1564. His device was two vipers forming a circle, the female devouring the head of the male, while she herself is devoured by her young, with the inscription “Quod tibi fieri non vis, alteri ne faceris.” This device is still to be seen on the front of a house at Lyons, in the rue Raisin, where his printing-office stood. He was succeeded by his son, John, who was also king’s printer, and carried on the business until 1585. His editions did not yield in elegance or correctness to those of his father, but being obliged at the date above-mentioned to quit his country, upon account of his religion, for he was a protestant, he settled at Geneva, where he had every encouragement, and in 1604 became a member of the council of two hundred. Like the Geneva printers, however, he deteriorated what he printed here by employing bad paper. He died in 1615. His descendants continued the printing and bookselling business at Geneva, and had established a very extensive trade, when in 1726, John James, and James Detournes purchased the stock of Anisson and Posnel, famous booksellers of Lyons, and obtained permission, notwithstanding their religion, to settle there; and as they also continued their house at Geneva, they greatly extended their trade, particularly to Spain and Italy. In 1740 the learned John Christian Wolff dedicated to them his “Monumenta Typographica,” as to the oldest printing and bookselling family in Europe. Their trade, which consisted chiefly in theological works, having begun to fall off when the Jesuits were suppressed, their sons, who had a plentiful fortune, sold off the whole of their stock in 1730, and retired from a business which had been carried on in their family with great reputation for nearly two hundred and forty years.

The ungovernable and restless habits of this artist precipitated him into great difficulties, and the circumstances of his death furnish a melancholy instance of the vicissitude of life, and the baneful effects of inquisitorial jurisprudence. Upon leaving England, he visited Spain, and after distinguishing himself by many excellent works, was employed by a Spanish grandee to sculpture in marble a Madonna and Infant Christ, of the size of nature, with high promises to be rewarded in proportion to its merit; and as the grandee was of the first rank, Torrigiano flattered himself with proportionate expectation. After much study and application he completed his work to his own satisfaction, and the grandee saw the performance with delight and reverence, bestowing on him the highest praise. Impatient to possess his treasure, he immediately sent for it, and that his generosity might be displayed to the greatest advantage he loaded two lacqueys with the money to defray the purchase. The bulk was promising; but when the bags were found to contain nothin^but brass maravedi, which amounted only to the small sum of thirty ducats, vexation and disappointment roused Torrigiano’s resentment, who considered this present rather as an insult than as a reward for his merit, and, on a sudden, snatched up his mallet, and without regard to the perfection of his workmanship, or the sacred character of the image, he broke it in pieces, and dismissed the lacqueys, with their load of farthings, to tell the tale. The grandee, with every passion alive to this merited disgrace, and perhaps impressed with superstitious horror for the sacrilegious nature of the act, presented him before the court of inquisition; and impeach* d him for his conduct as an infidel and heretic. Torrigiano urged the right of an author over his own creation reason pleaded on his side, but all in vain he was condemned to lose his life with torture. The holy office, however, lost its victim, for Torrigiano starved himself to death in prison, in 1522.

, otherwise Aretin, from being born at Arezzo, was one of the learned men of the fifteenth century, although our accounts of him are not very satisfactory. He either composed or translated a “Life of St. Atnanasius.” He was admitted into the confidence of Nicholas V. whose chamberlain he was. His conversation and candour have been much praised. He was principally skilled in grammar, as appears by his book “De Potestate Literarum.” Gesner’s “Bibliotheca” gives the titles of many other works; and Magius quotes a “Lexicon” of his. Laurentius Valla must have been one of his admirers, as he dedicates to him his books “De Latina Elegantia.” He died in 1466.

While Tossanus was here, he was frequently exposed to the greatest dangers during the war which broke out between the catholics and protestants, Orleans being besieged, and being full of adherents to the duke of Guise and his party. But by various means, although much persecuted, he escaped all, and finally reached Heidelberg, whither he had been invited by the pious Frederick III. elector palatine; and was so well received by that prince and by all descriptions of people, as soon to be able to forget his many dangers and sufferings. The prince afterwards employed him in visiting the reformed churches in his dominions, and in composing some differences of opinion among them, which he is said to have performed with equal ability and zeal. On the death of that prince, however, in 1576, he experienced a reverse, his son Louis being a Lutheran, and unwilling to retain Toussain, who was a Calvinist, in his service. His brother prince Casimir, who was of his father’s persuasion, then invited Toussain to Newstadt, made him superintendant of the churches there, and on the death of Ursinus, professor of divinity. He also officiated in the church of St. Lambert, composed of refugees; and preached to them in French, and by the prince’s desire, joined Zanchius and Ursinus in the publication of various works in support of the reformation. In 1578 he presided at a synod which prince Casimir had assembled for the purpose of establishing conformity in doctrine and discipline, and of assisting the exiles of the palatinate. With this prince Toussain became so great a favourite, that his highness took no steps in ecclesiastical matters without consulting him, and such was the general report of his character, that foreign princes or ambassadors who visited the court at Newstadt, made it a point to pay their respects to Toussain. On the death of the elector Louis IV. in 1583, prince Casimir, his brother, had the charge of his infant son and successor Frederick IV. On this he removed to Heidelberg, in order to take the regency into his own hands, and employed Toussain in promoting the reformed religion. In this, however, he was much obstructed by the violence of the Lutheran party; and the prince, after in vain endeavouring by conferences to allay the fervour of their zeal, was under the necessity of dismissing the most turbulent from their situations in the church or university. This was no more than had been done by the late elector without any ceremony: but the prince regent in the present case took every pains to show that it was a matter of necessity with him, all other means of pacification having failed.

Mr. Toup had lost his father whilst he was a child: and his mother sometime after marrying Mr. Keigwin, vicar of Landrake in Cornwall, his uncle Busvargus (the last male of that family) took him under his care: considered him as his own child; and bore the whole charge of his education both at school and college. By the death of this excellent man, without issue, in 1751, Mrs. Keigwin succeeded, as heir at law, to his estate and effects. A will was indeed found, supposed to have been signed by old Mr. Busvargus two days before his death: but there were so many suspicious circumstances attending it, that the persons who would have been benefited by it never ventured to prove it. Mrs. Keigwin died in 1773, and left a will, bequeathing the whole of her estates to her son Jonathan, which accounts for the property of which he died possessed, and which could not have accumulated from his preferments or his publications.

In 1700 he received an order from the king to travel to Greece, Asia, and Africa, not only to take cognizance of the plants which the ancients have mentioned, or even of those which escaped their observation, but to make also observations upon natural history at large, upon ancient and modern geography, and upon the religion, manners, and commerce, of different nations and people. The king ordered farther A. Gundelsheimer, a native of Anspach, and physician to the king of Prussia, to attend him as a draughtsman, who might draw plants, animals, orany thing curious, that fell in his way. Almost three years were employed in this learned voyage; and, as botany was M. Tournefort’s favourite object, he herborized over all the isles of the Archipelago, upon the coasts of the Black Sea, in Bithynia, Pontus, Cappadocia, Armenia, and Georgia. At his return he took a different route, in hopes of new subjects of observation, and came tbrough Galatia, Mysia, Lyiiia, and Ionia. The plague being then in Egypt hindered him from proceeding to Africa; yet he brought home 1356 species of plants, entirely new.

, a learned French Jesuit, was born at Rennes, April 26, 1661,- of an ancient family. He entered among the Jesuits in 1680, and besides other literary honours due to his merit, was appointed librarian to the society in Paris. His range of study had been so extensive that most of his learned contemporaries considered him as an oracle in every branch of science, taste, or art. The holy scriptures, divinity, the belles lettres, antiquities, sacred and profane, criticism, rhetoric, poetry, had all been the objects of his pursuit, and added to his accomplishments. He was for many years editor of the “Journal de Trevoux,” one of the most celebrated in France, in which he wrote a great many essays and criticisms of considerable merit and acuteness. He published also a good edition of“Menochius,” 1719, 2 vols. fol. and an edition of Prideaux’s History of the Jews. He died May 16, 1739, He was a man of a communicative disposition, and very attentive to strangers. There was, however, some degree of vanity in his composition, and he even prided himself on his birth, but upon the whole, was an estimable character, and contributed, by his Journal, to the diffusion of much useful knowledge.

, a French writer, and one of the Encyclopedists, was born at Paris in 1715, and was bred an advocate, but forsook the bar to cultivate general literature. In his youth he is thought to have been somewhat fanatical, as he wrote Latin hymns in praise of the abb Paris, at whose tomb extraordinary miracles were performed. (See Paris). An enthusiasm of a very opposite kind connected him with the philosophers who were exerting their powers against revealed religion, and in 1748 he contributed his first share by his book called “Moeurs,” or “Manners,” in which, although tolerably disguised, are some of those bold attacks, both on Christianity and morals, which afterwards appeared more plainly in the writings of his associates D'Alembert, Diderot, &c. This work procured him, however, a name in the world, although some have endeavoured to deprive him of it, by asserting that the work was written by an impious priest, and that Toussaint consented to bear the praise or blame. For this, however, there seems little foundation, if, according to the abbe Barruel, he afterwards publicly recanted his errors. In the mean time he published “Eciaircissemens sur les Mceurs,” 1764, which he meant as an apology for the former, but it was condemned by the parliament of Paris, and the author made his escape to Brussels, where he became editor of a French paper, devoted to the inte^ rests of the house of Austria. In this, of course, he treated the king of Prussia with little respect, even using the epithet, the “highwayman of the North,” and the philosopherking was not ignorant of this, but had been so much pleased with his book on “Manners,' 7 that he bestowed on him the professorship of logic and rhetoric at Berlin, where Tous* saint died in 1772. While there he published an excellent translation of Gellert’s Fables; and while in France had contributed some articles on jurisprudence to the Encyclopaedia, and assisted in a Dictionary of Medicine, published in 6 vols. folio. His” Mceurs" were translated into English about 1750.

About this time he acquired some property by marriage, and laid it out partly in furnishing a bookseller’s shop in Fore-street. Here he carried on trade for about nine years, but with no great success. During this time he published various pamphlets on the political topics of the day, and always in opposition to the measures and supporters of administration. In 1774 he resigned his business, and was ordained a preacher among the dissenters, and soon after chosen pastor of a congregation at Highgate. In 1778 he exchanged this situation for the office of forenoon preacher at Newington Green, where Dr. Price preached in the afternoon. When Dr. Kippis was employed by the London booksellers on a new edition of the “Biographia Britannica,” he recommended Mr. Towers as his assistant; and he wrote several lives, but, as already noticed, under the influence of prejudices which did no credit to the work. It seems indeed rather surprising that a work in which the lives of the eminent men of the church of England must necessarily be expected to form a large, if not the largest share, should be entrusted to one who had no sympathy with the constitution or doctrines of that church, and who, while he probably exerted as much impartiality as he was capable of, could not, in the nature of things, divest himself of a degree of prejudice which must damp his praise, if it did not dispose him to censure.

His religious opinions, respecting the doctrine of the Trinity, are said to have been those of Dr. Samuel Clarke; with a more moderate degree of Arianism; and although he associated much with the zealous advocates for Unitarian principles, he expressed no doubts of the pre-existence of Christ; nor did he become a convert to their notions respecting materialism, or what is called philosophical necessity. He was disposed to think that, whatever might be the means of meliorating the hardened and wicked in another state, the whole human race would ultimately have reason to acknowledge, that their existence was a blessing bestowed by the father of mercies.

, a learned English divine, of the seventeenth century, was a native of Middlesex, and became a commoner of Queen’s college, Oxford, in 1650, where he completed his degree of master of arts in 1657. In 1660, he was elected fellow of All Souls, about which time he entered into holy orders. His first preferment was to the rectory of Welwyn in Hertfordshire. He took his degree of D. D. in 1677, and in April 16i)2 was inducted into the living of St'. Andrew Undershaft, London, where he became a very distinguished preacher. He was presented to this rectory by king William, on the promotion of Dr. Grove to the bishopric of Chichester, and in consequence of the recommendation of archbishop Tillotson. This he acknowledges in the epistle dedicatory to his Latin “Tractatus in Epist. ad Philippenses,” and in the same place gratefully acknowledges his obligations to Dr. Tudor, rector of Tewing in Hertfordshire, to whom probably he was indebted for the living of Welwyn. He died in Oct. 1697, and was interred at Welwyn. Dr. Stanhope preached his funeral sermon at St. Andrew Undershaft, and gave him a very high character for piety, humility, and learning. His works are, 1. a pamphlet, entitled “A brief account of some expressions in St. Athanasius’s creed,” Oxon, 1663, '. 2. “An Explication of the Decalogue, or Ten Cornmandments,” and “Explication of the Catechism of the church of England,” in three parts or volumes, London, 1676—1680, fol. 3. “Of the sacraments in general, in pursuance of an explication of the catechism of the church of England,” Lond. 1686, 8vo. 4. “Of the sacrament of Baptism in particular; of the right of baptism among the heathen and Jews and of the institution of Christian baptism,” &c. ibid. 1687, 8vo.

, an accomplished scholar and connoisseur, was the eldest son of William Townley, of Townley, esq. and Cecilia his wife, sole heiress of Ralph Standish, of Standish in Lancashire, esq. by lady Philippa Howard, daughter of Henry duke of Norfolk. His paternal grandmother was heiress of the house of Widdrington. He was born in the house of his ancestors October 1, 1737; and succeeded to the family estate, by the premature death of his father, in 1742. This event, united with religious considerations, sent him in early childhood to France for education; to which, however, much more attention was paid than is usual in the seminaries of that couutry. At a tetter period he was committed to the care of Turbervile Needham, a man of considerable reputation at that time upon the Continent as a natural philosopher. His own native taste and activity of mind carried him far beyond his companions in classical attainments; and a graceful person easily adapted itself to all the forms of polished address, which are systematically taught in France. Thus accomplished he came out into the world, and was eagerly received into the first circles of gaiety and fashion, from the dissipations of which it would be vain to say that he wholly escaped. These habits of life, however, in which imbecility grows old without the power, and vanity without the will, to change, after having tried them for a few years, his vigorous and independent mind shook off at once; and by one of those decisive efforts of which it was always capable, he withdrew to the Continent, resumed his literary pursuits, studied with critical exactness the works and principles of ancient art, and gradually became one of the first connoisseurs in Europe. During this period of his life he principally resided at Rome; from whence, ki different excursions, he visited the remotest parts of Magna Graecia and Sicily. He has been heard to relate, that on arriving at Syracuse, after a long and fatiguing journey, he could take neither rest nor refreshment till he had visited the fountain of Arethusa. This, though a trifling, is a characteristic circumstance; for he never spared himself, nor ever desisted from any pursuit, till he had either obtained his object or completely exhausted his strength^

The Townley Marbles were now become a national object; the trustees of the British Museum, therefore, obtained from Parliament a grant of 20,000l. probably not halt the original cost; and for this sum they were purchased from the family. In the midst of an expensive war, and under the administration of one whose great mind rarely condescended to patronize the fine arts, this may be considered as a remarkable testimony to their value. They were, on the whole, undoubtedly the most select assemblage of Greek and Roman sculpture ever brought into England. That of the earl of Arundel, the first which travelled so far beyond the Alps, though much more numerous, appears from the remnants of it which are preserved, to have been filled with subjects of very inferior merit. The same perhaps may be said of a few celebrated collections yet remaining in some noble houses. But in the Townley Museum there was not a single statue, bust, or basso relievo, which did not rise far above mediocrity; and with the exception of seven or eight subjects beyond the hope or possibility of private attainment, it certainly contained the finest specimens of ancient art yet remaining in the world. Among these may be distinguished the farfamed head of Homer, the apotheosis of Marcus Aurelius, the younger Verus, the Astragalizontes, a small but exquisitely beautiful group, the Isis, the female Bacchus, the ivy-crowned Muse, and the small bronze of Hercules Alastor, found at Biblus in Syria.

But it would be injurious to the memory of this excellent person to consider him merely as a virtuoso. He was one of the most benevolent and generous of men. The demands of taste, however importunate, could never tempt him either to rapacity or retention. In his conduct to a numerous tenantry he was singularly considerate and humane: and whether present or absent from his house in the country, the stream of his bounty to the indigent never dried up or diminished. In one year of general distress, approaching to famine, he distributed among the poor of the neighbouring townships a sum equivalent to a fourth part of the clear income arising from the estate. His personal habits, though elegant, were frugal and unostentatious. He never even kept a carriage. He was an early riser, and an exact ceconomist of his time. To his own affairs he was minutely and skilfully attentive. In his later years he grew more attached to his native place, and displayed in adorning the grounds about it a taste not inferior to that which distinguished his other pursuits. His temper, though naturally cheerful, was calm and sedate. His conversation, though regulated by the nicest forms of goodbreeding, was seasoned with a kind of Attic irony, not always unfelt by those about him. His manner had much both of dignity and sweetness. He was happy in a vigorous constitution, and still more so in a slow and sensible decay; for, after half a century of uninterrupted health and spirits, which gave but too keen a relish to every enjoyment, a. lingering disorder which hung over him for the three last years of his life, co-operating with other means, brought him to a deep and serious sense of religion; and in this sense he died.

Mr. Townley also (with Dr. Morell) materially assisted his friend Hogarth in his “Analysis of Beauty,” as. Mr. Hogarth’s erudition was wholly of the pencil. Although bestowing so much attention on the business of the stage, he is said to have been much admired as a divine. “His manner of delivery was graceful, impressive, and energetic. The style of his discourses was correct, yet unstudied, and (what is the highest praise of sacred oratory) adapted to the understanding of a general auditory. Some single sermons only are in print.” When chosen head master of Merchant Taylors* school, the first improvement which he suggested in the system of education, was the introduction of mathematical learning, for which he had acquired a taste at Christ’s hospital, but this he was not able to accomplish. He was more successful, however, in substituting, instead of the old practice of declaiming, repetitions, every three or four months, of select passages in Hebrew, Greek, Latin, and English, which first took place in February 1761. In the following year, his partiality to theatrical representations induced him to request permission from the company of Merchant Taylors for the boys to perform a Latin play. This was at first granted, and plays were performed for two seasons, but the company finally disapproved of them, and we cannot help thinking, very justly, as likely to draw the attention of the scholars from more useful pursuits, and more important acquirements. In other respects, he appears occasionally to have di tiered from the guardians of the school, but was upon the whole a diligent master, and many of his pupils are now filling the highest stations in the three professions of divinity, law, and medicine.

In Sept. 1768, at the earnest request of his friend and patron, Mr. Drake, Dr. Townson went abroad with his eldest son, Mr. William Drake, a gentleman-commoner of Brazen Nose college, and performed nearly the same tour which he went over twenty-six years before. After his return to Malpas in October 1769, he studied and produced his “Discourses on the Four Gospels.” They originated in a sermon first preached in the parish church of Biithfiold, and afterwards before the university, June 2, 1771, where he was desired to publish what had been heard with so much satisfaction. This induced him to re-consider the subject; and, by a progress which every literary man will readily understand, it grew under his revision to its present form and size, and was published in 1778, in a quarto volume, and received with the universal approbation of his learned brethren. Bishop Lowth’s testimony to its merit may be selected from a number: “It is a capital performance, and sets every part of the subject it treats of in a more clear and convincing light than ever it appeared in before.” But, adds his biographer, he received testimony to the merit of his book, on which he set a higher value than on the commendation of any individual, however exalted in character, or dignified by station. This was the degree of D. D. by diploma, which was with perfect unanimity conferred on him in full convocation, by the university of Oxford, February 23, 1779. This honour will appear the greater to our readers, when they are told that diploma degrees are very rarely conferred by this university.

The “Discourses on the Gospels” were scarcely published, when some cavils respecting one of the evangelists, and an attack made upon Mr. West’s book on our Lord’s resurrection, induced Dr. Townson to consider the part of the Gospels which relates to that subject; but he did not at this time pursue it. In the summer of 1778 he published a sermon, entitled “The Manner of our Saviour’s teaching,” preached before Dr. Porteus at his primary visitation of the see of Chester; and two years after the bishop bestowed on him the archdeaconry of Richmond. The archdeacon of Richmond has a stall in the cathedral of Chester, and his portion in the duties of the church; but in other respects he has really no authority or charge belonging to him; for the bishop is himself, in effect, archdeacon both of Chester and Richmond; the endowments of which two archdeaconries constitute the principal revenue of the see. The bishop, however, laudably solicitous for the good of his diocese, gave him a special commission, April 25, 1782, to visit the five northern deaneries within the archdeaconry of Richmond, in the execution of which Dr. Townson rode, by his own computation, being then almost seventy years of age, 572 miles, and from the information obtained in this journey, composed a very elegant and methodical register, exhibiting a full and distinct view of each parish and r hapelry, under the several heads pointed out for his examination.

In 1783 the divinity chair of the university of Oxford, then vacant by the death of Dr. Wheeler, was offered to him by lord North, chancellor 'of Oxford, in a very handsome letter; but this offer he declined, “as he was now so far in the decline of life, that he was very apprehensive, or rather satisfied, that he was not equal to the exertions which a faithful discharge of the duties of that office would require.”

During the same year, when the attention of the reading and literary world was occupied by the controversy between Dr. Priestley and Dr. Horsley (then archdeacon of St. Alban’s) Dr. Townson sent to the archdeacon some remarks on his opponent’s letters, which were printed in the appendix of Dr. Uorsley’s Letters to Dr. Priestley, published in 1784, but without his name, which he concealed. In the northern part of the diocese of Chester, the Roman Catholics form a considerable body. This induced our author to turn his mind to examine the claims of the church of Rome, and he accordingly composed a dissertation on the subject; but, although this work was highly approved by his friends, and was even transcribed for the press, he deferred the publication with his wonted diffidence; nor did he at last, when the question was put to him, pronounce decisively whether it should or should not be printed. This, however, Whs done in 1797, and it now forms a part of his esteemed works. In 1784 he printed part of the work on the Resurrection, already noticed as begun in 1778, under the title of “A Discourse on the Evangelical Histories of the Resurrection and first Appearances of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ,” 4to. Of this he dispersed six or eight copies among those in whose judgment he placed confidence; but the final publication was posthumous.

, an eminent physician, was born in 1640, at Aversa, in the kingdom of Naples, and after studying medicine at Naples, took his doctor’s degree in 1661. Although at this time only in his twenty-first year, he was thought capable of instructing others, and first gave lectures on physiology; he afterwards for several years taught for Thomas Cornelio of Cosenza, whose advanced age prevented him from lecturing as professor of medicine and mathematics. He was also employed to supply the place of Andrew Lamez, another of the professors, and often gave four lectures in a day. At length be succeeded to Cornelio’s professorship of the theory of medicine, which he tilled with increasing reputation. In 1679 he had attained such high fame, that the university of Padua solicited him to accept, a chair there; hut this and many otuer most liberal offers he declined from his attachment to Naples, where he was deservedly appointed p!u >?cian to ti t hospital or' the Annunciata, and first physician to the state. On the death, however, of Malpighi, in 1694, he was induced to change his resolution. Pope Innocent XII. appointed him, in the year following, to succeed Malpighi as his first physician, and having accepted this honourable situation, the pope gave him the principal professorship in the college of Sapienza. After the death of this pontiff in 1700, Tozzi was chosen physician to the conclave, but could not accept it, as he was invited to Spain to attend the king, Charles II. then in a bad state of health. But hearing, when on the road to Madrid, of this king’s death, he returned to Rome to pay his respects to the new pope Clement XI. by whom he was highly esteemed, and who made him great offers if he would remain at Rome. His former attachment however to his native country returning, he proceeded again to Naples, whence the duke of Medina Celi, the viceroy, would not allow him any more to depart, a constraint which was perfectly agreeable to his inclination. He died at Naples, March 11, 1717, in his seventy-seventh year. He published several professional works separately, which, with many additions, were republished in 5 vols. 4to, under the title of “Opera omnia Medica,” Venice, 1711 1728. Tozzi, in his practice, as well as theory, held some singular opinions. He rejected blisters and bloodletting, and did not admit of the existence of plethora. With Van Helmont and Sylvius de Le Boe, he considered acidity as the cause of most diseases, which he endeavoured to obviate by absorbents. His specific in continued fevers, was a precipitate of mercury and in consumptions distilled water of vipers.

, an eminent botanist, the son of Leonard Targioni, born at Florence Sept. 11, 1722, was sent to the university of Pisa, where he very soon distinguished himself by a thesis on the use of medicine. At the age of nineteen he became acquainted with the famous botanist Micheli, by whom he was protected, with whom he kept up an uninterrupted friendship till 1737, when Micheli died, and whom he succeeded in the care of the famous botanic garden. Of the plants in this garden Micheli had already made a catalogue, which Targioni published after his death, with very considerable additions by himself. In the year 1737, he was made professor of botany in the Studio Fiorentino, a kind of university at Florence, and at the same time member of the academy ofApatisti. In 1738, he became a member of the Collegio Medico, or faculty of Medicine. Much about the same time he was named by government consulting physician in pestilential disorders, aud had the place of fiscal physician (physician to the courts of justice). This last place obliged him to write a great deal, being often consulted on the accidents that became discussions for a court of justice, such as deaths by poison, sudden deaths, unheard-of distempers, and (when, as it sometimes happened, foolish accusations of the kind were brought into court) witchcraft. Some time after, he was named, together with the celebrated Antonio Cocchi, to make a catalogue of the library, begun by P</lagliabecchi and increased by Marni, duke Leopold, and others, which consisted of 40,000 volumes of printed books, and about 1100 volumes of manuscripts. It is to this nomination we are indebted for the five volumes of letters of famous men, as, during his employment in this capacity, he used to make extracts of the curious books which fell into his hands. On Micheli’s death in 1737, Mr. Targioni had inherited his Hortus Siccus, Mss. and collection of natural history, which last, however, he purchased, but at a very cheap rate, with his own money. This seemed to lay him under the necessity of publishing what his master had left behind him, and accordingly he had prepared the second part of the “Nova Plantarum Genera,” but not exactly in the manner in which Micheli himself would have published them; for, though the drawings were too good to be lost, as they have all the accuracy which distinguish the other works of the great naturalist, Targioni could not suffer the work to come forth with the Zoophytes and Keratophytes classed among the plants, asMicheli had intended. Targioni therefore meant to have given the work another form. It was to be divided into two parts, the first of which would have contained the “Fucus’s, Algae, and Confervae;” and the second the “Zoophytes:” the first part was finished a week before Targioni’s death. Many of the plates are from drawings by Ottaviano Targioni, the son of John Targioni, who succeeded his father as reader of botany in the hospital of Sancta Maria Maggiore, a new establishment formed by the grand duke upon a liberal and extensive plan, in which ducal professors of medicine, anatomy, chemistry, physiology, surgery, &c. read gratis on the very spot where examples are at hand to confirm their doctrine. In 1739, Targioni was chosen member of the academy Naturae Curiosorum; and, in 1745, the Crusca gave him a public testimony of the value they set upon his style, by chusing him one of their members. In 1749, he was chosen member of the academy of Etruscans at Cortona, as he was of that of the Sepolti at Volterra in-4749. The academy of Botanophiles made him one of their body in 1757; as did that of practical agriculture at Udino in 1758. In 1771, he was chosen honorary member of the royal academy of sciences and belles lettres at Naples; and, finally, was named corresponding member of the royal society of medicine at Paris in 1780. It is much to be regretted that we cannot give an account of his manuscript works, several of which are known to be very important, as he was one of the most celebrated physicians of this time, and is known to have written a great deal on inoculation (of which he was one of the first promoters in Tuscany), putrid fevers, &c. &c. His printed works are extremely numerous; among the first of them was his “Thesis de prsestantia et usu Plantarum in medicina.” Pisis, 1734,“folio; and the latest, * Notizie degli Aggrandimenti delle Scienze Fisiche accaduti in Toscana nel corso di anni 60, nel secolo 17, Firenze,” 1780, 4 vols. 4to. He had just published the fourth volume of this last great work, on the improvement made in natural knowledge and natural philosophy in Tuscany in sixty years only of the 17th century, when he died of an atrophy in 1780. Mr. Targioni had a large cabinet of natural history, the foundation of which, as has been said, had been laid by Micheli. It consists of the minerals and fossils which are found in Tuscany, and the Zoophytes and Hortus Siccus of Micheli. There is a drawer made at Amboyna, by order of Rumphius, containing all the sorts of wood of that island. Besides this, there is a great suite of animals and shells and petrified animal substances, particularly of the bones of elephants which are found in the environs of Florence.

, a contributor to the study of natural history in this country in the seventeenth century, was by birth a Dutchman, as we are informed by Anthony Wood. On what occasion, and at what period he came into England, is not precisely ascertained, but it may be supposed to have been about the end of queen Elizabeth’s reign, or the beginning of that of James I. as Hollar’s print of him, engraved in 1656, represents him as a person very far advanced in years. He is said to have been for a considerable time in the service of lord treasurer Salisbury and lord Wooton. He travelled several years, and into various parts of Europe; as far eastward as into Russia. In 1620 he was in a fleet that was sent against the Algerines; and mention is made of his collecting plants in Barbary, and in the isles of the Mediterranean. He is said to have brought the trifolium stellatum of Linnseus from the isle of Fermentera; and his name frequently occurs in the second edition of Gerard, by Johnson in Parkinson’s “Theatre of Plants,” and in his “Garden of Flowers,” printed in 1656. But Dr. Pulteney conjectures that Tradescant was not resident in England in the time of Gerard himself, or known to him.

This small 12mo volume the author entitled “Museum Tradescantianum, or a collection of rarities, preserved at South Lambeth, near London, by John Tradescant,” 1656, dedicated to the college of physicians. It contains lists of his birds, quadrupeds, fish, shells, insects, minerals, fruits, artificial and miscellaneous curiosities, war instruments, habits, utensils, coins, and medals. These are followed by a catalogue, in English and Latin, of the plants of his garden, and a list of his benefactors. The reader may see a curious account of the remains of this garden, drawn up in 1749, by the late sir William Watson, and printed in the 46th volume of the Philosophical Transactions, and many other particulars in our authorities. Prefixed to the “Museum Tradescantianum” were the prints of both father and son, which, from the circumstance of being engraved by Hollar, has unfortunately rendered the book well known to the collectors of prints, by whom most of the copies have been plundered of the impressions.

In what year the elder Tradescant died is uncertain, though it seems to have happened most probably in 1652. The son inherited the museum, and bequeathed it by a deed of gift to Mr. Ashmole, who lodged in Tradescant’s house. (See Ashmole.) It afterwards becoming part of the Ashmolean museum, the name of Tradescant was sunk. John, the son, died in 1662, and was buried April 25 of that year. Besides the prints prefixed to the “Museum Tradescantianum,” there are several portraits of the Tradescant family in the Ashmolean Museum, both male and female, esteemed good; but there are no dates to the pictures, nor any painter’s name or mark. John’s widow erected a monument to the family in Lambeth church-yard, in 1662, which was much injured by time; but two fine drawings of it, happily preserved in the Pepysian library, came in aid of the mutilated parts, and in 1773 it was repaired by a public subscription.

, a learned divine at the period of the reformation, was supposed by Wood to have been born in Cornwall, or originally descended from an ancient family of his name in that county. This supposition seems to have been suggested to Wood by Fuller, who in his “Worthies” of Cornwall says, “The first syllable of his name, and what is added thereto by my author (Bale) parentum stemmatc clarus, and the sameness of his name with an ancient family in this country, are a three-fold cable to draw my belief that he was this countryman.” He was educated at Oxford, either in Exeter college, or Hart hall, where he attained some eminence in the Latin and Greek tongues. He afterwards, as was usual with scholars desirous of extensive improvement, travelled into Germany and Italy, and heard the lectures of the eminent men of that time. On his return to England he entered into holy orders, and was made keeper of the king’s library, which Leland’s researches had greatly enriched in the time of Henry VIII. King Edward VI. who gave Traheron this appointment with a salary of twenty marks, finding him otherwise a man of great merit, conferred on him the deanery of Chichester in 1551, as Wood says, but according to Le Neve, in 1553. This, on the accession of queen Mary in the same year, he lost, as well as his other preferments, and joined the other English exiles in Germany, where, at Francfort, he became their divinity-reader, particularly on the beginning of the Gospel of St. John, against the Arians, or, as Strype says, “against the wicked enterprises of the new start-up Arians in England.” While here he appears to have written all his works; 1. “Paraeresis, lib. 1.” addressed to his brother Thomas, persuading him to embrace the reformed religion. 2. “Carmina in mortem Henrici Dudlaei.” 3. “Analysis Scoparum Johannis Cochlaei.” 4. “Exposition of a part of St. John’s Gospel made in sundry readings in the English congregation against the Arians,” 1558, 8vo, 2d edition. 5. “Exposition on the fourth chapter of St. John’s Revelations, which treateth of the providence of God, made before his countrymen in Germany,” 1557, 8vo, reprinted 1577 and 1583. 6. “An answer made by Bar. Traheron to a private Papist,” &c. 1558, 8vo. 7. “Treatise of Repentance,” &c. Wood says he also published a translation of Vigo’s “Surgery,” and Vigo’s “Little practice.” When he died is uncertain. Wood, in his first edition, says he returned after queen Mary’s death, and was restored to all he had lost, and was living in 1662; but in his second edition he omits this, and quotes Holinshed, who gives it as a report that he died abroad in the latter end of Mary’s reign.

His son, Robert, the subject of this memoir, was born at Ely in May 1642. After the usual course of education at home, he was sent to the university of Edinburgh, where he recommended himself to the several professors by his capacity and diligent application to his studies. Having determined to devote himself to the church, he pursued the study of divinity with great ardour for several years. Partaking with his father in zeal for the principles and discipline of the presbyterian church, he became a sufferer in its cause, unusual severity being exercised against those who would not accede to the introduction of episcopacy. In 1666 he was obliged to secrete himself, together with his mother and elder brother, because some copies of a book entitled “An apologetic Relation,” &c. which the privy council had ordered to be publicly burnt, were found in Mrs. Traill’s house; and in the following year, being suspected as having been one of those who took up arms and resisted the king’s forces, or of being a favourer of their cause, a proclamation was issued for apprehending him. This obliged him to join his father in Holland, where he resumed his divinity studies, and assisted Nethenus, professor of divinity at Utrecht, in the republication of Rutherford’s “Examination of Arminianism.” In the preface to his edition of that book, Nethenus speaks of Mr. Robert Traill as a pious, prudent, learned, and industrious young man.

, a learned modern Greek, was born in 1395, in the island of Crete, but took the name of Trapezuntius, or “of Trebisond,” because his family were originally of that city. In his youth he wenj; to Venice, where Francis Barbaro, who had invited him, became his patron. Having been instructed in the Latin language he went to Padua, and afterwards to Vicenza, where in 1420 his patron obtained for him the professorship of the Greek, but he did not remain long in this situation. Finding himself harassed by the intrigues of Guarino, of Verona, who regarded him with sentiments of determined hostility, he gave up his professorship, on which Barbaro recalled him to Venice, where by the interest of this steady friend he was appointed to teach rhetoric, and was enrolled among the citizens of Venice. Barbaro afterwards recommended him to the court of Rome, where we find Trapezuntius in 1442, in the pontificate of Eugenius, teaching the belles lettres and the Aristotelian philosophy. During the same time he was employed in translating several Greek authors into Latin, which induced Nicholas V. the successor of Eugenius, to make him apostolic secretary. These translations he was thought to have executed well, but his reputation declined so far on one occasion as to end in his disgrace. He had received orders from the pope to translate the Almagest of Ptolemy, and to add a commentary, or notes. This he performed in 1451, and the following year was banished from Rome on account of this work. What there was so offensive as to bring upon him this punishment is not known, or at least not clearly expressed by his biographers; but it seems not improbable, that his general temper, which was irritable, had disgusted some of his contemporaries, and that the pope had listened to the insinuations of his enemies. Many errors had been detected in his translations by some of those able scholars whom Nicholas V. had assembled at his court, and this probably rendered Trapezuntius more apt to take offence. It was probably while in this temper, that a disgraceful quarrel took place between him and the celebrated Poggio, in Pompey’s theatre, where the pontifical secretaries were assembled, for the purpose of correcting certain official papers. It was occasioned by some satiric remarks of Poggio, which provoked Trapezuntius to give him a blow on the face. Poggio returned it, and continued the battle until, as we may suppose, the combatants were parted.

Among the translations executed by Trapezuntius, are several parts of the works of Eusebius, Cyril of Alexandria, Gregory Nyssen, Nazianzen, Chrysostom, Aristotle, Plato, Ptolemy, &c., but in many of these he is neither accurate nor faithful, having made unpardonable variations, omissions, or additions.

, a learned judge, was born, as Wood thinks, at or near Plympton in Devonshire in 1644, and was admitted a commoner of Exeter college, Oxford, in 1660. After studying some time here, he left college without taking a degree, as, we have repeatedly had occasion te observe, was usual with young gentlemen intended for the law; and went to the Inner Temple. After being admitted to the bar, he had much practice, and was accounted a good common lawyer. In 1678 and 1679, he sat in parliament as representative for Plympton, and in the lastmentioned year was appointed chairman of the committee of secrecy for the investigation of the popish plot, and was in 1680 one of the managers in the impeachment of lord Stafford. In December of the same year, when sir George Jeffries was dismissed from the recordership of London, Mr. Treby was elected in his room, and in January 1681 the king conferred on him the honour of knighthood: but when the quo warranto issued, and the city charter, for which he pleaded along with Pollexfen, was withheld, he was deprived of the recordership in Oct. 1685. On the revolution, king William restored him to this office, and he had the honour of addressing his majesty, in the absence of the lord mayor, sir John Chapman, who was confined by sickness. His very able speech on this occasion was published in the “Fourth collection of papers relating to the present juncture of affairs in England,” 1683, 4to, and in Bohun*s “History of the Desertion,” 1689, 4to, In March 1688 he was made solicitor -general, and the following year attorney-general. In April 1692 he was called to the rank of serjeant, and in May following was promoted to be chief justice of the Common Pleas, on which he resigned the office of recorder. This learned and upright lawyer died in March 1701-2, aged fifty-six. His son and grandson, of the same names, represented Plympton and Dartmouth, and the latter was master of the household to George II. and a lord of the treasury.

Sir George Treby published “A collection of Letters and other writings relating to the horrid Popish Plot, printed from the originals,” Lond. 1681, fol. in two parts, and is supposed to have written “Truth vindicated; or, a detection of the aspersions and scandals cast upon sir Robert Clayton and sir George Treby, justices, &c. in a paper published in the name of Dr. Francis Hawkins, minister of the Tower, entitled ‘The confession of Edward Fitzharris, &c.’” Lond. 1681. His pleadings and arguments in the King’s-bench on the quo warranto, are printed with those of Finch, Sawyer, and Pollexfen, Lund. 1690, fol.

, an eminent naturalist, was born at Gen-eva in 1710, and was intended by his father for the church, for which reason he sent him to pursue his studies in Holland. There he became tutor to the children of M. Bentinck, and coming afterwards to London, had the young duke of Richmond for his pupil. On his return to Geneva in 1757, he settled there, and became most esteemed for learning and private character. He had early devoted his leisure to some branches of natural history, and when appointed one of the commissioners for providing Geneva with a granary of corn, he was enabled by his knowledge of the insects which infest grain, to prevent their ravages in a great measure. But his reputation as a naturalist was first promoted throughout Europe by his discoveries on the nature of the polypes. These animals were first discovered by Leeuwenhoek, who gave some account of them in the Philosophical Transactions for 1703; but their wonderful properties were not thoroughly known until 1740, when Mr. Trembley began to investigate them; and when he published the result of his experiments in his “Memoires sur les Polypes,” Leyden, 1744, 4to, all naturalists became interested in the surprising facts which were disclosed. Previous to this, indeed, Leibnitz and Boerhaave, by reasonings a priori, had concluded that animals might be found which would propagate by slips like plants; and their conjecture was soon verified by the observations of Mr. Trembley. At first, however, he was uncertain whether he should reckon these creatures animals or plants: and while thus uncertain, he wrote a letter on the subject to Mr. Bonnet in January 1741; but in March the same year, he had satisfied himself that they were real animals. He also made several communications to the Royal Society, of which he was elected a member in 1743, on the same subject. There are other papers on subjects of natural history by him in the Philosophical Transactions. Mr. Trembley also acquired no small fame by the publication of some valuable books for young persons, particularly his “Instructions d'un pare a ses enfans sur la nature et la religion,” 1775 and 1779, 2 vols. 8vo “Instructions sur la religion naturelle,” 1779, 3 vols. 8vo and “Recherches sur le principe de la vertu et du bonheur,” 8vo, works in which philosophy and piety are united. Mr. Trembley died in 1734.

, an English political writer, of the democratic cast, was descended of an ancient family, the son of sir John Trenchard, secretary of state to king William III. and was born in 1669. “”He had a liberal education, and was bred to the law, in which he was well skilled; but politics, and his place of commissioner of the forfeited estates in Ireland, which he had enjoyed in the reign of king William, took him from the bar, whither he had never any inclination to return. He was also rendered independent by the death of an uncle, and by his marriage, and determined to employ his time in political discussions. His first publication of this kind, in conjunction with Mr. Moyle, appeared in 1698, entitled “An Argument, shewing that a standing army is inconsistent with a free government, and absolutely destructive to the constitution of the English monarchy;” and, in 1698, “A short history of Standing Armies in England;” which two pamphlets produced several answers. In November 1720, in conjunction with Mr. Thomas Gordon, he began to publish, in the “London,' 7 and afterwards in the” British Journal,“a series of letters, under the name of” Cato,“upon various and important subjects relating to the public. These were continued for almost three years with very great reputation among those who were not very closely attached to the government or the church; but there were some papers among them, written by Mr. Trenchard, under the name of” Diogenes,“upon several points of religion, which were thought exceptionable, and animadverted upon, particularly by Mr. John Jackson, in a” Defence of human Liberty.“Dr. Clarke also wrote some animadversions upon Trenchard’s principles, but which were never published. They are inserted in the General Dictionary. Mr. Gordon afterwards collected the papers written by Mr. Trenchard and himself, and published them in four volumes, 12mo, under the title of” Cato’s Letters, or Essays on Liberty, civil or religions, and other important subjects;“the fourth edition of which, corrected, was printed in 1737. It was imagined at the time, that lord Molesworth had a chief, at least a considerable, hand in those letters; but Mr. Gordon assures us, in the dedication of them to John Milner, esq. that this noble person never wrote a line in them, nor contributed a thought towards them. As to the purport and design of them, Mr. Gordon says, that” as they were the work of no faction or cabal, nor calculated for any lucrative or ambitious ends, or to serve the purposes of any party whatsoever, but attacked falsehood and dishonesty in all shapes and parties, without temporising with any, doing justice to all, even to the weakest and most unfashionable, and maintaining the principles of liberty against the practices of boih parties; so they were dropped without any sordid composition, and without any consideration, save that it was judged that the public, after all its terrible convulsions, was become calm and safe. They had treated of most of the subjects important to the world, and meddled with public measures and public men only in great instances.“He wrote also in” The Independent Whig," another paper hostile to 'the hierarchy.

Mr. Trenchard was member of parliament for Taunton in Somersetshire, and died Dec. 17, 1723, of an ulcer in his kidneys. He is said to have thought too much, and with too much solicitude, to have done what he did too intensely and with too much vigour and activity of the head, which caused him many bodily disorders, and is supposed at last to have worn out the springs of life. He left no writings at all behind him, but two or three loose papers, once intended for Cato’s Letters. Mr. Anthony Collins, in the manuscript catalogue of his library, ascribes to him the following pieces: “The natural history of Superstition,” 1709. “Considerations on the public debts,” 1709. “Comparison of the proposals of the Bank and South-Sea Company,” 1719. “Letter of thanks, &c.” 1719. “Thoughts on the Peerage-bill,” 1719. Arid “Reflections on the Old Whig,” 1719. Mr. Gordon, who has drawn his character at large in the preface above cited, tells us in his dedication, that " he has set him no higher than his own great abilities and many virtues set him; that his failings were small, his talents extraordinary, his probity equal; and that he was one of the worthiest, one of the ablest, one of the most useful, men that ever any countrywas blessed withal.

, an excellent artist of the English school, and a member of the Royal Academy of London, and of the academies of Rome and Bologna, was a native of Ireland, which country he left at an early age; and having devoted himself to the arts, repaired to Italy, at a time when an acquaintance with the master-pieces of the arts which that country possessed, was considered as an essential requisite for completing the education of a gentleman. The friendships and acquaintance formed by Mr. Tresham while abroad, were not a little conducive to the promotion of his interests on his return to this country; and their advantages were experienced by him to the last moment of his life. As an artist, Mr. Tresham possessed very considerable talents; and, while his health permitted him to exert them, they were honourably directed to the higher departments of his art. A long residence in Italy, together with a diligent study of the antique, had given him a lasting predilection for the Roman school; and his works display many of the powers and peculiarities which distinguish the productions of those great masters whose taste he had adopted. He had much facility of composition, and his fancy was well stored with materials; but his oil pictures are deficient in that richness of colouring and spirit of execution which characterize the Venetian pencil, and which have been displayed, in many instances, with rival excellence in this country. His drawings with pen and ink, and in black chalk, evince uncommon ability; the latter, in particular, are executed with a spirit, boldness, and breadth which are not often to be found in su; a productions. In that which may be termed the erudition of taste, Mr. Tresham was deeply skilled: a long acquaintance with the most eminent masters of the Italian schools made him familiar with their merits and defects; he could discriminate between all their varieties of style and manner; and as to every estimable quality of a picture, he was considered one of the ablest criticks of his day: in the just appreciation, also, of those various remains of antiquity which come under the different classifications of virtu, his opinion was sought, with eagerness, by the connoisseur as well as the artist, and held as an authority, from which few would venture lightly to dissent. This kind of knowledge proved not a little beneficial to him. Some years since, Mr. Thomas Hope, whose choice collections of every kind are well known, had given to one of his servants a number of Etruscan vases, as the refuse of a quantity which he had purchased. Accident made Mr. Tresham acquainted with the circumstance; and the whole lot was bought by him of the new owner for \00l. It was not long before he recefved 800l. from Mr. Samuel Rogers, for one moiety; and the other, increased by subsequent acquisitions, he transferred a few years ago to the earl of Carlisle. That nobleman, with a munificence and liberality which have invariably marked all his transactions, settled on the artist an annuity of 300l. for life, as the price of this collection. With such honour was this engagement fulfilled, that the amount of the last quarter, though due only a few days before Mr. Tresham’s death, was found to have been punctually paid. When Messrs. Longman and Co. commenced their splendid publication of engravings from the works of the ancient masters, in the collections of the British nobility, and others who have distinguished themselves by their patronage of the fine arts, they, with a discernment which does them credit, deputed Mr. Tresham to superintend the undertaking. To the honour of the owners of those master-pieces it must be recorded, that every facility was afforded to this artist, not only in the loan of pictures, but in the communication of such facts relating to the respective works as they were able to furnish. The salary paid him by these spirited publishers, contributed materially to the comfort of his declining years. We should not omit to mention, to the credit of Mr. Tresham, that, regardless as he had been in early life of providing those resourses for old age which prudence would suggest, yet so high were his principles, that the most celebrated dealers in virtu, auctioneers, and others, never hesitated to deliver lots to any amount purchased by him; and we may venture to assert, that he never abused their confidence. But the talents of Tresham were not confined to objects immediately connected with his profession; he had considerable taste for poetry, and his published performances in that art display a lively fancy, and powers of versification, of no ordinary kind. In society, which he loved and enjoyed to the last, he was always considered as an acquisition by his friends; and amongst those friends were included many of the most elevated and estimable characters of the time. In conversation, he was fluent, humourous, and animated, abounding in anecdote, and ready of reply. During the latter years of his life, the contrast exhibited between the playful vivacity of his manners and the occasional exclamations of agony, produced by the spasmodic affections with which he was so long afflicted, gave an interest to his appearance that enhanced the entertainment which his colloquial powers afforded. His existence seemed to hang upon so slight a thread that those who enjoyed his society were commonly under an impression that the pleasure derived from it might not be again renewed, and that a frame so feeble could scarcely survive the exertion which the vigour of his spirit for a moment sustained. The principle of life, however, was in him so strong, as to contradict all ordinary indications; and he lived on, through many years of infirmity, as much to the surprise as the gratification of his friends: his spirits unsubdued by pain, and his mind uninfluenced by the decay of his body. Though partaking, in some degree, of the proverbial irritability of the poet and the painter, no man was more free from envious and malignant feelings, or could be more ready to do justice to the claims of his competitors. So true a relish had he for the sallies of wit -and humour, that he could enjoy them even at his own expense: and he has been frequently known to repeat, with unaffected glee, the jest that has been pointed against himself. By his death, which took place June 17, 1814, the Royal Academy was deprived of one of its most enlightened members, and his profession of a liberal and accomplished artist.

Mr. Tresham’s poetical publications, all which he made in some measure the vehicle of his sentiments on subjects of art, were, 1. “The sea-sick Minstrel, or Maritime Sorrows,” in six cantos, 1796, 4to, an extraordinary, but, perhaps, irregular, effusion of real genius. 2. “Rome at close of the eighteenth century,” 1799, 4to, the subject, the plunder of that city by the French. 3. “Britannicus to Bonaparte, an heroic epistle, with notes,” 1803, 4to.

, an eminent Roman lawyer, and the object of equal praise and censure, was a native of Side in Pamphylia, and esteemed a man of extensive learning. He is said to have written, both in prose and verse, on many subjects of philosophy, politics, astronomy, &c. but none of his writings nave descended to us. From the bar of the praetorian praefects, he raised himself to the honours of questor, consul, and master of the offices. His knowledge of the Roman law induced Justinian the emperor to place him at the head of a committee of seventeen lawyers, who were to exercise an absolute jurisdiction over the works of their predecessors, from which they compiled the Digest or Pandects, which go by that emperor’s name. Tribonianus has been represented by some writers as an infidel, and by others as extremely avaricious, and tampering with the laws to gratify this propensity. The former of these charges Mr. Gibbon very naturally wishes to impute to bigotry, but the latter is generally admitted. His oppressions were at one time so much the subject of complaint as to procure a sentence of banishment, but he was soon recalled, and remained in favour with Justinian for above twenty years. Tribonianus is supposed to have died about the year 546.

, a learned divine, was born May 8, 1652, at Harlem. He acquired great skill in the Oriental languages, and the Holy Scriptures, of which he was professor at Leyden, in the place of Anthony Hulsius, and died in that' city, September 22, 1705, aged fifty-four, after having been twice rector of the university there. He left several works and “Dissertations on the sect of the Caraites,” and other curious and important subjects. He also published the “Tribus Judaeorum” of Serarius, Drusius, and Scaliger, or a dissertation on the three remarkable sects, the Pharisees, Sadducees, and Essenes, Delphis, 1703, 2 vols. 4to.

As the society in which she lived whilst in London was of rather too grave a cast for so young a person, she naturally had recourse to her favourite employment for recreation, and spent much time in reading. In this pursuit she was directed by her father, and from his conversation and instruction her mind acquired a thirst after knowledge, and was gradually opened and enlarged. Drawing was another occupation of her leisure hours: to this, however, she applied rather in compliance with the wishes of her father, than to gratify any inclination she felt tqr it. At his desire ^e went occasionally, under the care of a female friend, wit other young people, to the society for promoting Artv and once obtained a prize for the second-best drawing. Two or three miniatures, copies from larger pictures, are remaining of her painting, which, though not in the first style, are sufficiently good to show, that in this art she might have excelled, had her taste prompted her to pursue it. The knowledge of drawing, which she had acquired while young, became very useful to her when she was a mother, as it enabled her to amuse her children when in their infancy, and likewise to direct them afterwards in the exercise of their talents in that way.

About 1759, Mr. Kirby removed to Kew, upon being appointed clerk of the works in that palace, and there his daughter became acquainted with Mr. Trimmer, and at the age of twenty-one, she was united to him, with the approbation of the friends on both sides. Mr. Trimmer was a man of an agreeable person, pleasing manners, and exemplary virtues; and was about two years older than herself. In the course of their union, she had twelve children, six sons and six daughters. From the time of her marriage t?ll she became an author, she was almost constantly occupied with domestic duties; devoting herself to the nursing and educating of her children. She used to say, that as soon as she became a mother, her thoughts were turned so entirely to the subject of education, that she scarcely read a book upon any other topic, and believed she almost wearied her friends by making it so frequently the subject of conversation. Having experienced the greatest success in her plan of educating her own family, she naturally wished to extend that blessing to others, and this probably first induced her to become an author. Soon after the publication of Mrs. Barbauld’s “Easy Lessons for Children,” about 1780, Mrs. Trimmer was very much urged by a friend to write something of the same kind, from an opinion that she would be successful in that style of composition. Encouraged by this opinion, she began her “Easy Introduction to the knowledge of Nature,” which was soon completed, printed, became very popular, and still keeps its place in schools and private families. The design of it was to open the minds of children to a variety of information, to induce them to make observations on the works of nature, and to lead them up to the universal parent, the creator of this world and of all things in it. This was followed by a very valuable series of publications, some of the higher order, which met with the cordial approbation of that part of the public who considered religion as the only basis of morality. Into the notions of a lax education, independent of the history and truths of revelation, whether imported from the French or German writers, or the production of some of our own authors, misled by the vanity of being thought philosophers, Mrs. Trimmer could not for a moment enter; and therefore in some of her later publications, endeavoured with great zeal to stop that torrent of infidelity which at one time threatened to sweep away every vestige of Christianity. She was also an early supporter and promoter of Sunday-schools, and at one time had a long conference with her majesty, who wished to be made acquainted with the history, nature, and probable utility of those schools. But the fame she derived from her meritorious writings was not confined to schools. She had the happiness of hearing that her books were approved by many of our ablest divines, and that some of them were admitted on the list of publications dispersed by the Society for promoting Christian knowledge. One of her best performances was rendered very necessary by the circumstances of the times. It was a periodical work, which she continued for some years, under the title of “The Guardian of Education.” She was led to this by observing the mischief that had crept into various publications for the use of children, which occasioned her much alarm, and she feared, if something were not done to open the eyes of the public to this growing evil, the minds of youth would be poisoned, and irreparable injury be sustained. There was indeed just cause for alarm, when it was known that the two principal marts for insidious publications of this kind, were under the management of men who had only avarice to prompt them, and were notorious for their avowed contempt for religion.

In 1705, having had no parochial duty for some years, he undertook the charge of St. Giles’s parish, in the city of Norwich; and in October 1706 was instituted to St. James’s, Westminster, on the promotion of Dr. William Wake to the bishopric of Lincoln. In January 1707, he was elected bishop of Norwich in the room of Dr. John Moore, translated to Ely, and was permitted to keep the rectory of St. James’s with his bishopric for one year. In 1709 he published a charge to the clergy at his primary visitation, in which he spoke with great freedom against some prevailing opinions and practices, which he thought prejudicial to the true interest of the church of England in particular, and of religion in general. These opinions were, the “independence of the church upon the state; the” power of offering sacrifice,“properly so called; and the” power of forgiving sins: “all of them,” he says, “I am persuaded, erroneous, in the manner they have been urged, and no way agreeable to the doctrine of the church of England about them. The making more things follow our sacred function, than can fairly and plainly be grounded upon it, will never advance our character with wise and considering men, such as we should desire all men to be; but must be a real prejudice to us. Our, pretending to an independent power in things within the compass of human authority; and a right to offer sacrifice properly speaking; and a commission to forgive sins directly and immediately; may, and will weaken the grounds and occasions of the reformation; and give our adversaries of the church of Rome, as well as others, great advantage against us; but can never, I am persuaded, advance the interest of the Christian religion in general, or of our church in particular.” He added an Appendix to the charge in answer to some authorities that had been produced from ancient writers in favour of the independence of the church upon the state; which, he says, he did the rather, because he “thought the peace both of church and state more immediately concerned in it, and could not but apprehend mischief coming to both from a pretension so new among those who call themselves members of the church of England: a church that has hitherto been as much distinguished, as it has been supported, by rejecting that claim.” In a sermon preached in 1707 before the sons of the clergy, he had expressed himself in as strong a manner upon this subject, viz. “Let us take care that, while we maintain the distinction and dignity of our order, we do not suffer ourselves to be carried into a separate interest from that of those who are not of our order, or from that of the state For we cannot pretend to be a separate body, without making the worst kind of schism, and the nearest to that which is condemned in scripture, that can be imagined: nor can any thing give greater advantage to those other schisms that disturb the peace of the church, than our dividing ourselves, in any degree, from the true interest of that government to which we belong.” In his charge he censured a pa*sage in favour of a proper sacrifice from Mr. Johnson’s second part of the “Clergyman’s Vade Mecum” (in the note upon the second apostolical canon), which Mr. Johnson defended in a postscript to a pamphlet called “The Propitiatory Oblation.” The bishop replied, in vindication of what he had said on that subject; and afterwards inserted the substance of his Reply in the body of the second edition of his charge.

Besides the opinions that have been mentioned, he declared himself against the modern practice of using the bidding prayer before sermon, as not so agreeable to the nature of the service, the long and general practice of the church, or the design of the 55th canon. And he observed from authority, that “the bishops (Dr. Uavis and Dr. Fletcher) who drew up the 55th canon, always used a form of their own;” and that among the bishop of Lincoln’s articles of inquiry at his visitation in 1641, are these; "Do

you know of any parson, vicar, or curate that never

pray before their sermons, but bid the people pray? or use any other new and voluntary rite or ceremony not warranted by law? You are to present them."

Mr. Archdeacon Stephens, rector of Drokinsford, in Hampshire, preached his funeral sermon in Winchester cathedral. In that sermon, and other authorities, his character is thus given: “He had a very serious and devout turn of mind, and performed the duty of every station with the greatest exactness, notwithstanding the weakness of a constitution broken, in the early part of life, by long ant! frequent fastings, and too diligent an application to his studies. But this had no effect upon his mind, which was calm and composed at all times. The uneasiness he suffered from an ill habit of body, never made him uneasy to others. He was of a very affectionate, meek, and gentle nature; and though he had a good deal of warmth in his temper, he subdued it so effectually by reflection and habit, that he was hardly ever seen in a pas*, siott^ but behaved in all the private, as well as public circumstances of life, with great moderation and firmness of. spirit. He was a lover of peace and order, both from judgment and inclination; and, being a most sincere friend to the church of England, he constantly avowed those principles” of toleration and indulgence, which make that church the glory of the reformation. "There are letters extant, by which it appears, that he was very diligent in examining the arguments urged on both sides, before he took the oaths to king William and queen Mary, which he religiously observed by a steady and uniform attachment to the Revolution-interest, as longas he lived. No man ever supported the character of a bishop with greater dignity and authority, and yet no one was ever more beloved by the clergy of both his dioceses; for he was very courteous and obliging, and easy of access to all, and had a strict regard to those parts of behaviour which are most suitable to the profession of a minister of the gospel. His rebukes were conveyed in few words, and those delivered with a sort of uneasiness for the necessity of them: but although they were few, and smoother than oil, yet were they very swords; for to an understanding heart they seemed to receive an aggravation of anger, from that very meekness which endeavoured to soften them. He was of a temper incapable of soliciting favours for himself, or his nearest friends, though he had the tei/derest affection for them. He was very much displeased at the appearance of an importunate application in others, and always avoided it in his own conduct. And notwithstanding all his relations have prospered very much in the world by his means, their success has been owing rather to the credit and influence of his character, than any direct applications made by him. The nobleness of his mind appeared in many other instances; in his candour and generosity of spirit, and contempt of money; of which he left so many marks in every place where he lived, that he had neither ability, nor occasion, 1 to perpetuate his memcry by any posthumous charities. He did not consider his revenue as designed for the private advantage of a family; but as a trust or stewardship, that was to be employed for the honour of his station; the maintenance of hospitality; the relief of the poor; the promoting a good example amongst his clergy; and the general encouragement of religion and learning.

“He was not less qualified for his high station by his abilities than his conduct; for he had an excellent turn for business, and a quick apprehension. He was very well versed in the divinity controversies, and immediately discerned the point on which the dispute turned, and pared oil” all the luxuriancies or writing. He had read the ancients with great exactness; and, without quoting, ofieu mingled their finest notions with his own discourse, and had a particular easiness and beauty in his manner of conversing, and expressing his sentiments upon every occasion. With his other excellencies he had acquired a thorough knowledge of mankind; which, being adorned by an affable and polite behaviour, gained him the general esteem of the nobility and gentry. His known penetration and judgment recommended him so strongly to the favour and confidence of those who were at the head of affairs in the latter part of his life, that he was chiefly, if not solely, advised with, and entrusted by them, in matters which related to the filling up the principal offices in the church. And, though he enjoyed as much of this power as any clergyman has had since the reformation, he raised no public odium or enmity against himself on that account; because his silence, moderation, and prudence made it impossible for any one to discover the influence he had, from his conversation, or conduct; a circumstance almost peculiar to him. He was too wise a man to increase the envy, which naturally attends power, by an insolent and haughty behaviour; and too good a man to encourage any one with false hopes. For he was as cautious in making promises, as he was just in performing them; and always endeavoured to soften the disappointments of those he could not gratify, by the good-nature and humanity, with which he treated them. These separate characters (rarely blended together) of an excellent scholar, and a polite, well-bred man; a wise and honest statesman, and a devout, exemplary Christian, were all happily reconciled in this most amiable person; and placed him so high in the opinion of the world, that no one ever passed through life with more esteem and regard from men of all dispositions, parties, and denominations."

, an Italian poet, who endeavoured to reform the style of his country, was born at Vicenza, July 3, 1478, and was descended from one of the most ancient families of that place. It has been said that it was late in life before he began his studies, but as the same writer who gives us this information, adds that upon his father’s death, when he was only seven years old, he applied to them with spirit, it is evident he could not have lost much time. He was first educated at Vicenza, under a priest named Francis Gragnuola, and afterwards at Milan under the celebrated Demetrius Cbalcondylcs. To the memory of this last master, who died in 1511, Trissino erected a monument in the church of St. Mary at Milan, or us others say, in that of San Salvador, with an inscription. From the Greek and Latin language, he proceeded to the' study of mathematics, architecture, natural philosophy, and other branches which form a liberal education. In 1503 he married; and with a view to domestic happiness and literary retirement, went to reside on one of his estates, for he was left very opulent, at Criccoli on the Astego. Herv he built a magnificent house, from his own design, on which he employed one of his pupils in architecture, the afterwards justly celebrated Paliadio.

After the death of this pontiff he returned to his own country, and married a relation, Blanche Trissina, by whom he had a third son, Ciro; but Leo’s successor, Clement VII. soon recalled him to Rome, and gave him equal proofs of his esteem a-nd confidence, by sending him as his ambassador to Charles V. and to the senate of Venice. Some of his biographers say that he was created a knight of the golden fleece, either by Charles V. or by Maximilian, but Tiraboschi thinks that he never was admitted into that order, although he might have permission to add the fleece to his arms, and even take the title of chevalier. Voltaire’s blunders about Trissino are wholly unaccountable. Hie makes him archbishop of Benevento at the time he wrote his tragedy; and having this probably pointed out to him, he endeavoured to correct the error by asserting in a subsequent publication that bishop Trissino, by the advice of the archbishop of Benevento, chose Sophonisba for a subject, although Trissino never was either bishop or archbishop, nor an ecclesiastic of any rank.

Trissino has the credit of having first discarded the shackles of rhyme, and employed the versi scwlti, or blank verse of the Italians. This he first tried in his “Sophonisba,” and afterwards in his “Italia liberata,” the subject of which was the liberation of Italy from the Goths by Belisarius’^ and it was his design to exhibit in this poem, which consists of twenty-seven books, a specimen of the true epic, as founded on the example of Homer, and confirmed by the authority of Aristotle: but into the merits of this poem it is not necessary to enter so minutely as Ginguene has done, since it seems universally acknowledged that of all the attempts at epic poetry which had hitherto appeared, the “Italia liberata” may be considered as the most insipid and uninteresting; nor from the time it first appeared, in 1547-8, was it ever reprinted until the Abbate Aniouini gave an edition of it in 1729, 3 vols. 8vo, and in the same year it appeared in the collected works of the author, Verona, 2 vols. folio. In this collection, besides his epic poem and the tragedy already mentioned, are, a comedy from Plautus, called “I Simillimi;” lyric poems, both Latin and Italian; and various prose treatises, almost all on grammar and on the Italian language. As most of the great poets of his time wrote an “Art of Poetry,” we find accordingly among Trissino’s works an attempt of this kind, “Delia Poetica,” which was originally published in 1529.

, a Dominican friar, son of sir Thomas Trivet, lord chief justice, was author of the “Annales 6. Regurn Anglise,” published by Mr. Ant. Hall, of Queen’s college, Oxford, in 1719, 2 vols. 8vo. He lived in the reigns of Edward I. II. III. and died in 1328. Bishop Nicolson says that an excellent copy of his history, which John Pits subdivides into three several treatises, was in his time in the library of Merton college, Oxford, “whence several of our most eminent antiquaries have had very remarkable observations.” It is in French, and bears the title of “Les Gestes des Apostoiles, or the popes, empereurs, et rois;” but this must be a different work from the former. Trivet left many other Mss. on various subjects of philosophy and theology, a commentary on Seneca’s Tragedies, &c. He was educated at Oxford, and esteemed one of the ornaments of the university in his time.

, a learned protestant divine, was born at Groningen in 1633, and studied the classics, belles lettres, philosophy, and theology in that university, under Desmarets, Alting, and other eminent professors. He travelled afterwards through Germany and Switzerland, and studied Hebrew under Buxtorf. He then visited France and England, and on his return was appointed curate or minister, in the village of Haren, where he remained until 1671, when he was invited to be pastor at Groningen. In this office he continued forty-eight years, and died in 1719, aged eighty-six. In his eightieth year he was created doctor in theology at Groningen, as a testimony of respect on the part of the university. John Martinius, of Dantzick, having begun a Concordance of the Old Testament, in Flemish, Trommius completed it, and published it at Amsterdam, 1685 — 1692, 2 vols, folio. He also published a Greek Concordance of the Septusgint. He had made preparations and corrections for a second edition of the Flemish Concordance, but did not, we presume, finish it, as it has never been printed.

, a celebrated Dutch admiral, who is mentioned in our account of De Ruyter, was born at the Brille, in Holland. He rose in the naval service by his merit, after having distinguished himself on many occasions, especially at the famous engagement near Gibraltar in 1607. He was accounted one of the greatest seamen that had till that time appeared in the world; and was declared admiral of Holland, by the advice of the prince of Orange. He in that character defeated a large Spanish fleet in 1630, and gained upwards of thirty victories, of more or less importance, at sea; but was killed when under deck in an engagement with the English, in 1653. The States General caused medals to be struck to his honour, and lamented him as one or the greatest heroes of their republic. It is said that in the midst of his greatest glory, he was modest and unassuming, and never arrogated a higher character than that of a burgher, and that of being the father of the sailors. His second son, Cornelius, who died in 1691, was also a brave officer, and signalized himself in various naval engagements.

His son, Theodore, was educated, by the advice of Beza^ who was his godfather, and he made a vast progress in learning. The testimony which was given him in 1600, when he went to see foreign universities, represents him as a person of very great hopes. He confirmed this character + all the learned men under whom he studied, or with whom hee became acquainted during the course of his travels, and these comprized most of the eminent men on the contii w > in England. He returned to Geneva in 1606, and gave such proofs of his learning that he was the same year chosen professor of the Hebrew language. In 1607 he married Theodora Rocca, a woman of great merit in all respects, sister to the first syndic of the commonwealth, and grand-daughter to the wife of Theodore Beza, at whose house she had been educated, and whose goddaughter she was. He was chosen minister in December 1605, and created rector of the university in 1610. In 1614 he was requested to read some lectures in divinity besides those on the Hebrew language, on account of the indisposition of one of the professors; and when the professorship of divinity became vacant in 1618, he was promoted to it, and resigned that of Hebrew. The same year he was appointed by the assembly of pastors and professors to answer the Jesuit Colon, who had attacked the French version of the Bible in a book entitled “Geneve Plagiaire.'” This he did in his “Coton Plagiaire,” which was extremely well received by the public. At the same time he was sent with Diodati from the church of Geneva to the synod of Dorr.,' where he displayed his great knowledge in divinity, and a moderation which was highly applauded. He had permission to go to the duke of Rohan for some months in 1632, and fully answered the expectation of that nobleman, who shewed him afterwards great esteem, which he returned by honouring the duke’s memory with an oration, whicij he pronounced some days after the funeral of that great man in 1638. He carried on a very extensive correspondence in the reformed countries, where he gained the friendship of the most learned men, and of several princes and great lords. He had much facility in composing oration:* and Latin verses, and his conversation was highly instructive, for he had joined to the study of divinity and of several languages, the knowledge of the law, and of other sciences, and of sacred and profane history, especially with regard to the two last centuries, particulars of which he frequently introduced, and applied when in company. In 1655 he was appointed by the assembly of pastors to confer and concur with John Dury in the affair of the rennion between the Lutherans and the reformed, on which subject he wrote several pieces. He died of a fever on the 19th. of November, 1657, having survived all the foreign divines who were present at the synod of Don. He was an open and sincere man, zealous for religion and the service of the churches, a great enemy to vices, though very mild towards persons. His advice was highly esteemed both for the civil government, and in the two ecclesiastical bodies, and by strangers, a great number of whom consulted him. He left, among other children, Lewis Tronchin, who was a minister of the church of Lyons, and was chosen four years after to fill his place in the church and professorship of divinity at Geneva. He died in 1705. He was esteemed one of the ablest divines of his time, and a man of great liberality of senti ment. He was well known to, and corresponded with our archbishops Tillotson and Tenison, and the bishops Compton, Lloyd, and Burnet, who gives him a very high character in his Tour through Switzerland.

, a celebrated physician, was apparently the grandson of Lewis Troncbin, and was born at Geneva in 1709. His father, John Robert Tronchin, having lost his property in the fatal Mississippi speculation, Theodore left home at the age of eighteen, and came to England to lord Bolingbroke, to whom he is said to have been related, we know not in what degree; but Bolingbroke had it not in his power to do much for him, and he went to Holland to study chemistry under Boerhaave, whose work on that subject had engaged his attention, and made him desiror.s of seeing the author. Boerhaave is said to have soon distinguished Tronchin from the general mass of his pupils, and in 1731 advised him to settle at Amsterdam, where he introduced him to practice, and in a, short time Tronchin was at the head of the physicians of Amsterdam. But having married a young lady of the family of the celebrated patriot De Witt, he fancied that the name would be disgraced by his accepting a place at court, and therefore he refused that of first physician to the stadtholder, and quitting Amsterdam when the stadtholderate was made hereditary, returned to Geneva, where he could live in a pure republic. Here the council gave him the title of honorary professor of medicine, but no duties were attached to it. It was not his intention, however, to be idle, and he gave lectures on the general principles of medicine, in which he endeavoured to free the science from rooted prejudices and false theories. In 1756 he was called to Paris to inoculate the children of the duke of Orleans. He bad introduced this practice both in Holland and at Geneva, and, in the former at least, without almost any opposition; and the success he had in his Hrst trial in France, on these princes of the blood, having contributed not a little to his celebrity, he rose to the highest honours of his profession, and acquired great wealth. In 1765 he was invited to Parma to inoculate the royal children of that court. Although averse to accept any situations which might form a restraint upon his time or studies, he consented to the title of first physician to the duke of Orleans, and in 1766 fixed his residence at Paris. The arrival of an eminent physician in Paris is always accompanied by a revolution in practice. Tronchin brought with him a new regimen, new medicines, and new methods of cure, and many of them certainly of great importance, particularly the admission and change of air in sick rooms, and a more hardy method of bringing up children; he also recommend-ed to the ladies more exercise and less effeminacy in thair modes of living and in diet. His prescriptions were generally simple; but perhaps his fame was chiefly owing to his introducing the practice of inoculation, which he pursued upon the most rational plan. In all this he had to encounter long established prejudices, and being a stranger, had to contend with the illiberality of some of the faculty, obstacles which he removed by a steady, humane course, and his frequent success completed his triumph. He was in person a fine figure; there was a mixture of sweetness and dignity in his countenance; his air and external demeanour inspired affection, and commanded respect; his dress, voice, and manner, were graceful and pleasing: all which no doubt gave an additional luslre to his reputation, and perhaps an efficacy to his prescriptions. His extensive practice prevented his writing or publishing more than a few papers on some medical cases, one “De colica pictorum,” 1757, 8vo. He also prefixed a judicious preface to an edition of “Oeuvres de Baillou,” 1762. This eminent practitioner died Nov. 30, 1781. He was at that time a citizen of Geneva, a title of which he was very proud, a member of the nobility of Parma, first physician to the duke of Orleans, and to the infant duke of Parma, doctor of medicine cf the universities of' Ley Jen, Geneva, and Montpellier, and a member of the academy of sciences of Paris, of that of surgery, of the Royal Society of London (elected 1762), and of the academies or colleges of Petersburgh, Edinburgh, and Berlin.

, celebrated for his learned translations, was born in 1508. He was first a canon of Laybach, and began in 1531 to preach publicly in the cathedral of that city Luther’s doctrine concerning the sacrament in both kinds; and to approve the marriage of priests; so that he embraced Luther’s party, and left Carniola to retire into the empire, where the town of Kempson chose him for their pastor. He preached there for fourteen years, and acquired much fame by his translations. He translated into the Carniolan tongue, in Latin characters, not onlv the Gospels, according to the version of Luther, with his catechism, but also the whole New Testament, and the Psalms of David in 1553. At length the States of Carniola recalled him home. He translated also into his mother tongue the confession of Augsburgb, and Luther’s German sermons. Herman Fabricius Mosemannus thus notices Truber’s translation, with the addition of some other particulars: “John Ungnad baron of Sonneck in Croatia, at the time of the Augsburgh confession, caused the Bible to be translated into the Sclavonian language at Aurach in the duchy of Wirternbergh. In this translation he employed three learned Sclavonians; the first was named Primus Truber, the second Anthony Dalmata, and the third Stephen Consul. But these books were seized on the road, and are still shut up in casks at Newstad in Austria. The character is altogether singular, almost resembling an Asiatic or Syriac character, with pretty large and square letters. A copy of this Bible may be seen in the library of the landgrave of Hesse. There are also some copies of it to be met with in Sclavonia.” These Bibles are without doubt printed in Cyrillic characters. Truber was banished Carniola a second time, and died June 29, 1586. The same year, in a letter he wrote to the deputies of Carniola, he Mjbscribes himself “Primus Truber, formerly canon in ordinary, called and confirmed at Laybach, pastor at Lack, at Tuffer near Ratschach, and at St. Bartholomew’s field, chaplain at S. Maximilian of Cilly, Sclavonian preacher at Trieste, and after the first persecution preacher at Rosemburgh on the Tauber, pastor at Kempten and at Aurais, afterwards preacher to the States of Carniola, and at Rubia in the county of Goergh, and after the second persecution pastor at CauHFen, and now at Deredingen near Tubingen.”

, an estimable and upright statesman, was born at Easthampsted in Berkshire in August 1638. He was the eldest son of William Trumbull, esq. a justice of peace in Berkshire, and grandson of another William Trumbull, who was agent and envoy from James I. to the archduke Albert at Brussels, from 1609 to the end of 1625. This great man, for such he appears to have been, made a large collection of letters, memoirs, minutes, and negociations, of all the men of note in iiis time, with whom he entertained a constant and familiar correspondence. These documents, which are, or were lately, in the gallery at Easthampsted park, sufficiently show his care, industry, vigilance, and sufficiency, in the employment he served; and he appears to have been the family pattern and model which sir William Trumbull, the subject of our memoir, had in his eye, and spurred him on to an imitation of those virtues which, if they appeared so bright in the grandfather, shone forth in much greater lustre and perfection in the grandson.

In 1684, he was presented to the king by lord Rochester, and received the honour of knighthood; and was also made clerk of the deliveries of the ordnance stores, a place worth 300l. a year. In 1685, he was appointed envoy extraordinary at the court of France, against his inclination; but the king (James II.) insisted upon it, and gave him a pension of 200l. a year, in lieu of his place of clerk of the deliveries, which he could not hold with his appointment as envoy. His conduct in this office does him much credit. Being in France when the Protestants were persecuted in consequence of the revocation of the edict of Nantz, he remonstrated against it, and spoke his opinion with a freedom which was not very acceptable, either at the court where he was, or that from which he came; and when he found his remonstrances in vain, he took every method he could, by his privilege, to harbour many of the persecuted Protestants, and assisted them in recovering their effects, and conveying them to England. It was probably on this account that he was recalled in 1636, and, as his services were too valuable to be laid aside, the king appointed him ambassador extraordinary to the Ottoman Porte; and before he embarked, the Turkey-company presented him with a gold cup, value sixty pounds. He was continued in this embassy by William III. and remained there until 1691. He then returned from Constantinople, principally by land. In 1694 and 1695 he was advanced to be one of the lords of the treasury, a member of the privy-council, and principal secretary of state. He was also governor of the Turkeycompany: and had been several times member of parliament, and once represented the university of Oxford. His opportunities to acquire diplomatic knowledge, and to understand the intrigues of negotiation, induced him once to say to king William, “Do not, Sir, send embassies to Italy, but a fleet into the Mediterranean.”

In 1697, he resigned all his employments, and retired to East Hampsted, where he died December 14, 1716, and was buried in East Hampsted church. It was in this retirement that, in 1705, he became acquainted with Pope , who then lived at Binfield. Pope informed Mr. Spence, that he “loved very much to read and talk of the classics in his retirement. We used to take a ride out together three or four days in the week, and at last almost every day.” His letters to Pope breathe'an air of uncommon good temper, good sense, candour, and tranquillity of mind. They evince the scholar, the man of taste, and the gentleman, mixed with the clearest sense of propriety. It appears that sir William was the very first person that urged Pope to undertake a translation of the Iliad. Besides these letters in Pope’s Works, several written by him while he was ambassador in France, are preserved in the paperoffice, and extracts from others have been printed by sir John Dalrymple. His well-written character of air William Dolben, archbishop of York, we have already given in our account of that prelate. We ought not to omit, that he had been a friend and patron to Dryden, who, in the postscript to his Virgil, pays him a very elegant compliment: "If the last Æneid shine among its fellows, it is. owing to the commands of sir William Trumbull, one of the principal secretaries of state, who recommended it as his favourite to my care; and for his sake particularly I have made it mine. For who would confess weariness when he. enjoined a fresh labour? I could not but invoke the assistance of a muse for this last office:

His reputation among the ancients, if we may judge from their having given him the title of grammarian, was very considerable; for, though the word grammarian be now applied to persons altogether attentive to the minutiae of language, yet it was anciently a title of honour, and particularly bestowed on such as wrote well and politely in every way. The writings of this author were extremely numerous, as we learn from their titles preserved by Suidas yet none of them are come down to us, except his “Destruction of Troy,” which he calls “A Sequel to the Iliad.” He also wrote a new Odyssey, which Addison has described with equal truth and humour. After having proposed to speak of the several species of false wit among the ancients, he says, “The first I shall produce are the Lipogrammatists, or Letter-droppers, of antiquity, that would take an exception, without any reason, against some particular letter in the alphabet, so as not to admit it once into a whole poem. One Tryphiodorus was a great master in this kind of writing. He composed an Odyssey, or epic poem on the adventures of Ulysses, consisting of four and twenty books, having entirely banished the letter A from his first book, which was called ‘ Alpha,’ as lucus a non lucendo, because there was not an Alpha in it. His second book was inscribed * Beta' for the same reason: in short, the poet excluded the whole four and twenty letters in their turns, and shewed them, one after another, that he could do his business without them. It must have been very pleasant to have seen this poet avoiding the reprobate letter, as much as another would a false quantity; and making his escape from it through the several Greek dialects, when he was pressed with it in any particular syllable. For, the most apt and elegant word in the whole language was rejected, like a diamond with a flaw in it, if it appeared blemished with a wrong letter. I shall only observe upon this head, that if the work I have here mentioned had been now extant, the Odyssey of Tryphiodorus in all probability would have been oftener quoted by our learned pedants than the Odyssey of Homer. What a perpetual fund would it have been of obsolete words and phrases, unusual barbarisms and rusticities, absurd spellings and complicated dialects! I make no question, but it would have been looked upon as one of the most valuable trcasures of the Greek tongue.” It may be necessary to add that this singular composition does not exist, and that some have good-naturedly doubted whether it was written by our Tryphiodorus.

Tschirnhausen wrote, “De Medicina Mentis & Corporis,” printed at Amsterdam in 1687. And the following memoirs were printed in the volumes of the Academy of Sciences: K Observations on Burning Glasses of 3 or 4 feet diameter; vol. 1699. 2. Observations on the Glass of a Telescope, convex on both sides, of 32 feet focal distance; 1700. 3. On the Radii of Curvature, with the finding the Tangents, Quadratures, and Rectifications of many curves; 1701. 4. On the Tangents of Mechanical Curves; 1702. 5. On a method of Quadratures 1702.

, an ingenious English writer, was born in London Sept. 2, 1705, of a Somersetshire family; his father was a merchant, his mother was Judith, daughter of Abraham Tillard, esq. Both his parents died before he was two years old, and left him under the care of his grandmother Tillard and his maternal uncle sir Isaac Tillard, a man of strict piety and morality, of whose memory Mr. Tucker always spoke with the highest veneration and regard, and who took the utmost pains to give his nephew principles of integrity, benevolence, and candour, with a disposition to unwearied application and industry in his pursuits. He was educated at Bishop’s Stortford, and in 1721 was entered as a gentleman commoner in Merlon-college, Oxford, where his favourite studies were metaphysics and the mathematics. He there engaged masters to teach him French, Italian, and music, of which last he was very fond. In 1726 he was entered of the Inner Temple. Soon afterwards, and just before he came of age, he lost his guardian sir Isaac. He studied enough of the law to be useful to himself and his friends; but his fortune not requiring it, and his constitution not being strong, he was never called to the bar. He usually spent the summer vacations in tours through different parts of England, Wales, and Scotland, and once passed six weeks in France and Flanders. In 1727 he purchased Betchworth-castle with its estate. He then turned his attention more to rural affairs, and with his usual industry wrote down numberless observations which he collected in discourses with his farmers, or extracted from various authors on the subject. On the 3d of February, 1736, he married Dorothy, daughter of Edward Barker, esq. afterwards cursitor baron of the exchequer, and receiver of the tenths. By her he had three daughters, Dorothy, who died under three years old, Judith, and Dorothea- Maria, who, on the 27th of October, 1763, married sir Henry Paulett St. John, bart. and died on the 5th of May, 1768, leaving one son. Mrs. Tucker died the 7th of May, 1754, aged 48. As they had lived together in the tenderest harmony, the loss was a very severe stroke to Mr. Tucker. His first amusement was. to collect all the letters which had passed between them whenever they happened to be absent from each other, which he copied out in books twice over, under the title of “The Picture of artless Love;” one copy he gave to her father, who survived her five years, and the other he kept to read over to his daughters frequently. His principal attention then was to instruct his daughters; he taught them French and Italian, and whatever else he thought might be useful to them to know. In 1755, at the request of a friend in the west of England, he worked up some materials which he sent him into the form of a pamphlet, then published under the title of “The Country Gentleman’s Advice to his Son on the Subject of Party Clubs,” printed by Owen, Temple-bar; and he soon after began writing “The Light of Nature pursued,” of which he not only formed and wrote over several sketches before he fixed on the method he determined to pursue, but wrote the complete copy twice with his own hand; but thinking his style was naturally still and laboured, in order to improve it, he had employed much time in studying the most elegant writers and orators, and translating many orations of Cicero, Demosthenes, &c. and, twice over, “Cicero de Oratore.” After this he composed a little treatise called “Vocal Sounds,” printed, but never published; contriving, with a few additional letters, to fix the pronunciation to the whole alphabet in such manner, that the sound of any word may be conveyed on puper as exactly as by the voice. His usual method of spending his time was to rise very early to his studies, in winter bu ‘ning a lamp in order to light his own fire before his servants were stirring. After breakfast he returned to his studies for two or three hours, and then took a ride on horseback, or walked. The evenings in summer he often spent in walking over his farms and setting down his remarks; and in the winter, while in the country, reading to his wife, and afterwards to his daughters. In London, where he passed some months every winter and spring, he passed much time in the same manner, only that his evenings were more frequently spent in friendly parties with some of his relations who lived near, and with some of his old fellow collegiates or Temple friends. His walks there were chiefly to transact any business he had in town, always preferring to walk on all his own errands, to sending orders by a servant, and frequently when he found no other, would walk, he said, to the Bank to see what it was o’clock. Besides his knowledge in the classics and the sciences, he was perfectly skilled in merchant’s accompts, and kept all his books with the exactness of an accompting-house; and he was ready to serve his neighbours by acting as justice of peace. His close application to his studies, and writing latterly much by candle and lamp-light, weakened his sight, and hrought on cataracts, which grew so much worse after a fever in the spring, 1771, that he could no longer amuse himself with reading or writing, and at last could not walk, except in his own garden, without leading. This was a great trial on his philosophy, yet it did not fail him i he not only bore it with patience, but cheerfulness, frequently being much diverted with the mistakes his infirmity occasioned him to make. His last illness carried him off on the 20th of November, 1774, perfectly sensible, and as he had lived, easy and resigned, to the last. He published a pamphlet entitled a Man in quest of himself,“in reply to some strictures on a note to his” Free Will.“He had no turn for politics or public life, and never could be induced to become a candidate to represent the county of Surrey, to which his fortune, abilities, and character gave him full pretensions.” My thoughts,“says Mr. Tucker of himself,” have taken a turn, from my earliest youth, towards searching into the foundations and measures of right and wrong; my love for retirement has furnished me with continual leisure; and the exercise of my reason has been my daily employment." He once, however, was induced to attend a public meeting at Epsom in the beginning of the present reign, when party ran very high, and when sir Joseph Mawbey began to exercise his talent for poetry by a ballad on the occasion, in which he introduced Mr. Tucker and other gentlemen who differed from him in their opinions. So far from being hurt by this, Mr. Tucker was highly amused at the representation given of himself, and actually set the ballad to music.

When the dispute arose between Great Britain and the American colonies, the dean was an attentive observer of the contest, examining the affair with a very different eye from that of a party-man, or an interested merchant, and discovered, as he conceived, that both sides would be benefited by an absolute separation. The more he thought on this subject, the more he was persuaded that extensive colonies were an evil rather than an advantage to any commercial nation. On this principle, therefore, he published his “Thoughts upon the Dispute between the Mother Country and America.” He demonstrated, that the latter 1 could, not be conquered, and that, if it could, the purchase would be dearly bought. He warned this country against commencing a war with the colonies, and advised that they should be left to themselves. This advice startled all parties, and by all the dean was considered as a sort of madman, who had rambled out of the proper line of his profession to commence political quack. Our author, however, went on vindicating and enforcing his favourite system, in spite of all the obloquy with which it was treated both in the senate and from the press. As the war proceeded, some intelligent persons began to see more truth and reason in his sentiments, and time, perhaps, may be thought to have demonstrated that he was right. He printed several essays in the newspapers under the title of Cassandra.

In 1777 he published seventeen practical sermons, in one vol. 8vo. After he resigned his rectory in Bristol he resided mostly in Gloucester, where, in 1781, he married Mrs. Crowe, his housekeeper. He died of the gradual decays of age, November 4, 1799, and was interred in the South transept of Gloucester cathedral, where a monument has since been erected to his memory. It should be recorded to his praise, that though enjoying but very moderate preferment (for to a man of no paternal estate, or other ecclesiastical dignity, the deanery of Gloucester is no very advantageous situation), he was notwithstanding a liberal benefactor to several public institutions, and a distinguished patron of merit. About 1790 he thought of resigning his rectory in Bristol, and, without communicating his design to any other person, he applied to the chancellor, in whose gift it is, for leave to quit it in favour of his curate, a most deserving maq, with a large family. His lordship was willing enough that he should give up the living, but he refused him the liberty of nominating his successor. On this the dean resolved to hold the living himself till he could find a fit opportunity to succeed in his object. After weighing the matter more deliberately, he communicated his wish to his parishioners, and advised them to draw up a petition to the chancellor in favour of the curate. This was accordingly done, and signed by all of them, without any exception, either on the part of the dissenters or others. The chancellor, being touched with this testimony of love between a clergyman and his people, yielded at last to the application; in consequence of which the dean cheerfully resigned the living to a successor well qualified to tread in his steps.

Dr. Tucker was esteemed an excellent Greek and Latin scholar. “The purity of his Latin pen,” says Fuller, “procured his preferment. He was an able divine, a person of great gravity and piety, and well read in curious and critical authors.” His publications are, 1. “Charisma, sive Donum Sanationis, seu Explicatio totius qusestionis de mirabilium sanitatum gratia, &c.” Lond. 1597, 4to. This is the work which, Prince says, introduced him to the favour of queen Elizabeth. It is a historical defence of the power of our kings in curing what is called the king’s evil. Deirio, the Jesuit, answered it, and “with him,” say Wood and Prince, “are said to agree most fanaticks,” and we may add, most persons of common sense. Tucker was, if we mistake not, the first who wrote in defence of the royal touch, and Carte, the historian, the last, or perhaps the celebrated Whiston, who has a long digression on the subject in his life. 2. “Of the Fabrick of the Church and Church-men’s Living,” Lond. 1604, 8vo. This appears’ to have been written to obviate the scruples of some of the puritan party. The subjects treated are: I. “Of parity and imparity of gifts; of competency and incompetency of men’s livings; and of the reward of men’s gifts or maintenance, so called; of parity and imparity of men’s livings, which ariseth out of the equality or inequality of men’s gifts, and of preferments so called; of singularity and plurality of beneh'ces, and of the cause thereof, viz. dispensations; of the friends and enemies of pluralities; and of supportance and keeping of the fabrick of the church upright, in which he vindicates the hierarchy and constitution of the church of England against the enemies thereof, who are for reducing all to a parity and equality.” 3. “Singulare Certamen cum Martino Becano Jesuita,” Lond. 1611, 8vo, in defence of James I. against Becan and Bellarmin.

Mr. Tuckney took his first degree in arts before he was seventeen years old, and was chosen fellow of his college three years after. In 1620 he proceeded M. A. and was some time in the earl of Lincoln’s family, before he resided on his fellowship. When he returned he became a very eminent tutor, and had many persons of rank admitted under him. In 1627 he took his degree of B. D.; after which he accepted the invitation of his countrymen, and went to Boston, as assistant to the famous vicar of that town, John Cotton, for whom, though a very zealous nonconformist, his diocesan bishop Williams, when lord keeper, procured a toleration under the great seal, for the free exercise of his ministry, notwithstanding his dissenting in ceremonies, so long as done without disturbance to the church. But this was probably not very long: for Mr. Cotton quitted his native country, before the rebellion, and withdrew to New England. On his departure the corporation of Boston chose Mr. Tuckney, who was now married, into this vicarage, and he kept it, at their request, till the restoration; or rather his title to it, for he took no part of the profit after he ceased to reside. Calamy mentions a Mr. Anderson as having been ejected at the restoration; he probably officiated there, but never was vicar, and Dr. How succeeded Mr. Tuckney in 1660.

Mr. Baker thus represents the treatment Dr. Tuckney met with: “A set of young men (for the old ejected members seem to have been content with their commons) were so intoxicated with the return of the king, and flushed with warmer expectations, as to forget all reverence and gratitude that was due to a venerable old man, and to turn upon their benefactor, to whom most of them owed encouragement, and some of them preferment. The same person, that had been so much reverenced by them, was now neglected. Complaints were brought by them, and preferred at court against him, where meeting with countenance, the good old man, partly awed with the terrors of the higher powers, and partly grieved and vexed with the ingratitude of his fellows; or possibly foreseeing a consequent necessity upon his non-compliance, was easily prevailed with to resign his preferments. He accordingly resigned his mastership of St. John’s and professorship June 22, 1661, a pension of 100l. per annum being reserved to him out of the emoluments of his professorship, which was duly paid him to his dying day.”

“The rest of his life,” adds Mr. Baker, “he spent in retirement, most part at London, where he had been pastor of St. Michael le Querne, and where he had been commissioner at the conference at the Savoy: but, either through diffidence of himself, or for other reasons, although he had filled the chair at Cambridge so many years with reputation, by acquitting himself extremely well, yet he never could be prevailed with to appear and act in that conference; whilst Mr. Baxter, who knew nothing of an university, nor was acquainted with any other chair save that of the pulpit, only in the strength of natural logic ventured to engage in mood and figure with some of our best and most experienced divines, with such success as usually attends rash undertakings.”

From these writings, Dr. Salter remarks, that “our professor appears to have been a man of great reading and much knowledge; a ready and elegant Laiinist but narrow, stiff, and dogmatical no enemy to the royal or episcopal power, as it should seem but above measure zealous for church power and ecclesiastical discipline which such men as Tuckney, Arrowsmith, &c. very sincerely wished and hoped to have established, by authority of the parliament, following the repeated advice of the assembly; and they sadly regretted their disappointment; their new masters constantly turning a deaf ear to all such admonitions.” In his elections at St. John’s, when the president would call upon him to have regard to the godly, the master answered, “No one should have a greater regard to the truly godly than himself, but he was determined to choose none but scholars” adding, “They may deceive me in their godliness: they cannot in their scholarship.”

“One thing,” Mr. Baker adds, “may be said in favour of Dr. Tuckney, and his predecessor (Arrowsmith), or rather it is a right owing to their memory, that though they were not perhaps so learned as some of those that have before and since filled that post and station, yet their government was so good, and the discipline under them so strict and regular, that learning then flourished: and it was under them that some of those great men had their education who were afterwards the ornaments of the following age. I need not name them. Stillingfleet, Beveridge, Cave, &c. are names well known; names that will live in future ages, when their first instructors will perhaps be forgot.”

, a gentleman of an ancient family in Yorkshire, deserves honourable mention in this work, although we can say little as to his biography, as the first inventor of the drill-plough, and the first Englishman, perhaps the first writer ancient or modern, who attempted with any tolerable degree of success to reduce agriculture to certain and uniform principles. After an education at one of our universities, and being admitted a barrister of the Temple, he made the tour of Europe, and, in every country through which he passed, was a diligent observer of the soil, culture, and vegetable productions. On his return to England he married, and settled in a paternal farm in Oxfordshire, where he pursued an infinite number of agricultural experiments, till by intense application, vexatious toil, and too frequently exposing himself to the vicissitudes of heat and cold in the open fields, he contracted a disorder in his breast, which, not being found curable in England, obliged him a second time to travel, and to seek a cure in the milder climates of France and Italy. Here he again attended more minutely to the culture of those countries; and, having little else to do, he employed himself, during three years residence abroad, to reduce his observations to writing, with a view of once more endeavouring to introduce them into practice, if ever he should be so happy as to recover his health, and be able to undergo the fatigues of a second attempt. From the climate of Montpelier, and the waters of that salutary spring, he found in a few months that relief which all the power of physic could not afford him at home; and he returned to appearance perfectly repaired in his constitution, but greatly embarrassed in his fortune. Part of his estate in Oxfordshire he had sold, and before his departure had settled his family on a farm of his own, called Prosperous Farm, near Hungerford in Berkshire, where he returned with a firm resolution to perfect his former undertaking, having, as he thought, devised means during his absence to obviate all difficulties, and to force his new husbandry into practice by the success of it, in spite of all the opposition that should be raised by the lower class of husbandmen against it. He revised and rectified all his old instruments, and contrived new ones proper for the different soils of his new farm; and he now went on pretty successfully, though not rapidly, nor much less expensively, in the prosecution of his new system. He demonstrated to all the world the good effects of his horsehoeing culture; and by raising crops of wheat without dunging for thirteen years together in the same field, equal in quantity, and superior in quality, to those of his neighbours in the ordinary course, he demonstrated the truth of his own doctrine, that labour and arrangement would snpply the place of dung and fallow, and would produce more corn at an equal or less expence. But though Mr. Tull was successful in demonstrating that this might be done, he was not so happy in doing it himself. His expences were enhanced various ways, but chiefly by the stupidity of workmen in constructing his instruments, and in the awkwardness and wickedness of his servants, who, because they did not or would not comprehend the use of them, seldom failed to break some essential part or other, in order to render them useless. These disadvantages were discernible only to Mr. Tull himself; the advantages attending the new husbandry were now visible to all the world; and it was now that Mr. Tull was prevailed upon, by the solicitations of the neighbouring gentlemen who were witnesses of its utility, to publish his theory, illustrated by a genuine account of the result of it in practice, which he engaged to do, and faithfully performed at no trivial expence.

, a learned English divine and controversial writer, was born in St. Martin’s parish in the city of Carlisle, July 22, 1620, and was educated partly at the free-school there, and afterwards at Barton-kirk in Westmoreland. He was entered of Queen’s college, Oxford, in 1634, where Gerard Langbaine was his tutor, and attained a fellowship. In 1642 he was created M. A. and became master of the grammar-school at Tetbury in Gloucestershire; but this he seems to have accepted rather as a retreat, while Oxford was garrisoned during the rebellion, for after the surrender of the garrison, he returned to his college, and became a noted tutor and preacher, and in 1657 was admitted bachelor of divinity. He was soon after made principal of Edmund-hall, which he found almost empty, but raised it, as Wood informs us, to a state as flourishing as that of any hall in Oxford. After the restoration, he was created D. D. and was made chaplain to his majesty. He was also presented to the rectory of Griggleton, or Grittleton, near Malmsbury in Wiltshire, by Thomas Gore of Alderton, esq. who had been one of his pupils, and in 1675 the king conferred upon him the deanery of Rippon, which he did not long enjoy, as he died on January 14 following, 1675-6, at the parsonage house at Griggleton, and was interred in the chancel of that church.

, an eminent physician, was the son of Peter Dirx, a rich merchant of Amsterdam, where he was born Oct. 11, 1593. He rarely went by his father’s name, having rather whimsically changed it to de Tulp, the name, or probably the sign of a house in which he lived on the emperor’s canal. He was at first a surgeon’s apprentice, but having a perfect acquaintance with the Latin language, and a turn for science, he determined to extend his studies to every thing connected with medicine, to which he accordingly applied at the university of Leyden. After taking his doctor’s degree he returned to Amsterdam, and carried on practice for fifty-two years with the greatest reputation. But his fame was not confined to his profession only. Possessing an accurate knowledge and much judgment in the political history of his country, he was raised to civic honours; in 1622 he was elected of the council of Amsterdam, and six times served the office of sheriff. In 1652 he was made burgomaster, an office which he filled also in 1656, 1660, and 1671. In 1672, when Louis XIV. attacked Holland, Tulp had a principal hand in exciting that spirit of resistance among his fellow-citizens by which Amsterdam was saved. Nor were they unmindful of his services, for when he died in 1674, aged eighty, a medal was struck to his memory.

In the medical world he is principally known by his “Observationum medicarum Libri tres,” Amst. 1641, 1652, 12mo, with engravings, reprinted with a fourth book, Amst. 1672, 1685, and Leyden, 1716. In these cases, which are very curious, and written in a Latin style, which is pure without affectation, and concise without obscurity, are some valuable anatomical remarks; and, according to Haller, Tulp was the first, or one of the first, who observed the lacteal vessels.

, a very learned, and in many respects a very excellent prelate of the church of Rome, was born at Hatchford, near Richmond, Yorkshire, about 1474. He was a natural son of a gentleman named Tunstall or Tonstal, by a lady of the Conyers family. He became a student at Baliol college, Oxford, about 1491, but, on the plague breaking out, went to Cambridge, where he became a fellow of King’s hall, now part of Trinity college. After having for some time prosecuted his studies there, he went to the university of Padua, which was then in high reputation, studied along with Latimer, and took the degree of doctor of laws. According to Godwin, he was by this time a man of extensive learning, a good Hebrew and Greek scholar, an able lawyer and divine, a good rhetorician, and skilled in various branches of the mathematics. These accomplishments, on his return, recommended him to the patronage of archbishop Warham, who constituted him vicar-general or chancellor, in August 1511. The archbishop also recommended him to Henry VIII. and in December of the same year, collated him to the rectory of Harrow-on-the hill, Middlesex; which he held till 1522.

While in the Tower, Tunstall was frequently visited by his nephew, the celebrated Bernard Gilpin, who had probably been brought up to the church with a view of being advanced by this prelate, but he was now in no capacity to serve him otherwise than by his advice, and the advice he gave him about this time, places Tunstall in a very favourable point of view. When Gilpin, just entered on his parochial duties in the north, found that his mind was not quite settled in his religious opinions, he wrote to his uncle Tunstall, who told him, in answer, that he should thiuk of nothing till be had fixed his religion, and that, in his opinion, he could not do better than put his parish into the hands of some person in whom he conld confide, and spend a year or two in Germany, France, and Holland; by which means he might have an opportunity of conversing with some of the most eminent professors on both sides of the question. To this admirable advice, for such it surely is, from a popish bishop of that age, Giipin had but one objection, namely the expence; but the bishop wrote, that his living would do something towards his maintenance; and he would supply deficiencies. When they parted, the bishop gave him some books he had written while in the Tower, particularly one" on the Lord’s supper, which he wished to be printed under his inspection at Paris.

On the accession of queen Mary in 1553, Tunstall was restored to his bishopric; but still he was not a man to her mind, behaving with great lenity and moderation, and consequently his diocese escaped the cruel persecutions which prevailed in others. When he left London, he was strictly charged with the entire extirpation of heresy in his diocese; and was given to understand, that severity would be the only allowed test of his zeal. These instructions, says Mr. Giipin, he received in the spirit they were given; loudly threatening, that heretics should no where find a warmer reception than at Durham: and it was thought indeed that the protestants would hardly meet with much favour from him, as they had shown him so little. But nothing was further from his intention than persecution: insomuch that his was almost the only diocese where the poor protestants enjoyed any repose. When most of the other bishops sent in large accounts of their services to religion, very lame ones came from Durham; they were filled with high encomiums of the orthodoxy of the diocese, interspersed here and there with the trial of an heretic, but either the depositions against him were not sufficiently proved, or there were great hopes of his recantation; no mention however was made of any burnings. A behaviour of this kind was but ill relished by the zealous council: and the bishop lay deservedly under the calumny of being not actuated by true Romish principles. When his nephew Bernard Gilpin, an avowed protestant, came home from his travels, the bishop not only received him with great friendship, but gave this heretic the archdeaconry of Durham; and Fox tells us, that when one Mr. Russel, a preacher, was before bishopTunstail, on a charge of heresy, and Dr. Hinmer, his chancellor, would have examined him more particularly, the bishop prevented him, saying, “Hitherto, we have had a good report among our neighbours; I pray you bring not this man’s blood upon my head.”

Bishop Tunstall did not continue long in this state of retirement, for he died Nov. 18, 1559, aged eighty-five, and was handsomely buried in the chancel of Lambeth church, at the expence of archbishop Parker, with a Latin epitaph by the learned Dr. Haddon. The character of Tunstall may in part he collected from the preceding particulars. Gilpin, who has frequently introduced notices of him in his Lives of Bernard Gilpin, Latimer, &c. says “he was a papist only by profession; no way influenced by the spirit of popery; but he was a good catholic, and had true notions of the genius of Christianity. He considered a good life as the end, and faith as the means; and never branded as an heretic that person, however erroneous his opinions might be in points less fundamental, who had such a belief in Christ as made him live like a Christian. He was just therefore the reverse of (his early patron) Warham, and thought the persecution of protestants one of the things most foreign to his function. For parts and learning he was very eminent: his knowledge was extensive, and his taste in letters superior to that o- most of his contemporaries. The great foible of which he stands accused in history, was the pliancy of his temper. Like most of the bishops of those times, he had been bred in a court; and was indeed too dextrous in the arts there practised.” On this last failing, Mr. Gilpin seems to us to lay too much stress, for even the particulars which, in the preceding sketch we have extracted from his life of Bernard Gilpin, shew decidedly that Tnnstall was no courtly complier in those measures which were particularly characteristic of the times, and which have been more or less the test of the worth of every eminent man who lived in them.

, a learned and amiable divine, was born about 1710, and educated at St. John’s college in Cambridge, of which he became fellow and a principal tutor. He was instituted to the rectory of Sturmer in Essex, in 1739, and, in 1741, elected public orator of the university. He afterwards became chaplain to Potter, abp. of Canterbury; and was there a person of such uniform meekness and humility as to make it said, after he left Lambeth, that “many a man came there, as chaplain, humble, but that none ever departed so except Dr. Tunstall.” He was created D. D. at Cambridge in 1714; was collated by the archbishop to the rectory of Great Chart in Kent, and to the vicarage of Minster in the Isle of Thanet, both which he resigned in 1757, for the valuable vicarage of Rochdale in Lancashire, given him by abp. Hutton, who married his wife’s aunt; but the exchange, from many circumstances, di i not answer his expectation; he wished for a prebend of Canterbury. It is supposed that either family uneasinesses, or the above disappointment, hastened his death, which took place March 28, 1772.

Turbervile was a sdnnetteer of great note in his time, although, except Harrington, his contemporaries and successors appear to have been sparing of their praises. It is probably to some adverse critics that he alludes, in his address to Sycophants. Gascoigne also used to complain of the Zoilus’s of his time. There is a considerable diversity of fancy and sentiment in Turbervile’s pieces: the verses in praise of the countess of Warwick are ingenipusly imagined, and perhaps in his best style, and his satirical effusions, if occasionally flat and vulgar, are characteristic of his age. Many of his allusions, as was then the fashion, are taken from the amusement of hawking, and these and his occasional strokes on large noses, and other personal redundancies or defects, descended afterwards to Shakspeare, and other dramatic writers. He entitles his pieces Epitaphs and Epigrams, Songs and Sonnets, but the reader will seldom recognize the legitimate characteristics of those species of poetry. His epitaphs are without pathetic reflection, being stuffed with common-place railing against “the cursed cruelty” of death; and his epigrams are often conceits without point, or, in some instances, the point is placed first, and the conclusion left “lame and impotent.” His love sonnets, although seemingly addressed to a real mistress, are full of the borrowed passion of a translator, and the elaborate and unnatural language of a scholar. The classics in his age began to be studied very generally, and were no sooner studied than translated. This retarded the progress of invention at a time when the language was certainly improving; and hence among a number of authors who flourished in this period, we seldom meet with the glow of pure poetry. It may, however, be added in favour of Turbervile, that he seldom transgresses against morals or delicacy.

Some of his leisure hours he employed in collecting and writing the history of the church of Durham from the year 635 to 1096, in four books. But not having published this work, or made many transcripts of it, according to the custom of those times, it fell into the hands of Simeon, precentor of the church of Durham, who published it under his own name, expunging only a few passages that would have discovered its real author. This curious fact, of which we were not aware when we drew up our brief account of Simeon, is demonstrated by Selden, in his preface to sir Roger Twysden’s “Decem Scriptores,” and shews that literary fame was even then an object of ambition. Turgot composed several other works, particularly the lives of Malcolm Canmore, king of Scotland, and of his pious consort queen Margaret, which is often quoted by Fordun and others, but is not supposed to exist. Turgot had been confessor to queen Margaret, and as Papebroch has published in the “Acts of the Saints,” a life of her, under the name of Theodoric, also said to have been a confessor to the queen, it seems not improbable, according to lord Hailes and others, that Theodoric is another name for Turgot, or that the name of Theodoric has been prefixed to the saint’s life, instead of that of Turgot, by the mistake of some copier: but Papebroch certainly thinks they were two distinct persons.

, a French minister of state, was born at Paris, May 10, 1727, of a very ancient Norman family. His father was, for a long time, provost of the corporation of merchants. He was intended for the church, and went through the requisite preparatory studies; but whether he disliked the catholic religion, or objected to any peculiar doctrines, is not certain. It is generally supposed that the latter was the case, and the intimacy and correspondence he had with Voltaire, Diderot, D'Alembert, &c. afford very probable ground for believing him entirely of their opinion in matters of religion. He looked, however, to the political department, as that which was best adapted to his acquisitions, and the rer sources which he found in his ingenuity and invention. For this purpose he studied the sciences suited to his destination, and mixed experimental philosophy with mathematics, and history with political disquisition. He embraced the profession of the law, and at once displayed his views by fixing on the office of master of the requests, who is the executive officer of government, in operations of commerce and finance. His panegyrist, M. Condorcet, tells us, that a master of requests is rarely without a considerable share of influence respecting some one of the provinces, or the whole state; so that it seldom happens that his liberality or his prejudices, his virtues or his vices, do not, in the course of his life, produce great good or great mischief. About this period Turgot wrote some articles for the Encyclopedic, of which the principal were, Etymology, Existence, Expansibility, Fair, and Foundation. He had prepared several o.thers; but these five only were inserted. All these his biographer praises with more zeal than judgment; the article on Expansibility being very exceptionable, and that on Existence being little more than an ingenious commentary on the first principles of Des Cartes, and by no means deserving to be called the “only improvement in the science of the human mind since the days of Locke.”

The progress of his pursuits are not particularly detailed, but he is reported to have taught the classics at Toulouse, and afterwards, in 1547, was appointed Greek professor at Paris, where he had for his colleagues Buchanan and Muretus, whose joint reputation brought scholars from all parU of Europe. In 1552, Turnebus was appointed super* intendant of the royal printing-house for Greek books, and had William Morel for his associate, whom he left in sole possession of this office about four years after; on being appointed one of the royal professors. Such was his fame, that he had invitations and large offers from Italy, Spain, Portugal, Germany, and England, on condition of settling in. either of those countries; but he preferred the moderate circumstances enjoyed in his own country to the most tempting offers of riches elsewhere. He died June 12, 1565, in the fifty-third year of his age, and was buried on the evening of the same day, agreeably to his desire, in a very private manner, in the burial-place belonging to the college of Montaign, being followed to his grave by only a few friends. He was supposed to have embraced the doctrines of the Reformation; but this was not generally known; and so much was he admired, that both papists and protestants endeavoured to claim him as their own. It was his singular fate, that all who knew him, and all who read his works, loved him. This gave rise to some ingenious lines by Henry Stephens, in which, after putting the question, “Why does Turnebus please every body?” in various ways, he answers, that “he pleaded every body, because he did not please himself,” alluding to his extreme diffidence and modesty, and his very amiable manners. Such was the esteem in which he was held, that some of the German professors, when in their lectures they quoted the authority of Turnebus (or Cujacius, to whom the same compliment was paid) they used to move their right hand to their cap, as a token of veneration. He directed his studies chiefly to philological researches, and to translating the Greek authors. His translations have always been approved, and his criticisms were not less admired in his own and the succeeding age. It has been, indeed, sometimes objected, that he was too fond of conjectural emendations, and that, notwithstanding the constitutional gentleness of his temper, he displayed more than necessary warmth in his controversies with Ramus, and with Bodin but in general his style, as well us his sentiments, were liberal and he is said to have discovered nothing of the pedant but in his dress. His works were collected and published in three volumes, folio, which generally make but one, at Strasburg, 1600, and consist of his commentaries on various parts of Cicero, Varro, Horace, Pliny, &c.; his translations of Aristotle, Theophrastus, Plutarch, &c. and his miscellaneous pieces, letters, and poems. His “Adversaria” went through man)' editions, first in quarto, from 1564 to 1599, when the last was printed in folio. Niceron enumerates a few other separate publications, and comments contributed by him to some of the classics. Of his translations, Huetius says, that “he had every quality which is necessary for a perfect translator; for ho understood Greek thoroughly, and turned it into elegant Latin, closely and without departing in the least from his author, yet in a clear and pleasant style.”

He published, 1. “An Introduction to Psalmody,” 1737. 2. “An abstract of English grammar,” 1738. 3. “The balance of the merits of the whigs and tories,” 1753. 4. “.A summary of facts relative to the election at Abingdon,” 1768. 5. “A friendly monitor to the hardened sinner,” &c. 1770. 6. “An Introduction to rhetoric,” 1771. 7. “A Compendium of social religion,” 1758, reprinted in 1778. 8. “Remarks on Mr. Lake’s sermon on Baptism,” 1781. 9. “Meditations on select portions of Scripture,” 2d edit. 1785. 10. “Devotional poetry vindicated against Dr. Johnson,” 1785. 11. “A serious address to Chris­ tians on the duty of prayer,” 1786. 12. “Essays on important subjects,” 1789, 2 vols. 13. “Exhortations to loyalty and peace,” 1792. 14. “Free thoughts on the spirit of free inquiry in religion,” 1792. 15. “Letters religious and moral, addressed to young persons,” 1793, 2d edit. 16. “Several pieces of poetry,” printed, but not published, in 1794. 17. “The Monitor, or friendly address to the people of Great Britain,” 1795. 18. “Common sense, or the plain man’s answer to the question, whether Christianity be a religion worthy of our choice?” 1797. He also printed a few occasional sermons.

Dr. Turner has left only one sermon in print, preached before the king, May 29, 1685, but he is memorable on another account. He was a single man, and remarkable for his munificence and charity in his life-time. By his will, he left the bulk of his fortune, which was very considerable, in public and charitable uses; for, besides 4000l. in legacies to his relations and friends, he gave or left to his college 6000l. for improving the buildings, and other purposes; to the dean and chapter of Ely 1000l. for augmenting the singing-men’s stipends and 100l. the interest of which was to be expended in putting out children of tha town of Ely apprentices, at the nomination of his successors in the stall he held; and the remainder of his effects, which amounted to 20,000l. his executors were directed to lay out" in estates and lands, and settle them on the governors of the charity for the relief of poor widows and children of clergymen. His executors accordingly purchased the manor of Stow in Northamptonshire, and other estates there, and at West-Wratting in Cambridgeshire, amounting to above 1000l. a year, and settled them in 1716, agreeably to his will. They also erected a sumptuous monument to his memory in Stow church, with an inscription. William Turner, the third son of the dean of Canterbury, was archdeacon of Durham, and rector of Stanhope in that county. He died at Oxford in 1635, and was buried in St. Giles’s church, and near his remains were deposited those of his mother, who died in 1692.

, a very eminent naturalist and divine, was born at Morpeth, in Northumberland, and was educated under the patronage of sir Thomas Wentworth, at the university of Cambridge, where he was chosen a fellow of Pembroke Hall, about 1531. He acquired great reputation for his learning, and about 1536 was admitted to deacon’s orders, at which time he was master of arts. He applied himself also to philosophy and physic, and early discovered an inclination to the study of plants, and a wish to be well acquainted with the materia medico, of the ancients. He complains of the little assistance he could receive in these pursuits. “Being yet a student of Pembroke Hall, where I could learn never one Greke, neither Latin, nor English name, even amongst the physicians, of any herhe or tree such was the ignorance of that time; and as yet there was no English herbal, but one all full of unlearned cacographies and falsely naming of herbes.”

On the accession of Edward VI. he returned o England, was incorporated M. D. at Oxford, appointed physician to Edward, duke of Somerset, and, as a divine, was rewarded with a prebend of York, a canonry of Windsor, and the deanery of Wells. In 1552 he was ordained priest by bishop Ridley. He speaks of himself in the third part of his “Herbal,” as having been physician to the “erle of Embden, lord of East Friesland.” In 1551 he published the first part of his History of Plants, which he dedicated to the duke of Somerset his patron. But on the accession of queen Mary, his zeal in the cause of the reformation, which he had amply testified, not only in preaching, but in various publications, rendered it necessary for him to retire again to the continent, where he remained at Basil, or Strasburgh, with others of the English exiles, until queen Elizabeth came to the throne. He then returned, and was reinstated in his preferments. He had, however, while abroad, caught some of the prejudices which divided the early protestants into two irreconcilable parties, and spoke and acted with such contempt for the English discipline and ceremonies, as to incur censure, but certainly was not deprived, as some of those writers who are hostile to the church have asserted, for he died possessed of the deanery of Wells. It would appear, indeed, that he had given sufficient provocation, but found a friend in the queen on such occasions. In the dedication of the complete edition of his “Herbal” to her in 1568, he acknowledges with gratitude, her favours in restoring him to his benefices, and in other ways protecting him from troubles, having, at four several times, granted him the great seal for that purpose.

Dr. Turner was the author of many controversial treatises, chiefly written against popery. Among these were, 1. “The hunting of the Romish 'Fox,” c. Basil, 1543. 2. “Rescuing of the Romish Fox,” 1545. 3. “The hunting of the Romish Wolf,” 8vo all these were published under the name of William Wraughton. 4. “Dialogue, wherein is contained the examination of the Mass,” Loncl. 8vo. 5. “A preservative, or triacle against the Poison of Pelagius, lately renewed and stirred up again, by the furious secc of the anabaptists,” ibid. 1551, 12mo. 6. “A new book of spiritual physic for divers diseases,” 1555. 7. “The hunting of the Fox and Wolf, because they did make havock of the sheep of Jesus Christ,” 8vo. Tanner mentions a few other articles, and there are several of his tracts yet in manuscript, in various libraries. He collated the translation of the Bible with Hebrew, Greek, and Latin copies, and corrected it in many places. He procured to be printed at Antwerp a new and corrected edition of William of Newburgh’s “Historia gentis nostrse,” from a ms. he found in the library at Wells; but complains that the printer not only omitted certain articles sent by him, but left out the preface he sent him, and substituted one of his own. Our author also translated several works from the Latin, particularly “The comparison of the Old Learning and the New,” written by Urbanus Regius, Southwark, 1537, 8vo, and again 1538 and 1548.

, son to the preceding Dr. Peter, and grandson to Dr. William Turner, was born in 1585, and was admitted a probationer fellow of Merton college, Oxford, in 1607, where he proceeded in arts, and not being restricted to any particular faculty, as the fellows of other colleges are, became, according to Wood, versed in all kinds of literature. His first preferment was the professorship of geometry in Gresham college, in July 1620, but he continued to reside mostly at Oxford, and held this place together with his fellowship. In 1629, by the direction of Laud, then bishop of London, he drew up a scheme for the annual election of proctors out of the several colleges at Oxford in a certain order, that was to return every twenty-three years, which being approved of by his majesty, Charles I. was called the Caroline cycle, and is still followed, and always printed at the end of the “Parecbolae sive Excerpta, e corpore statutorum universitatis Oxon.” In the same year he acted as one of the commissioners for revising the statutes, and reducing them to a better form and order. In 1630, on the death of Briggs, Mr. Turner was chosen to succeed him as professor of geometry at Oxford, and resigned his Gresham professorship. How well he was qualified for his new office appears by the character archbishop Usher gives of him, “Savilianus in academia Oxoniensi inatheseos professor eruditissimus.” In 1634 the new edition of the statutes was printed in fol. with a preface by Mr. Turner; and to reward him for his care and trouble, a new office was founded, that of “custos archivorum,” or keeper of the archives, to which he was appointed, and made large collections respecting the antiquities of the university, which were afterwards of great use to Anthony Wood. In 1636, on a royal visit to Oxford, Mr. Turner was created M. D. but having adhered to his majesty in his troubles, and even taken up arms in his cause, he was ejected from his fellowship of Merton, and his professorship. This greatly impoverished him, and he went to reside with a sister, the widow of a Mr. Watts, a brewer in Southwark, where he died in Jan. 1651, and was interred in St. Saviour’s church. He was a man of extensive learning, and wrote much, but being fastidious in his opinion of his own works, he never could complete them to his mind. We have mentioned the only writings he published, except a Latin poem in the collection in honour of sir Thomas Bodley, called the “Bodleiomnema,” Oxf. 1613. Wood also mentions “Epistolae variae ad doctissimos viros;” but we know of no printed letters of his Dr. Ward, however, gives extracts from three ms letters in English to Selden, chiefly relating to some Greek writers on the music of the ancients.

, the first of a celebrated family of protestant divines, was the son of Francis Turretin, descended from an ancient family at Lucca, who was obliged to fly his country for the cause of religion, and resided partly at Antwerp and Geneva, and lastly at Zurich, where he died. His son Benedict was born Nov. 9, 1588, and in his thirty-third year (1621) was appointed pastor, and professor of theology at Geneva. The same year the republic of Geneva being alarmed at the hostile preparations making by the duke of Savoy, sent Mr. Turretin to the States General of the United Provinces and to the prince of Orange, and he prevailed on their high mightinesses to advance the sum of 30,000 livres, and 10,000 livres per month, for three months, in case of a siege. He also obtained other pecuniary aid from the churches of Hamburgh, Embden, and Bremen. During his being in Holland, he had interviews with the French and English ambassadors, and had an audience of the king of Bohemia, to whom he communicated the sympathy which the state of Geneva felt on his reverse of fortune. In 1622 he returned to Geneva, and was received with all the respect due to his services. He died at Geneva, March 4, 1631, with the character of a very learned divine, and a man of great moderation and judgment. His works are, 1. A defence of the Geneva translation of the Bible, against the attack of father Colon in his “Geneve Plagiaire.” This extended to three parts, or volumes, printed from 1618 to 1626. 2. “Sermons,” in French, “sur rutilite” des chatiments.“3.” Sermons," in Italian, &c.

, the most celebrated of the family, was the son of Francis Turretin, and was born at Geneva, Aug. 24, 1671. From his infancy he shewed a great ardour for study, which his father took every pains to improve and direct. Some of his early preceptors were divines who had fled from France for religion, and one of them, a Mons. Dautun, was particularly serviceable in correcting the exuberances of his compositions, and habituating him to revise and reconsider what he wrote. This at first was rather troublesome to the lively spirits of our author, but he soon saw that Dautun had reason on his side. He studied the Cartesian philosophy under Chouet, a very able professor. Bishop Burnet, who passed the winter at Geneva in 1685, conceived a very high opinion of young Turretin, often examined him on his tasks, and in the course of many conversations inspired him with that taste which Turretin always afterwards indulged for English literature. In 1687 he lost his father, but continued to pursue his theological studies under Louis Tronchin, Calendrini, and Pictet. Tronchin admired in him a great love for truth and peace, and said, “that young man begins where others end.” Turretin had many advantages on his side, an uncommon share of natural understanding, a great memory, a facility in discovering the important parts of a question; an aversion to idleness and frivolous amusements; learned friends, an ample library, and a patrimony which set him at ease from anxiety or precipitation in his studies. At the age of twenty, with these advantages, we are told he was “almost a great man,” (presque un grand homme).

In 1699 he embraced a favourable opportunity to make the tour of Swisserland, in the course of which he added considerably to the number of his friends and admirers. After his return, the commencement of a new century directed his attention to the secular games of the ancients, and produced from his pen a treatise entitled “De ludis ssECularibus Academicae Questiones,” Gen. 1701, 4to.In the same year he was chosen rector of the academy, in which office he remained until 1711, and delivered ten orations on the academic anniversary of each year. In 1702, he wrote a panegyric on William III, which was reprinted in England, and much admired. On the death of Tronchin, in 1705, he was appointed to succeed him in the divinity professorship, which he held with that of ecclesiastical history, but did not deliver a regular, systematic course of divinity lectures, for which he was blamed. In 1706 he joined those Geneva divines who sought to be excused from subscribing the form called the consensus, which had been introduced about thirty or forty years before. It appears from this that his notions were rather more latitudinarian than those of his ancestors; and it was remarked as rather singular that the son should be so zealous to abolish, what the father had been equally zealous to establish. We are assured, however, that friendly as he was to toleration, and somewhat inclined to Arminianism, he was a constant advocate for uniformity in all essential doctrines. In 1707, when the re-union of the protestant churches was agitated, the king of Prussia made Turretin a present of a gold medal, and he was chosen a member of the royal society of Berlin, as he had before of that of London. On the subject of any junction with the church of Rome, Turretin held that to be wholly impracticable, and his opinion had great weight. Such was indeed his reputation, that no strangers, of whatever rank, ever visited Geneva without a desire to be introduced to him, and to consult him on matters of importance.

In 1711 he began to print his theses on different subjects, but chiefly on the necessity of a revelation, and on the truth of the Christian religion, all of which were published at Geneva in 2 vols. 4to, 1737. In 1719 he published a “Dissertation on Fundamental Points,” which he had written at the request of two persons of rank of the Lutheran profession. Along with it was published his “Cloud of Witnesses.” The title was “Nubes Testium de moderate et pacifico de rebus theologicis judicio, et instituenda inter protestantes concordia. Premissa est brevis et pacifica de articulis fundamentalibus disquisitio, qua ad protestantium pacem, mutuamque tolerantiam via sternitur,” 4to. This work, which contains an assemblage of the sentiments of eminent men of all ages on the subject of toleration, was dedicated to archbishop Wake, who as well as the author laboured much to procure a re-union between the protestant churches; and Turretin derived no little reputation from this attempt, which many of the leading men among the Lutherans highly approved. About this time he had a controversy with Buddeus on the subject of miracles, which was conducted on both sides with great urbanity. Turretm also began to prepare for the press his lectures on natural religion, which form an excellent system on that subject. On the death of Pictet he succeeded him in his duties on. solemn academical festivals, and in delivering the accustomed harangues, prescribed by the laws of Geneva, not only in the council of two hundred, but in the half-yearly meetings of the burgesses. He also took an active part in various improvements introduced by the church of Geneva, as a revision of their liturgies, a translation of the new testament published in 1726, the establishment of a society for the education of the young, &c. In 1734 he published his abridgment of ecclesiastical history, in Latin, “Historiae Ecclesiastics compendium a Christo nato usque ad annum. 1700,” Genev. 8vo. This he used to dictate to his students, and it served as a text-book for his lectures. The preceding year he received from our queen Caroline, who had often shewn him marks of respect, a gold medal, brought by Sir Luke Schaub, but she was dead before it arrived. On the death of archbishop Wake in 1737, which Turretin very much regretted, the divines of Geneva having determined to write a letter to the new archbishop, Potter, congratulating him on his promotion, and requesting his protection to the foreign churches, Turretin was employed on the occasion, and this was the last letter of any importance which he wrote. His health, always delicate, now began to give way, and he died May I, 1737, in his sixty-sixth year, regretted as one of the most able divines of his church or time.

, an English poet of the sixteenth century, and styled the British Varro, was born, as it is supposed, about the year 1515, at Rivenhall near Witham in Essex. His father, William Tusser, married a daughter of Thomas Smith, of Rivenhall, esq. by whom he had five sons and four daughters; and this match appears to have been the chief foundation of “the gentility of his family,” for which he refers his readers to “the Heralds’ book.” The name and race, however, have long been extinct. At an early age, much against his will, he was sent by his father to a music-school; and was soon placed as a chorister or singing-boy in the collegiate chapel of the castle of Wallingford; and after some hardships, of which he complains, and frequent change of place, he was at length admitted into St. Paul’s, where he arrived at considerable proficiency in music, under John Redford, the organist of that cathedral, a man distinguished for his attainments in the science. From St. Paul’s he was sent to Eton school, and was some time under the tuition of the famous Nicholas Udall, of whose severity he complains, in giving him fiftythree stripes at once for a trifling fault. Hence he was removed to Cambridge, and, according to some, was first entered of King’s college, and afterwards removed to Trinity hall; but his studies being interrupted by sickness, he left the university, and was employed about court, probably in his musical capacity, by the influence of his patron, William lord Paget. He appears to have been a retainer in this nobleman’s family, and he mentions his lordship in the highest terms of panegyric.

For an author, the vicissitudes of his life present an uncommon variety of incident. “Without a tincture of careless imprudence,” saysWarton, “or vicious extravagance, this desultory character seems to have thriven in no vocation.” There are no data, however, to account for his frequent changes of life and his failures. Farming was his leading pursuit, and in that, although he was a good theorist for the time, he was unsuccessful in practice. Stillingfleet says, “He seems to have been a good-natured cheerful man, and though a lover of ceconomy, far from meanness, as appears in many of his precepts, wherein he shews his disapprobation of that pitiful spirit, which makes farmers starve their cattle, their land, and every thing belonging to them; choosing rather to lose a pound than spend a shilling. Upon the whole, his book displays all the qualities of a well-disposed man, as well as of an able farmer.” Mr. Stillingfleet adds, “Googe set Tusser on a level with Varro and Columella and Palladius; but I would rather compare him to old Hesiod. They both wrote in the infancy of husbandry; both gave good general precepts, without entering into the detail, though Tusser has more of it than Hesiod; they both seem desirous to improve the morals of their readers as well as their farms, by recommending industry and economy; and that which perhaps may be looked upon as the greatest resemblance, they both wrote in verse, probably for the same reason, namely, to propagate their doctrines more effectually.”

The learned have looked with wearied expectation, and the friends of Mr. Tweddell with disappointed anxiety, to receive from the press some portion at least of the very large and choice materials which he had prepared for publication, both from his own pen, and from the pencil of an eminent artist, Mons. Preaux, acting under his immediate direction; these, it may be presumed, coming from a traveller so accomplished and so indefatigable, must have shed new and extraordinary light on the antiquities of Greece, and more particularly on those of Athens; whilst the journals of his travels in some of the mountainous districts of Switzerland, rarely, if ever before, visited, and in the Crimea, on the borders of the Euxine, could not have failed to impart much novel information. But notwithstanding the most urgent and diligent endeavours made by Mr. Tweddell’s friends notwithstanding the arrival at Constantinople of his papers and effects from Athens, and the actual delivery of his Swiss journals, with sundry other manuscripts, and above three hundred highlyfinished drawings, into the official custody of the British ambassador at the Othman court, it remains at this time a mystery, what is actually become of all these valuable manuscripts and drawings. Neither have all the investigations set on foot by his friends, nor the more recent representations addressed to the ambassador, obtained any explicit or satisfactory elucidation of the strange and suspicious obscurity which hangs over all the circumstances of this questionable business.

Mr. Tweddell, in his person, was of the middle stature, of a handsome and well-proportioned figure. His eye was remarkably soft and intelligent. The profile, or frontispiece to the volume, lately published, gives a correct and lively representation of the original, though it is not in the power of any outline to shadow out the fine expression of his animated and interesting countenance. His address was polished, affable, and prepossessing in a high degree; and there was in his whole appearance an air of dignified benevolence, which pourtrayed at once the suavity of his nature and the independence of his mind. In conversation, he had a talent so peculiarly his own, as to form a very distinguishing feature of his character. A chastised and ingenious wit, which could seize on an incident in the happiest manner a lively fancy, which could clothe the choicest ideas in the best language — these, supported by large acquaintance with men and books, together with the further advantages of a melodious voice, and a playfulness of manner singularly sweet and engaging, rendered him the delight of every company: his power of attracting friendships was, indeed, remarkable; and in securing them he was equally happy. Accomplished and admired as he was, his modesty was conspicuous, and his whole deportment devoid of affectation or pretension. Qualified eminently to shine in society, and actually sharing its applause, he found his chief enjoyment in the retired circle of select friends; in whose literary leisure, and in the amenities of female converse (which for him had the highest charms) he sought the purest and the most refined recreation. “Of jhe purity of Mr. Tweddell’s principles, and the honourable independence of his character of his elevated integrity, his love of truth, his generous, noble, and affectionate spirit, the editor might with justice say much, but the traces and proofs of these, dispersed throughout the annexed correspondence, he cheerfully leaves to the police and sympathy of the intelligent reader.” Such is the language of his brother, the rev. Robert Tweddell, and the editor of a very interesting volume, entitled “Remains of the late John Tweddell, &c. being a selection of his Letters, written from various parts of the continent, together with a republication of his Prolusiones Juveniles,” 1815, 4to. It has been justly remarked on this volume, that, though some letters in the collection, and parts of others, would have been perhaps judiciously omitted, there are few instances of a private correspondence, written without the least view to publication, which will bear a severer scrutiny, either in point of good sense, elegant taste, or honourable sentiments. Full of candour and discrimination, Tweddell pourtrays with great spirit the manners and customs, and characters of the different nations he visited imbued with classical lore, and blessed with a fine imagination, he paints in glowing colours the magnificent scenery of nature in her wildest regions, and throws a double interest over the deserted relics of ancient art: educated in the strict principles of morality and religion, by the most excellent of parents, he repays their care and solicitude by the strong and vivid sentiments of attachment displayed throughout his whole correspondence, which is undefiled by a single sentence of a licentious tendency.

, a learned English divine, was educated at Jesus college, Cambridge, where he proceeded B. A. in 1704-. In 1733 the university of Oxford conferred on him the degree of M. A. by diploma, in approbation, as we presume, of his “Critical Examination, &c.” hereafter mentioned. He was at that time vicar of St. Mary’s at Marlborough; but in 1737 was presented to the united rectories of St. Matthew, Friday-street, and St. Peter, Cheap. He was also a prebendary of St. Paul’s, and one of the lecturers of St. Dunstan’s in the West. Some of these promotions came late, nor had he more than 100l. a year to support a family of five children till within five years of his death, which took place Feb. 19, 1741-2. By the advice of some friends, two volumes of his sermons at Boyle’s and lady Moyer’s lectures were published for the benefit of his family, 1743, in 2 vols. 8vo. His publications in his life-time were, 1. “A Critical Examination of the late new text and version of the Testament, in Greek and English, in three parts;” the first two were printed in 1731, and the last in 1732, 8vo. The work here examined was entitled “The New Testament in Greek and English, containing the original text corrected, from the authority of authentic Mss. and a new version formed agreeably to the illustrations of the most learned commentators and critics, with notes and various readings, &c.” Mr. Twells’s object is to prove that the editor’s text is corrupt, his version false, and his notes fallacious, and that the tendency of the work is to injure Christianity in general, and the tenets of the Church of England in particular. Mr. Twells also published, 2. “A Vindication of the gospel of St. Matthew,” 1735, 8vo; and “A Supplement to the Vindication.” 3. “Answer to the Inquiry into the meaning of the Demoniacks in the New Testament,” 1737, 8vo. 4. “Answer to the ‘ Further Inquiry,’ 1738,” 8vo. 5. “The Theological Works of Dr. Pocock,” 1740, 2 vols. fol. with a life of Pocock, to which we have already referred, replete with curious information respecting that great orientalist, his contemporaries, and the times in which he lived. Mr. Twells, we are sorry to add, gained little by this pub-. Hcation. He himself states that his reward for writing the life, compiling indexes, collating and correcting the errors of the old edition, which with soliciting for subscriptions, travelling to London, Oxford, &c. more or less employed his time and exercised his patience for five years, would be in all probability not more than 50l.

In 1760 he took his degree of B. A. and that of A. M. in 1763. He became rector of White Notley, Essex, in private patronage, 1788, and of St. Mary’s, Colchester, to which he was presented by the bishop of London, on the death of Philip Morant, 1770. He died Aug. 6, 1804, in the seventieth year of his age. Sound learning, polite literature, and exquisite taste in all the fine arts, lost an ornament and defender in the death of this scholar and worthy divine. His translation of the “Poetics of Aristotle” must convince men of learning of his knowledge of the Greek language, of the wide extent of his classical erudition, of his acute and fair spirit of criticism, and, above all, of his good taste, sound judgment, and general reading manifested in his dissertations. Besides his familiar acquaintance with the Greek and Roman classics, his knowledge of modern languages, particularly French and Italian, was such as not only to enable him to read but to write those languages with facility and idiomatic accuracy. His conversation and letters, when science and serious subjects were out of the question, were replete with wit, humour, and playfulness. In the performance of his ecclesiastical duties Mr. T. was exemplary, scarcely allowing himself to be absent from his parishioners more than a fortnight in a year, during the last forty years of his life, though, from his learning, accomplishments, pleasing character, and conversation, no man’s company was so much sought. During the last 12 or 14 years of his life he was a widower, and has left no progeny. His preferment in the church was inadequate to his learning, piety, and talents; but such was the moderation of his desires, that he neither solicited nor complained. The Colchester living was conferred upon him by Dr. Lowth, bishop of London, very much to his honour, without personal acquaintance or powerful recommendation; but, from the modesty of his character, and love of a private life, his profound learning and literary abilities were little known till the publication of his Aristotle.

others, were dug up and thrown into was nothing inDr.Twiss’s conduct to rena pit, in St. Margaret’s churchyard, derhis memory particularly obnoxious. personal character, there seems no difference of opinion among historians. Fuller denominates him “a divine of great abilities, learning, piety, and moderation;” and Wood says, “his plain preaching was esteemed good; his solid disputations were accounted better; but his pious life was reckoned best of all.” Nor less favourably does bishop Sanderson speak of him, even while differing greatly from some of his opinions. Mr. Clark says, that he “had his infirmities, whereof the most visible was this: that he was of a facile nature, and too prone to be deceived by giving too much credit to those, whom, by information from others, or in his own opinion, he judged to be godly. Whence it came to pass that he was often imposed upon, especially by certain crafty heads, who solemnly professed that their chiefest care was the preservation of the purity of doctrine, and reformation of discipline, whereas, in deed and truth, they sought the utter subversion of both.”

His writings are all controversial, and more or less directed against Arminianism, of which, it seems to be agreed, even by his adversaries, he was the ablest and most successful opponent of his time. The authors against whom he wrote were, principally, Dr. Thomas Jackson, Mr. Henry Mason, Dr. Thomas Godwin, Mr. John Godwin, Mr. John Cotton, Dr. Potter, Dr. Heylin, and Dr. Hammond. His works were, 1. “Vindiciae gratioe,” Amst. 1632 and 164S, fol. against Arminius. 2. “A discovery of Dr. Jackson’s Vanity,” &c. 1631, 4to, printed abroad. 3. “Dissertatio de scientia media tribus libris absoluta,” &c. Arnheim, 1639, fol. 4. “Of the Morality of the Fourth Commandment,” Lond. 1641, 4to. 5. “Treatise of Reprobation,” ibid. 1646, 4to, with some other works printed after his death. There are fifteen of his letters in Mr. Joseph Mede’s Works, and he, left many Mss. in the hands of his son, who, WoocJ says, was a minister, but these are probably lost.

, son of Thomas, and grandson of John Twyne, was born in 1579, and admitted a scholar of Corpus Christi college in December 1594. After he had taken the degrees in arts, he was admitted probationer fellow in 1605, and entering into holy orders took the degree of bachelor of divinity in 1610. In 1614 he was made Greek reader of his college, in which office he acquitted himself with credit, but about 1623 left college to avoid being involved in some dispute between the president and fellows; because in this affair, Wood informs us, he could not vote on either side without the hazard of expulsion, having entered college on a Surrey scholarship, which, it seems, was irregular. He was afterwards presented to the vicarage of Rye in Sussex by the earl of Dorset, but seldom resided, passing most of his time in Oxford, where he had lodgings in Penverthing or Pennyfarthing street, in the parish of St. Aldate. He lived here in a kind of retirement, being, as Wood says, of a melancholy temper, and wholly given to reading, writing, and contemplation. Laud had a great regard for him, and employed him in drawing up the university statutes, all of which he transcribed with his own hand, and was rewarded with the place of custos archivorum, founded in 1634. He died at his lodging^ in St. Aldate’s, July 4, 1644, aged sixty-five, and was buried in Corpus chapel.

Twyne, who was an indefatigable collector of every document or information respecting the history and antiquities of Oxford, produced the first regular account of it, which was published in 1608, under the title of “Antiquitatis Academioe Oxoniensis Apologia, in tres libros divisa,” Oxon. 4to. The chief object of this work was to refute what Kaye or Caius had asserted in his history of Cambridge on the antiquity of that university, proving it to be 1267 years older than Oxford. So absurd an assertion would scarcely now be thought worthy of a serious answer, but Twyne was an enthusiast on the question, and mere antiquity was thought preferable to every other degree of superiority. He therefore produced his “Apologia,” in which he revives and endeavours to prove that Oxford was originally founded by some Greek philosophers, the companions of Brutus, and restored by King Alfred in 870. Smith, in his history of University college, has very ably answered his principal arguments on this question, which indeed has nothing more than tradition on its side. He was a young man when he wrote this book, and intended a new edition; but his interleaved copy for this purpose, with his additions, &c. was unfortunately lost in a fire at Oxford, which happened some time after his death. He left, however, several volumes of ms collections to the university, of which Wood availed himself in his history.

, the second baronet of the family, of Roydon hall, East Peckham, in Kent, was born in 1597. His father, William Twysden, esq. was one of those who conducted king James to London, when he first came from Scotland, to take possession of the English crown, and was first knighted and afterwards created a baronet by his majesty. Sir William had a learned education, understood Greek and Hebrew well, and accumulated a valuable collection of books and Mss. which he made useful to the public, both in defence of the protestant religion and the ancient constitutions of the kingdom. He died in January 1627-8. Sir Roger, his eldest son, had also a learned education, and was a good antiquary. He assisted Mr. Philpot in his Survey of Kent, who returns him acknowledgments, as a person to whom, “for his learned conduct of these his imperfect labours, through the gloomy and perplexed paths of antiquity, and the many difficulties that assaulted him, he was signally obliged.” He was a man of great accomplishments, well versed in the learned languages, and exemplary in his attachment to the church of England. He made many important additions to his father’s library, which seems seldom to have been unemployed by his family or his descendants. His brother, Thomas, was brought up to the profession of the law, and became one of the justices of the King’s Bench after the restoration, and was created a baronet, by which he became the founder of the family of Twisdens (for he altered the spelling of the name) of Bradbourn in Kent. Another brother, John, was a physician, and a good mathematician, and wrote on both sciences.

In an old comedy, or scenical history, whichever it is proper to call it, with the following whimsical title, “When you see me you know me,” by Samuel Rowley, printed in 1623, wherein are represented in the manner of a drama some of the remarkable events during the reign of Henry VIII. is a conversation between prince Edward and Dr. Tye on the subject of music, which, for its curiosity, sir John Hawkins has transcribed at length. The “Acts of the Apostles,” mentioned in this dialogue, were never completed; but the first fourteen chapters thereof were, in 1553, printed by Wyllyam Seres, with the following quaint title: “The Actes of the Appostles, translated into Englyshe metre, and dedicated to the kynges most excellent majestye by Christofer Tye, doctor in musyke, and one of the Gentylmen of hys graces moste honourable Chappell, wyth notes to eche Chapter, to syng and also to play upon, the Lute, very necessarye for studentes after theyr studye, to fyle theyr wyttes, and alsoe for all Christians that cannot synge to reade the good and godlye storyes of the Hues of Christ hys Apostles.” The dedication is, “To the vertuous and godlye learned prynce Edwarde the VI.” and is in stanzas of alternate metre. The reader will find some account of it in the “Bibliographer,” vol. I.

The “Acts of the Apostles,” set to music by Dr. Tye, were sung in the chapel of Edward VI. and probably in other places where choral service was performed; but the success of them not answering the expectation of their author, he applied himself to another kind of study, the composing of music to words selected from the Psalms of David, in four, five, and more parts; to which species of harmony, for want of a better, the name of Anthem, a corruption of Antiphon, was given. In Dr. Boyce’s collection of cathedral music, lately published, vol. II. is aa anthem of this great musician, “I will exalt thee,” a most perfect model for composition in the church-style, whether we regard the melody or the harmony, the expression or the contrivance, or, in a word, the general effect of the whole. In the Ashmolean ms. fol. 189, is the following note in the hand-writing of Antony Wood “Dr. Tye was a peevish and humoursome man, especially in his latter days and sometimes playing on the organ in the chapel of Qu. Eliz. which contained much music, but little delight to the ear, she would send to the verger to tell him that he played out of tune; whereupon he sent word, that her ears were out of tune.” The same author adds, that Dr. Tye restored church-music after it had been almost ruined by the dissolution of abbeys. What sir John Hawkins, from whom this article appears to have been taken by our predecessors, has said of Tye, is confirmed by Dr. Burney, who says that he was doubtless at the head of all our ecclesiastical composers of that period. This eminent musical historian adds, that Dr. Tye, “if compared with his contemporaries, was perhaps as good a poet as Sternhold, and as great a musician as Europe then could boast; and it is hardly fair to expect marc perfection from him, or to blame an individual for the general defects of the age in which he lived.”

, a miscellaneous writer of considerable talents, was one of the two sons of Mr. Jonathan Tyers, the original embellisher of Vauxhall gardens, of which he was himself a joint proprietor till the end of the season of 1785, when he sold his share to his brother’s family. He was born in 1726, and being intended for one of the learned professions, was sent very early in life to the university of Oxford, where he entered of Exeter college, and was so young when he took his bachelor’s degree that he was called the boy bachelor. That of master of arts he completed in April 1745, when he was only nineteen. In 1753 he was admitted a student of the Inner Temple, and became, after he had kept his terms, a barrister in that house; but he tells us that, although his father hoped he would apply to the law, take notes, and make a figure in Westminster-hall, he never undertook any causes, nor went a single circuit. He loved his ease too much to acquire a character in that or any other profession. It is said that the character of Tom Restless (in the Idler, N 8 48) was intended by Dr. Johnson for Mr. Tyers, but he was certainly a man of superior cast to the person described under that name. It could not be said of Mr. Tyers that he sought wisdom more in conversation than in his library, for few men read more, and he was heard to say, not long before his death, that for the last forty years, he had not been a single day, when in health, without a book or a pen in his hand, “nulla dies sine linea.”

He began early to write, and when at college, or very soon after, published two pastorals, “Lucy,” inscribed to lord Chesterfield, and “Rosalind,” to earl Grenville. He was also the author of a great deal of vocal poetry, or what he called “sing song,” principally for Vauxhall-gardens; and the satisfactory description ofVauxhall, published in Mr. Nichols’s “History of Lambeth,” was drawriup by him. Having inherited from his father an easy fortune, and from nature an inclination to indulge in learned leisure, he was happily enabled “to see what friends and read what books he pleased.” He was, if any man could be said to be so, most perfectly master of his own time, which he divided at his pleasure between his villa at Ashted, near Epsom, and his apartments in Southampton-street. Indefatigable in reading the newest publications, either of belles lettres or politics, and blest with a retentive memory, he was every where a welcome guest; and, having the agreeable faculty of always repeating the good-natured side of a story, the anecdotes he retailed pretty copiously were rarely found either tedious or disagreeable. In the country he was considered by all the surrounding gentry as a man of profound learning, who had some little peculiarities in his manners, which were amply atoned for by a thousand good qualities both of the head and heart. In London he was in habits of intimacy with many whom the world have agreed to call both great and good. Dr. Johnson loved him, lord Hardwicke esteemed him, and even the mitred Lowth respected him. The literati in general had more regard for him than authors usually have for each other; as Mr. Tyers, though known for many years to have been a writer, was rather considered by them as an amateur than a professor of the art. He was certainly among the number of “gentlemen who wrote with ease;” witness hi* “Rhapsodies” on Pope and Addison; and particularly his Biographical sketches of Johnson, warm from the heart when his friend was scarcely buried, and which have not been exceeded by any one of our great moralist’s biographers. The “Political Conferences” of Mr. Tyers, however, will place him in a higher point of view; in that production, much ingenuity and sound political knowledge are displayed; and the work has received the plaudits it so well deserved, and passed through two editions. One part of Mr. Tyers’s knowledge he would have been happier had he not possessed. He had a turn for the study of medicine, and its operations on the human frame, which gave him somewhat of a propensity to hypochondriasm, and often led from imaginary to real ailments. Hence the least variation of the atmosphere had not unfrequently an effect both on his mind and body. The last year or two of his life were also embittered by the death of several near and dear friends, whose loss made a deep impression on his sensibility, particularly that of a very amiable lady, to whom he was once attached, and that of his only sister, Mrs. Rogers, of Southampton, who died but a few months before him. He died at his house at Ashted, after a lingering illness, Feb. 1, 1787, in his sixty-first year.

When this translation was imported into England, the supporters of popery became very much alarmed; they asserted that there were a thousand heresies in it; that it was too bad to be corrected, and ought to be suppressed; that it was not possible to translate the Scriptures into English; and that it would make the laity heretics, and rebels to their king. It is more painful, however, to record that such men as William Warham, archbishop of Canterbury, and Cuthbert Tunstall, bishop of London, issued their orders and monitions to bring in all the New Testaments translated into the vulgar tongue, that they might be burnt. To destroy them more effectually, Tunstall being at Antwerp in 1526 or 1S27, procured Augustin Packington, an English merchant, to buy up all the copies of the English Testament which remained unsold; these were accordingly brought to England, and publicly burnt at Paul’s cross. But this ill-fudged policy only took off many copies which lay dead upon Tyndale’s hands, and supplied him with, money for another and more correct edition, printed in 1534, while the first edition was in the mean while reprinted twice, but not by the translator. Of Tunstall’s singular purchase, the following fact is related: “Sir Thomas More being lord chancellor, and having several persons accused of heresy, and ready for execution, offered to compound with one of them, named George Constantine, for his life, upon the easy terms of discovering to him who they were in London that maintained Tyndale beyond the sea. After the poor man had got as good a security for his life as the honour and truth of the chancellor could give him, he told him it was the bishop of London who maintained Tyndale, by sending him a sum of money to buy up the impression of his Testaments. The chancellor smiled, saying that he believed he said true. Thus was this poor confessor’s life saved.” Strict search, however, continued to be made among those who were suspected of importing, and concealing them; of whom John Tyndale, our author’s brother, was prosecuted, and condemned to do penance. Humphrey Monmouth, his great patron and benefactor, was imprisoned in the Tower, and almost ruined.

But these rigorous measures not producing the intended effect; and burning the word of God, in any shape, being regarded by the people as a shocking profanation, sir Thomas More was induced to take up the pen. In 1529, he published “A Dyaloge,” in which he endeavoured to prove that the books burnt were not New Testaments, but Tyndale’s or Luther’s testaments; and so corrupted and changed from the good and wholesome doctrine of Christ to their own devilish heresies, as to be quite another thing. In 15 Jo, Tyndale published an answer to this Dialogue, and proceeded in translating the Five Books of Moses, from the Hebrew into English; but happening to go by sea to Hamburgh, to have it printed there, the vessel was wrecked, and he lost all his money, books, writings, and copies, and was obliged to begin anew. At Hamburgh he met with Miles Coverdale, who assisted him in translating the Pentateuch, which was printed in 1530, in a small octavo volume, and apparently at several presses. He afterwards made an English version of the prophecy of Jonas, with a large prologue, which was printed in 1531; but he translated no more books of the Scripture, as Hall, Bale, and Tanner, have asserted.

Mr. Tyrrell’s first appearance as an author was in the dedication of a posthumous work of archbishop Usher’s. Wood says he published this, but the publisher was bishop Sanderson. It was entitled “The Power communicated by God to the Prince, and the obedience required of the Subject,” Lond. 1661, 4to. At this time Mr. Tyrrell was very young, and had not probably left Oxford, or was but just beginning his studies in the Temple; but it might perhaps be thought creditable to appear as the nearest relative of the venerable author, and he might not be sorry to have an early opportunity of paying his court to the restored monarch. This much we may infer from the dedication itself, which he concludes in these words: “I shall now make this my most humble suit to your majesty, that as the reverend author in his life-time publicly professed his loyalty to his sovereign, and constantly prayed for your majesty’s happy and glorious return to these your kingdoms, and in all things shewed himself your loyal subject, so you would be pleased to own him as such, by affording your gracious countenance to this his posthumous work, which will eternize the memory of the deceased author, and thereby confer the greatest temporal blessing on your majesty’s most loyal and obedient subject, James Tyrrell.”

In 1686 appeared his vindication of his father-in-law, printed at the end of Parr’s “Life of Archbishop Usher,” under the title of “An Appendix, containing a vindication of his opinions and actions in reference to the doctrine and discipline of the Church of England, and his conformity thereunto, from the aspersions of Peter Heylin, D. D. in his pamphlet called Respondet Petrus” This pamphlet of Heylin’s was his answer to Dr. Bernard’s book entitled “The Judgment of the late Primate of Ireland, &c. as he is made a party by the said Lord Primate in the point of the Sabbath,” Lond. 1658, 4to. (See Heylin, p. 442 and 443.) Mr. Tyrrell’s notions in politics were adverse to those of some of his contemporaries, who were for carrying the prerogative to its height, and vindicated passive obedience and non-resistance: he was clearly for a monarchy, but a limited monarchy, and therefore answered sir Robert Filmer in a small volume entitled “Patriarcha non Monarcha, or the Patriarch unmonarched, &c.” 1681, 8vo. This was animadverted upon by Edmund Bohun, in the preface to the second edition of sir Robert’s “Patriarcha;” but Mr. Tyrrell’s opinions on this and other subjects connected with it are most fully displayed in his political dialogues, which were first published at different times, in 1692, 1693, 1694, and 1695, in quarto, until they amounted to fourteen. They were afterwards collected into one volume folio, about the time of his death, and published under the name of “Bibliotheca Politica, or an Enquiry into the ancient Constitution of the English Government, with respect to the just extent of the regal power, and the rights and liberties of the subject. Wherein all the chief arguments, both for and against the late revolution, are impartially represented and considered. In fourteen dialogues, collected out of the best authors, ancient and modern,” Lond. 1718, reprinted 1727. It appears also that subjects of the religious kind sometimes employed his attention, as in 1692 he published an abridgment of bishop Cumberland’s work on the laws of nature, with the consent and approbation of the right reverend author. This, which was entitled “A brief Disquisition of the Law of Nature, &c.” was reprinted in 1701. But the work which had employed most of Mr. Tyrreli’s time was his “General History of England, both ecclesiastical and civil, from the earliest accounts of time,” 5 vols. fol. generally bound in three, Lond. 1700, 1704. He intended to have brought this down to the reign of William III. but what is published extends no farther than that of Richard II. and of course forms but a small part of the whole plan. It is thought that he left another volume or more ready for the press, but this has never appeared. His chief object seems to be to refute the sentiments of Dr. Brady in his “History of England,” particularly where he asserts that “all the liberties and privileges the people can pretend to were the grants and concessions of the kings of this nation, and were derived from the crown” and that “the commons of England were not introduced, nor were one of the three estates in parliament, before the forty-ninth of Henry III. Before which time the body of commons of England, or freemen collectively taken, had not any share or votes in making laws for the government of the kingdom, nor had any communication in affairs of state, unless they were represented by the tenants in capite.” In refuting these opinions Mr. Tyrrell will probably be thought not unsuccessful; but the work is ill digested, and less fit for reading than for consultation. As a compilation it will be found useful, particularly on account of his copious translations from our old English historians, although even there he has admitted some mistakes.

, an ancient Greek poet, who flourished in the seventh century B. C. was born at Miletus, but lived at Athens, and became celebrated by all antiquity for the composition of military songs and airs, as well as the performance of them and the successof his verses has advanced his name to the rank of the greatest heroes as well as the noblest poets. The Lacedaemonians, during the second Messenian war, about 685 B. C. by advice of the Pythian Oracle, applied to the Athenians for a general. The Athenians sent them Tyrtæus, perhaps in ridicule for, besides his occupation, utterly remote from military affairs, he is reported to have been short and very deformed, blind of one eye, and lame But a memorable victory which they obtained over the Messenians is attributed to the animating sound of a new military flute or clarion, invented and played upon by Tyrtæus; and his military airs were constantly sung and played in the Spartan army, to the last hour of the republic. The poems of Tyrtæus were first printed in a collection by Frobenius in 1532, and separately in 1764 by Klotz. His “War Elegies” have been versified in English by Mr. Polwhele, and imitated by the late Mr. Pye, with a reference to the late war.

He was now made clerk of the House of Commons, in the room of the deceased Jeremiah Dyson, esq. and resigned his fellowship. This, however, was not his first step in public life. He had previously resided for some time in the Temple, and had studied law; and in December 1756 was appointed deputy secretary at war, under his noble friend and patron, lord Barrington, with whom and his family he preserved, and highly valued, the most intimate friendship to the last hour of his life. If the too constant fatigues and late hours of his office, as clerk of the House of Commons, had not proved too much for his constitution, it is thought that some of the higher offices of the state were within his reach. But after getting through one long parliament, he resigned in 1768, or, as he says in a short list of the dates of his life now before us, he was liber factus, and retired to his beloved books. The remainder of his life was devoted entirely to literary pursuits. Besides a knowledge of almost every European tongue, he was deeplyconversant in the learning of Greece and Koine, and in the old English writers; and as his knowledge was directed by a manly judgment, his critical efforts to illustiate the text of Chaucer and Shakspeare are justly ranked among the happiest efforts of modern skill. The profundity and acuteness of his remarks also on Euripides, Babrius, the PseudoRowley, &c. bear sufficient witness to the diligence of his researches and the force of his understanding His mode of criticism is allowed to have been at once rigorous and candid. As he never availed himself of petty stratagems in support of doubtful positions, he was vigilant to strip his antagonists of all such specious advantages. Yet controversy produced no unbecoming change in the habitual gentleness and elegance of his manners. His spirit of inquiry was exempt from captiousness, and his censures were as void of rudeness, as his erudition was free from pedantry. In private life he was a man of great liberality, of which some striking instances are given in our authorities. In one year it is said he gave away 2000l.; and for such generous exertions he had the ability as well as the inclination, for he had no luxuries, no follies, and no vices to maintain. Of such a man it is unnecessary to add that he died lamented by all who knew the worth of his friendship, or enjoyrd the honour of his acquaintance. His constitution had never been of the athletic kind, and therefore easily gave way to a joint attack from two violent disorders, which ended his life, Aug. 15, 1786, in his fifty-sixth year. He died at his house in Welbeck-street, Cavendish-square, and was interred in St. George’s chapel, Windsor. He had for many years been a member of the Royal Society and the Society of Antiquaries. In 1784 he was, without the slightest private interest or solicitation, elected a curator of the British Museum, in the duties of which office, the highest honour that can be enjoyed by a literary man, he was indefatigably diligent.

, an ingenious writer on historical and miscellaneous subjects, was born at Edinburgh, Oct. 12, 1711. He was the son of Mr. Alexander Tytler, writer (or attorney) in Edinburgh, by Jane, daughter of Mr, William Leslie, merchant in Aberdeen, and grand-daughter of sir Patrick Leslie of Iden, provost of that city. He was educated at the high school, and at the university of Edinburgh, and distinguished himself by an early proficiency in those classical studies, which, to the latest period of his life, were the occupation of his leisure hours, and a principal source of his mental enjoyments. At the age of thirty-one, Mr. Tytler was admitted into the society of writers to his majesty’s signet, and continued the practice of that profession with very good success, and with equal respect from his clients and the public, till his death, which happened Sept 12, 1792.

, a celebrated grammarian of Constantinople, died about the end of the twelfth century. Being put under proper masters at fifteen, he learnt not only the belles lettres, and the whole circle of sciences, but even the Hebrew and Syriac tongues. He had a prodigious memory, and, it is said, was able to repeat all the Scriptures by heart. He seems to have been a most accomplished person, who understood almost every thing; but was a severe critic on the performances of others, and not without a considerable share of vanity. He wrote “Commentaries upon Lycophron’s Alexandria,” which he published first under the name of his brother, Isaac Tzetzes: they are inserted by Potter in his edition of this poet at Oxford, 1697, in folio. He wrote also “Chiliades,” or miscellaneous histories, in verse, which Fabricius calls his most celebrated work, as abounding with political and civil knowledge; “Scholia upon Hesiod;” “Epigrams and other Poems;” “Pieces upon Grammar and Criticism.” He mentions also “Allegories upon Homer,” which he dedicated to the empress Irene, wife of Manuel Comnenus. This empress was married in 1143, and died in 1158, which nearly ascertains the age of Tzetzes. The “Allegories” of this author were published by Morel, Paris, 1616, 8vo, and the “Chiliades,” at Basil, 1546, fol.

, an illuminator on vellum, who was in England in the reign of queen Elizabeth, appears to have been a native of Florence, and, while here, a teacher of the Italian language. Vertue speaks of some of his works as extant in his time, or as having very lately been so; as the Psalms of David in folio, with an inscription by Ubaldini to Henry earl of Arundel, whom he calls his Maecenas. The date is, London, 1565. There was another book on vellum, written and illuminated by him, by order of sir Nicholas Bacon, who presented it to the lady Lumley. This is, or was, at Gorhambury. There were other specimens of his skill in the royal library, now in the British Museum, and he appears also to have been an author. Walpole mentions one of his Mss. in the Museum, entitled “Scotiae descriptio a Deidonensi quodain facto, A. D. 1550, et per Petruccium Ubaldinum transcripta A. D. 1576,” which was published afterwards in Italian, with his name, at Antwerp, 1588, fol. The Museum catalogue attributes also the following to Ubaldini: 1. “Discourse concerning of the Spanish fleet invading England in 1588 and overthroweu,” Lond. 1590, 4to. 2. “Le Vite delle Donne illustri del regno d'lughilterra, e del regnb di Scotia, &c.” ibid. 1591. Walpole, who appears to have examined this work, gives, as a specimen of Petrucchio’s talents for history, two of his heroines. The first was Chembrigia, daughter of Gurguntius, son of king Bellinus, who, having married one Cantabro, founded a city, which, from a mixture of both their names, was called Cambridge. The other illustrious lady he styles expressly donna senza. name, and this nameless lady, as Walpole says, was the mother of Ferrex and Porrex in lord Dorset’s “Gorboduc,” who, because one of her sons killed the other that was a favourite, killed a third son in a passion. 3. “Precetti moral i, politici, et economici,” 1592, 4to. 4. “Scelta di alcune Attioni, e di varii Accidenti,” 1595, 4to. 5. “Rime,”

, an Italian poet of the fourteenth century, was the descendant of an illustrious family of Florence, the Uberti, who, when the Guelphs became victorious, were banished from Florence, and their property divided among their enemies. Our poet was born in the poverty and obscurity to which his family had been reduced, and although the Florentines allowed him to return and reside in the country of his forefathers, he never became rich, and was obliged to attend the courts of the nobility, and gain a subsistence by chaunting his verses. Of those he composed a great many in the form of songs and other small pieces which were admired for their novelty; he is even thought to have been the inventor of the ballad species. In more advanced age, he undertook his “Dittamondo,” in imitation of Dante, who in his vision takes Virgil for his guide; Uberti takes Solinus, who conducts him over the whole habitable globe. By means of this fiction he includes geographical and historical matter, which has induced some to call his poem a geographical treatise. It is said to be written with energy and elegance, and was first printed, or at least a part of it, at Vicenza in 1474, fol. and reprinted at Venice in 1501. Both are rare, and chiefly valued for their rarity. Villani, who gives us a sort of eloge rather than a life of Uberti, says that he died at an advanced age in 1370.

When his son Ephraim was born, does not appear, but he was educated at Emanuel college, Cambridge, where he took his degree of A. B. in 1609, and that of A. M. in 1614. His only preferment in the church appears to have been the rectory of St. Augustine’s, Watling-street, but the time of his admission is not stated by Newcourt or Walker. He was sequestered, however, in 1643, although he had always been accounted, and indeed admired as a preacher of puritan principles. The truth was, that he early perceived the real designs of the republican party, and exerted himself to oppose them. In a sermon at Mercers’ chapel, he addressed himself to some of them in these words, “You desire truth and peace; leave your lying, and you may have truth; lay down your arms, and you may have peace.” He went farther than even this, by declaring openly for episcopacy and the liturgy, and publishing a learned (Treatise against sacrilege, entitled “A Coal from the Altar;” and another, “Communion comeliness,” in which he recommended the placing of rails around the communion-table. He also published a sermon, called “Noli me tangere,” containing many loyal sentiments and much attachment to the church. Crimes like these were not to be forgiven; and accordingly his house was plundered, his library and furniture carried off, and his old and lame wife literally turned into the street. Mr. Udal died about the latter end of May 1647. His funeral sermon was preached by the rev. Thomas Reeve, B. D. who was neither ashamed nor afraid to give him what he seems to have deserved, a high character for piety and zeal.

, an eminent artist, called Gio. Da Nanni, or Ricamatori, as Vasari promiscuously calls him, was born in 1494, at Udine in the Friul, and passed from the school of Giorgiorie to that of Raphael Sanzio, under whose direction he executed the greater part of the stuccoes and grotesque ornaments in the Logge and various apartments of the Vatican. In this branch of the art he is not only considered as the first, but as an inventor: for though under Alexander VI. Morto da Feltro had begun to paint in grotesque, he was not acquainted with stucco, which was first discovered in the baths of Titus, and successfully imitated by this artist. His bowers, plants, and foliage, his aviaries, mews, birds and fowls of every kind, impose on the eye by a truth of imitation less the result of labour than of sentiment: his touch is all character, and never deviates into the anxious detail of fac-similists. After the saccage of Rome he visited other parts of Italy, and left various specimens of his art at Florence, Genoa, and Udiue. He died in 1564.

a very learned German, was born at Frankfort Feb. 22, 1683, and was the son of a counsellor of that city, of an antient family. In 1694 he was sent for education to the college of Rudelstadt, where he applied with such ardour that his master was obliged to check him, and especially prevent his studying by night, to which he was much addicted. Besides the classics, which, young as he was, he always read with a pen in his hand, making such remarks or extracts as struck his fancy, he studied also the Hebrew language, and logic, and metaphysics, to which he soon added history, geography, chronology, &c. In 1698 he was obliged to return home to recover his health, which had probably been injured by intense application, and he for some time confined himself to lessons on history and geography from Arnold, then rector of the college of Frankfort. He was afterwards sent to the university of Strasburgh, where he studied the sciences, attended the anatomical lectures, &c. but his leading object was literary history and bibliography, in pursuit of which he passed much of his time in the public libraries. In 1700 he had the misfortune to lose both his parents, which obliged him to return to Frankfort. When his grief had in some degree subsided, he went to Halle, and continued his studies there about two years. In 1702 he took his degree of doctor of laws, and returned to Frankfort with a copious library, which he had collected in the course of his studies. He then visited some of the most famous universities on the continent; but in 1704 settled at Frankfort, where the library he formed was then considered among the best in Europe. To make it still more complete appears to have been the object of his ambition, and he re-commenced his travels for that purpose in 1708 and 1709. In one of those years he was at Oxford, and had some inducement to settle there, but imagined that the climate would not agree with his health. When he returned to Frankfort from these tours in 1711, he brought an addition of four thousand books to his collection. In 1721 he was made a senator of his native city, but became now so diligent in his civic duties as to have little time to spare to his studies, which inclined him in 1729 to publish a catalogue of his library, with a view to dispose of a considerable part of it. He died Jan. 6, 1734, universally regretted. He had begun several learned works, which his employments as a magistrate, and afterwards his bad state of health, prevented his finishing; among these were, 1. “Glossarium Germanicum medii sevi.” 2. A history of his life, in Latin. 3. “Selecta historiae litterariae et librarian,” in several volumes. These he bequeathed to John George Schelhorn, along with his literary correspondence in eighteen large quarto volumes. In 1736 John Christ. Wolff printed an account of two collections made by Uffembach, which he had just purchased 3 the first consisting of an immense quantity of letters, mostly originals, written by the eminent men of the two or three preceding centuries the second comprized various curious Mss. on literary subjects. Schelhorn, in his “Amcenitates litterariaB,” has availed himself much of UfFembach’s collections; and in vol. IX. has an article entitled “Deprimitiis typographicis, quae Haerlemi in civica et Francoforti in bibliotheca Uffembachiana adservantur.” And he afterwards published a Life of Uffembach, prefixed to his “Cornmercii Epistolaris Uffembachiani Selecta, &c.” 5 vols. 1753 1756, 8vo.

, a celebrated Spanish mathematician, and a commander of the order of St. Jago, was born at Seville Jan. 12, 1716. He was brought up in the service of the royal marines, in which he at length obtained the rank of lieutenant-general. In 1735 he was appointed, with Don George Juan, to sail to South America, and accompany the French academicians who were going to Peru to measure a degree of the meridian. On his return home in 1745, in a French ship, he was taken by two English vessels, and after being detained some time at Louisbourg in Cape Breton, was brought to England, where his talents recommended him to Martin Folkes, president of the Royal Society, and he was the same year elected a member of that learned body. On his return to Madrid he published his “Voyage to South America,” which was afterwards translated into German and French. There is also an English translation, in two vols. 8vo, 1758, but miserably garbled and inaccurate. In 1755 he made a second voyage to America, where he collected materials for another work, which however did not appear until 1772, under the title of “Entretenimientos Physico-historicos.” He travelled afterwards over a considerable part of Europe to collect information respecting such improvements in arts and manufactures as might be serviceable to Spain, and was the means of introducing many which had not before been known in Spain, or very imperfectly carried on. He died on July 5, 1795. There are a few of his papers in the “Philosophical Transactions.”

, or Gulphilas, a Gothic bishop, and the first translator of a part of the Bible into that language, flourished in the fourth century, and during the reign of Valens, obtained leave of that emperor that the Goths should reside in Thrace, on condition of his, the bishop’s, embracing the Arian faith. Little else is known of this prelate, unless that he translated the Evangelists, and perhaps some other books of the New Testament, into the Gothic language, which he achieved by inventing a new alphabet of twenty-six letters. This translation is now in the library of Upsal, and there have been three editions of it, the best by Mr. Lye, printed at Oxford in 1750. Many disputes have been carried on by the learned both as to the antiquity and authenticity of this version. Of later years, however, another fragment of Ulphilas’s translation was discovered in the library at Wolfenbuttle, containing a portion of the Epistle to the Romans. This has been published by Knitel, archdeacon of Wolfenbuttle, who seems of opinion that Ulphilas translated the whole Bible.

, one of those pontiffs who deserve some notice on account of his learning, and attention to the interests of literature, was born at Florence in 1568. His family name was Maffei Barbarini, and his family was of the most ancient and honourable. His father dying while Maffei was an infant, he was entrusted to the care of his uncle Francis, a prothonotary of the Roman court, who sent for him to Rome, and placed him for education in the Jesuits’ college. Here he made great proficiency in classical studies under Tursellino and Benci, and was particularly distinguished for his taste for poetry. But as his uncle intended him for active life, he took him from his beloved studies, and sent him to Pisa, where he might acquire a knowledge of the law, so neoessary then to those who would rise to preferment; and here he applied with such diligence, that in his twentieth year the degree of doctor was deservedly conferred upon him. He then returned to Rome, where his uncle received him with the greatest kindness, and having always treated him as his son, bequeathed him, on his death, which happened soon after, a handsome fortune, as his sole heir. His first patron was cardinal Farnese, and by his interest and his own talents he soon passed through the various gradations of preferment which led, in 1606, to the rank of cardinal, bestowed on him by Paul V. In 1623, while cardinal legate of Bologna, he was elected pope, and took the name of Urban VIII. It is not our intention to detail the historical events in which he was concerned. The errors in his government, which were fewer than might have been expected in one so zealous for the church, arose from two circumstances, his early attachment to the Jesuits, and his nepotism, or family partiality. The latter was so powerful, that he bestowed on his relations red hats and temporal employments with a very liberal hand, and often entrusted the management of affairs to them; and the chief errors of his pontificate were imputed to them by the candid, although he only was blamed by the people at large. As a mjjn of learning, and a patron of learned merr, he has generally been praised; but he was no antiquary, and was justly censured for having destroyed some Roman antiquities, which the barbarous nations had spared when masters of Rome; and this gave occasion to the famous pasquinade, “Quod non fecerunt Barbari, fecerunt Barherini.” He wrote many Latin poems in an elegant style, of which an edition was published at Paris in 1642, fol. and a very beautiful one at Oxford, in 1726, 8vo, edited by Joseph Brown, M. A. of Queen’s college, and afterwards provost of that college, with a life and learned notes. Urban’s patronage of learned men was very liberal, and he received those of all nations with equal respect. Among others he extended his patronage to Ciampolo, Cesarini, Herman Hugo, and to Dempster and Barclay, two learned Scotchmen. The latter has celebrated him in his “Argenis” under the name of Ibburranis, the transposition of Barberini. Urban published a remarkable edition of the Romish breviary, aud several bulls and decrees which are in “Cherubini bullarium.” Among the most noticeable is that which abolishes the order of female Jesuits, and certain festivals; and others which relate to image worship; those by which, in compliance with the Jesuits, he condemns Jansenius; and that by which the title of eminence was conferred upon the cardinal-legates, the three ecclesiastical electors, and the grand master of Malta. Among his foundations was the college “De propaganda fide.” In the article of cardinals he was profuse, for he created no less than seventy-four. He died July 29, 1644, and was buried in St. Peter’s, in the stately tomb erected by his own orders by the celebrated Bernini.

, one of the most celebrated Protestant divines of the 16th century, was born at Breslau, in Silesia, July 28, 1534. He had already made a considerable progress, for one so young, when he was sent to Wittemberg in 1550, where he studied seven years, and, as his father was not rich, he was assisted by gratuities both private and public, and by the profits of taking pupils. At the same time, he applied himself so closely to study, that he acquired great skill both in poetry, lan-r guages, philosophy, and divinity. Melancthon, who was the ornament of that university, had a particular esteem and friendship for him. Ursinus accompanied him in 1557 to the conference of Worms, whence he went to Geneva, and afterwards to Paris, where he made some stay, in order to learn French, and improve himself in Hebrew under the learned John Mercerus. He was no sooner returned to Melancthon at Wittemberg, than he received letters from the magistrates of Breslaw in September 1558, offering him the mastership of their great school; and having accepted it, he discharged the duties of his employment in so laudable a manner, that he might have continued in it as long as he pleased, had he not been prosecuted by the clergy, the instant they perceived he was not a Lutheran. When he explained Melancthon’s book, “De examine ordinandorum ad Ministerium,” he handled the subject of the Lord’s supper in such a manner, as made the demagogues or factious orators (for so the author of his Life calls them) term him Sacramentarian. He wrote, however, a justification of himself, in which he discovered what his opinions were with regard to Baptism and the Lord’s Supper; and when he found that this did not pacify his adversaries, he obtained an honourable leave from the magistrates; and as he could not retire to his master Melancthon, he being dead a little before, in April 1560, he went to Zurich, where Peter Martyr, Bullinger, Simler, Gesner, and some other eminent personages, had a great friendship for him. From this place he was soon removed by the university of Heidelberg, which was in want of an able professor; and in September 1561 was settled in the Collegium Sapientiae (College of Wisdom) to instruct the students. He also attempted to preach, but finding he had not the talents requisite for the pulpit, he laid that aside. As a professor, he evinced, in the most eminent elegree, the qualifications requisite: a lively genius, a great fund of knowledge, and a happy dexterity in explaining things, and therefore, besides the employment he already enjoyed, he exercised the professorship of the loci communes, or common places in that university. To qualify him for this place, it was necessary for him, agreeably to the statutes, to be received doctor of divinity, and accordingly he was solemnly admitted to that degree the 25th of August, 1562, and he was professor of the common places till 1568. It was he who wrote the Catechism of the Palatinate, which was almost universally adopted by the Calvinists, and drew up an apology for it by ordtr of the elector Frederic III. in opposition to the clamours which Flacius Illyricus, Heshusius, and some other rigid Lutherans, had published in 1563. The elector, finding himself exposed, not only to the complaints of the Lutheran divines, but likewise to those of some princes, as if he had established a doctrine concerning the Eucharist, which was condemned by the Augsburg Confession, was obliged to cause to be printed an exposition of the une doctrine concerning the Sacraments. Ursinus the following year was at the conference of Maulbrun, where he spoke with great warmth against the doctrine of Ubiquity. He afterwards wrote on that subject, and against some other tenets of the Lutherans. The plan and statutes which he drew up for the elector, for the establishment of some schools, and several other services, raised him so high in his esteem, that finding him resolved to accept of a professorship in divinity at Lausanne in 1571, he wrote a letter to him with his own hand, in which he gave several reasons why it would not be proper for him to accept of that employment. This prince’s death, which happened in 1577, produced a great revolution in the palatinate; prince Lewis, his eldest son, who succeeded him, not permitting any clergyman to be there, unless he was a sound Lutheran; so that Ursinus and the pupils educated by him in the Collegium Sapientiae were obliged to quit it. He retired to Neustadt, to be divinity-professor in the illustrious school which prince Casimir, son to Frederic III. founded there at that time. He began his lectures there the 26th of May, 1578. He also taught logic there in his own apartment; published some books, and was preparing to write several more, when his health, which had been frequently and strongly attacked, occasioned by his incredible application to study, yielded at last to a long sickness, of which he died in Neustadt, the 6th of March, 1583, in the forty-ninth year of his age. His works were collected after his death, by the care of his only son, a minister, and by that of David Pareus and Quirinus Reuterus, his disciples; and to the last of these we are indebted for the publication of them in 1612, 3 vols. folio.

Ursinus was not unknown to our English divines, and some of his works were translated into English as, his “Catechism,” or rather, his lectures upon the catechism, entitled “The Summe of the Christian Religion,” translated by Henry Parrie, 1587, 4to. There were also at least two abridgments of it; and a translation of “A collection of learned Discourses,” 1600, &c. Ursinus was a very laborious student; and, that no interruption might be given, he caused the following inscription to be placed on the door of his library:

Sir Philip Sidney, while at Heidelberg, was particularly anxious to cultivate the friendship of Ursinus. “From this eminent scholar,” says Dr. Zouch, “Mr. Sidney learned to estimate the value of time: he learned how criminal it is to waste the hours of life in unedifying discourse, and much more so in vitious pursuits or guilty indulgences.” Dr. Zouch observes, that Ursinus’s moral character was still more excellent than his literary one. He was all humility, attributing nothing to himself, and perfectly uncorrupted by avarice or ambition.

Having continued five years under these excellent masters, of whom he ever afterwards spoke with honour, and having made a progress far beyond his age, he was admitted into the college of Dublin, which was finished that very year, 1593. He was one of the first three students who were admitted; and his name stands to this day in the first line of the roll. Dr. Bernard seems to hint that he was the first graduate, fellow, and proctor, which we doubt, at least as to the fellowship, his uncle being first fellow, and his tutor at this time senior fellow, according to Harris. Here he learned logic, and the philosophy of Aristotle, under Mr. Hamilton, his tutor, and though, as we are told, his love of poetry and cards retarded his studies for some time, yet he soon recovered himself from these habits, applied to books again with great vigour, and at the same time acquired that pious turn which was ever afterwards a distinguishing; feature in his character. He is said to hare been wonderfully affected with that passage in Cicero, “Nescire quid antea quam natus sis accident, id est semper esse puerum” that is, “to know nothing of what happened before you were born is to be always a boy.” About this time, from meeting with Sleidan’s little book “De quatuor imperiis,” he contracted an extreme fondness for the study of history, which he afterwards pursued with equal depth and preciseness. At fourteen years of age he began to make extracts from all the historical books he could meet with, in order to fix the facts more firmly in his memory; and, between fifteen or sixteen, he had made such a proficiency in chronology, that he had drawn up in Latin an exact chronicle of the Bible, as far as the book of Kings, not much differing from his “Annals,” which have since been published. The difference chiefly consists in the addition of observations and the parallel chronofcugy of the heathens. Before he was full sixteen, he had entered upon theological studies, and perused the most able writers, on both sides, on the Romish controversy. Among the Romanists, he read Stapleton’s “Fortress of Faith;” and, finding that author confident in asserting antiquity for the tenets of Popery, and in taxing our church with novelty in. what it dissented from theirs, he kept his mind in suspense, till he could examine how the truth stood in that particular. He took it for granted, as his historian says, that the ancient doctrines must needs be the right, as the nearer the fountain the purer the stream; and that errors sprang up as the ages succeeded, according to that known saying of Tertullian, “Verum quodcunque primum, adulterum quodcunque posterius.” Bishop Jewel had adopted the same principle before him; and too much deference to the authority of the fathers prevailed in their days and long after. Yet they were far from being ignorant, as has been absurdly imputed to them, that the question concerning doctrines is not how ancient, but how true those doctrines are. The dispute was purely historical. Stapleton quoted the fathers as holding the doctrines of popery. Usher thought this impossible, and rather believed that Stapleton had misquoted them, at least had wrested and tortured them to his own sense. This made him then take up a firm resolution, that in due time (if God gave him life) he would himself read all the fathers, and trust none but his own eyes in searching out their sense: which great work he afterwards began at twenty years of age, and finished at thirty-eight; strictly confining himself to read a certain portion every day, from which he suffered no occasion to divert him.

Being now settled to his liking, and freed from worldly connexions and cares, he devoted himself entirely to the pursuit of every species of literature, human and divine; He was admitted fellow of the college, and acknowledged to be a model of piety, modesty, and learning. About this time, the learned Jesuit Fitz-simons (See Fitz-Simons), then a prisoner in Dublin-castle, sent out a challenge , defying the ablest champion that should come against him, to dispute with him about the points in controversy between the Roman and the Protestant churches. Usher, though but in his nineteenth year, accepted the challenge; and when they met, the Jesuit despised him as but a boy; yet, after a conference or two, was so very sensible of the quickness of his wit, the strength of his arguments, and his skill in disputation, as to decline any farther contest with him. This appears from the following letter of Usher, which Dr. Parr has inserted in his life; and which serves also to confute those who have supposed that there was not any actual dispute between them. “I was not purposed, Mr. Fitz-simons, to write unto you, before you had first written to me, concerning some chief points of your religion, as at our last meeting you promised; s but, seeing you have deferred the same, for reasons best known to yourself, I thought it not amiss to inquire farther of your mind, concerning the continuation of the conference begun betwixt us. And to this I am the rather moved, because I am credibly informed of certain reports, which I could hardly be persuaded should proceed from him, who in my presence pretended so great love and affection unto me. If I am a boy, as it hath pleased you very contemptuously to name me, I give thanks to the Lord, that my carriage towards you hath been such as could minister unto you no just occasion to despise my youth. Your spear belike is in your own conceit a weaver’s beam, and your abilities such, that you desire to encounter with the stoutest champion in the host of Israel; and therefore, like the Philistine, you contemn me as being a boy. Yet this I would fain have you know, that I neither came then, nor now do come unto you, in any confidence of any learning that is in me; in which respect, notwithstanding, I thank God I am what I am: but I come in the name of the Lord of Hosts, whose companies you have reproached, being certainly persuaded, that even out of the mouths of babes and sucklings he was able to shew forth his own praises. For the farther manifestation thereof, I do again earnestly request you, that, setting aside all vain comparisons of persons, we may go plainly forward in examining the matters that rest in controversy between us; otherwise I hope you will not be displeased, if, as for your part you have begun, so 1 also for my own part may be bold, for the clearing of myself and the truth which I profess, freely to make known what hath already passed concerning this matter. Thus intreating you in a few lines to make known unto me your purpose in this behalf, I end; praying the Lord, that both this and all other enterprises that we take in hand may be so ordered as may most make for the advancement of his own glory and the kingdom of his son Jesus Christ.” Tuus ad Aras usque,

In 1606, the necessity of purchasing books and manuscripts relating to English history (in which study our author was then engaged) brought him again into England. He now contracted an intimate acquaintance and friendship with several learned men, and among others, sir Robert Cotton, Thomas Allen of Oxford, and Mr. Camden, which last, designing a new edition of his “Britannia,” consulted with him about publishing Ninias, St. Patrick, and Congal, and other writers or documents relating to the ancient state

He was again in England, when king James, just before he died, advanced him to the archbishopric of Armagh; but, as he was preparing to return to Ireland, he was seized with a quartan ague, which detained him nine months. Before he left England he had a disputation with a popish priest at Drayton in Northamptonshire, the seat of lord Mordaunt, afterwards earl of Peterborough. He was scarce recovered from his ague, when this lord Mordaunt, then a zealous Roman catholic, being very desirous to bring his lady into the pale of that church, cpncluded that there could be no better or more certain way than to procure a disputation to be held between two learned and principal persons, one of each side, at which his lady should be present. In that resolution he chose, for the champion of his own cause, the Jesuit Beaumont, whose true name was Rookwood, being brother to that Rookwood who was executed for the gunpowder treason. Against this antagonist lady Peterborough chose our primate, who, notwithstanding his health was not sufficiently confirmed to engage in such a task, yet from the ardent zeal for the reformed doctrine with which he was constantly animated, and to save a soul from falling into the wiles of an artful Jesuit, he did not refuse to comply with her ladyship’s request. The place appointed for holding the disputation was my lord’s seat at Drayton, a place very proper for the business, as being furnished with a most copious library of the writings of all the ancient fathers of the church, which were ready at hand, if it should happen that any of them should be re-> ferred to in the engagement. The heads of the dispute were agreed to be upon transubstantiation, the invocation of saints, of images, and the perpetual visibility of the church. After it had been held for three days, five hours each day, in which our primate sustained the part of respondent, that office for the fourth day lay upon Beaumont, according to the regulation settled by himself. But he sent a letter to the baron, with an excuse, alleging, “that all the arguments which he had formed had slipt out of his memory, nor was he able by any effort to recollect them, imputing the cause of the misfortune to a just judgment of God upon him, for undertaking of his own accord, without the licence of his superiors, to engage in a dispute with a person of so great eminence and learning as the primate.” Such a shameful tergiversation sunk deeply into the mind of lord Mordaunt, so that, after some conferences with the primate, he renounced popery, and Cod­tinued in the profession of the protestant faith to the end of his life.

All this while he kept a correspondence in every country for the advancement of learning, and procured in 1634 a very good copy of the Samaritan Pentateuch from the East; besides one of the Old Testament in Syriac, and other valuable manuscripts. It was one of the first of those Pentateuchs that ever were brought into these western parts of Europe, as Mr. Selden and Dr. Walton acknowledge; and the Syriac Testament was much more perfect than had hitherto been seen in these parts. The other manuscripts were procured by the means of one Mr. Davies, then a merchant at Aleppo. The archbishop collated the Samaritan with the Hebrew, and marked the differences, after which he intended it for the library of sir Robert Cotton. Bat this, as well as the other manuscripts, being borrowed of him by Dr. Walton, and made use of by hhn in the edition of the Polyglot Bible, were not recovered out of the hands of that bishop’s executors till 1686, and are novy in the Bodleian library. And notwithstanding the necessaryavocations in the discharge of his episcopal office, he prosecuted his studies with indefatigable diligence, the fruits of which appeared in 1638, when he pablished at Dublin, in 4to, his “Emmanuel, or a treatise on the Incarnation of the Son of God;” which was followed by his “Britannicarum Ecclesiarum Antiquitates” in the ensuing year. This history contains a most exact account of the British church: From the first planting of Christianity in twenty years after our Saviour’s crucifixion, he brings it down both in Britain and Ireland, to the end of the seventh century. The piece was of great service, particularly to Dr. Lloyd and bishop Stillingfleet, his followers upon the same subject.

In the beginning of 1640 he came into England with his family, intending (as before) to return in a year or two at farthest. Soon after his arrival he went to Oxford for the more convenience of pursuing his studies: but these were unhappily interrupted by the urgent necessity of the times, which put him upon writing some pieces that were published at Oxford in 1641, on the subject of episcopacy: These were, 1. “The Judgment of Dr. Reynolds concerning the original of Episcopacy defended.” 2. “The Original of Bishops, or a chorographical and-historical disquisition touching the Lydian and proconsular Asia, and the seven metropolitan churches contained therein.” The design of this treatise is to prove, from Acts xix. 17, supported by Rev. ii. 1. and confirmed by ecclesiastical history, that bishops and metropolitans were instituted by the apostles; meaning only with regard to their superiority in degree; for he did not hold episcopacy to be a superior order to presbytery. He also endeavours to prove that the bishop of Ephesus was not only the metropolitan of the proconsular Asia, but the primate, or exarch, of all the provinces that were comprehended within the compass of the whole Asian diocese; and that he acted suitably to the patriarchal jurisdiction, which was in effect conferred upon him, In the prosecution of the argument he shews, 1. That the stars described in the Revelations are the angels of the seven churches. 2. That these angels were the several bishops of those churches, and not the whole college of presbyters. 3. That each of these seven churches was at that time a metropolis. 4. That these bishops were ordained by the apostles as constant permanent officers in the church, and so in a sortjwe (Tivino, not to be dispensed with except in cases of necessity. These tracts were printed, with others on the same subject, under the title “Certain brief Treatises,” &c. Oxf. 1641, 4to. It was about this, time also that he drew up his treatise on “The Power of the Prince and the Obedience of the Subject,” which, as we have mentioned in our account of his grandson, James Tyrrell, was published after the restoration. Archbishop Usher was a man of too much note, and of too high a station, not to. be < deeply involved in and affected with the succeeding troubles. He is charged by some writers with having advised the king to consent to the bill against the earl of Stratford, but is cleared by others; and Dr. Parr tells us, that when the primate lay extremely ill, and expected death at St. Donate’s castle in 164-5, he asked his grace concerning it, who flatly denied it, and said it was wrongfully laid to his charge; for, that he neither advised nor approved it. In the rebellion in Ireland he was plundered of everything except his library and some furniture in his house at Drogheda, whence the library was conveyed to England. On this the king conferred on him the bishopric of Carlisle, to be holden in commendam; the revenues of which, however, were reduced to almost nothing by the Scots and English armies quartering upon it. When all the lands belonging to the English bishoprics were seized by the parliament, they voted him a pension of 400l. per annum; which yet he never received above once or twice. It is said that he was invited into France by cardinal Richelieu, with a promise of the free exercise of his religion, and a considerable pension; and likewise by the States of Holland, who offered him the place of honorary professor at Leyden. Dr. Smith, one of his biographers, seems to doubt these facts, especially the first. But Dr. Parr thinks it not unlikely, from an instance of respect which Richelieu had before shewn to the archbishop, by sending him, in return for a copy of the “Antiquity of the British Churches,” which the author had presented to his eminence, a letter of much kindness and esteem, accompanied with a gold medal, which Dr. Bernard says “is still preserved.” It was in possession of the Tyrrell family in 1738, and was then exhibited to the society of antiquaries. The date is 1631. In 1642 the archbishop removed to Oxford, not lon before the king came thither, and preached every Sunday at some of the churches, principally All Saints. In 1643 he was nominated one of the assembly of divines at Westminster, but refused to sit among them: and this, together with some of his sermons at Oxford, in which he had spoke against their authority, giving offence to the parliament, they ordered his library to be seized, and it would have been sold, had not Dr. Featly, who sat among those divines while his heart was with the church and king, obtained it by means of Mr. Selden for his own use, and so secured it to the right owner, or at least the greater part, but some valuable articles were stolen, and never recovered. In 1644 he published at Oxford his valuable edition of “Polycarpi et Ignatii Epistolae.”

The king’s affairs declining, and Oxford being threatened with a siege, he left that city, and retired to Cardiff, in Wales, to the house of sir Timothy Tyrrell, who had married his only daughter, and who was then governor and general of the ordnance. He continued six months here in tranquillity, prosecuting his studies, particularly his “Annals,” and then went to the castle of St. Donate, whither he was invited by the lady dowager Stradling; but in his journey thither fell into the hands of the mountaineers, who took away his books and papers; yet these were, by the kindness of the gentlemen and clergy of that country, in a great measure restored. Before this had been achieved, and while his Mss, the labour of so many years, seemed irrecoverable, he was observed to be more concerned than at all his former sufferings. At St. Donate’s he found an excellent library: but a fit of sickness prevented him from making all the use of it he proposed. His sickness was of an extraordinary nature; it was at first a suppression of urine, with extremity of torture, ending in a violent bleeding at the nose for near forty hours, without any intermission; but when he was every moment expected to die, the bleeding stopped, and he gradually recovered. He went to London in 1646, upon an invitation from the countess of Peterborough to make her house his home and, in 1647, was chosen preacher of Lincoln’s Inn, This society ordered him handsome lodgings, ready furnished, and several rooms for his library, which was about this time brought up from Chester, being almost all the remains of his substance that had escaped the rebels. Mr. (afterwards lord chief justice) Hale was then a bencher of the society, and probably had the chief hand in procuring him this place; and it happened that the society was well rewarded for it by that treasure lodged in this library by the lord chief justice in four volumes, which were extracted from the primate’s manuscripts; of which Dr. Parr has subjoined to his Life of the primate a catalogue, consisting of thirty-three very curious books. Here the primate constantly preached all term-time for almost eight years, till at last, his eye-sight and teeth beginning to fail him, he could not well be heard in so large a congregation, and was forced to quit this place about a year and a half 'before his death, to the great regret of the society. In the mean time, amidst all the convulsions of the times, he continued his studies, and the year he was chosen to Lincoln’s Inn, published his treatise “De Romanae Ecclesiae Symbol^,” which he followed by his “Dissertatio de Macedonum et Asianorum anno solari” in the beginning of 1648, 8vo. la this tract, besides fixing the exact time of St. Polycarp’s martyrdom, he compares the Grecian and Macedonian months with the Julian and other nations; and, having laid down the method and disposition of the Macedonian and Asiatic year, he adds rules for finding out the cycles of the sun and moon, and Easter for ever, with several curious accounts of the celestial motions according to the ancient Greek astronomers, Melon, Calippus, Eudoxus, and others. To which is annexed an Ephemeris, or entire Greek and Roman calendar for the whole year, with the rising and setting of the stars in that climate.

Usher left his library, being the chief part of his property, as a portion to his only daughter, who had been the mother of a numerous offspring. It was first bought by the officers and soldiers of Cromwell’s army in Ireland, and lodged in Dublin-castle, where it lay, though not without being much pillaged, till the restoration; which bringing it into the possession of king Charles II. he gave it, according to the primate’s first intention, to Dublincollege, where it now remains. This, in truth, had been the primate’s first intention; but, upon the loss of every thing else except his books, he was compelled to consider the necessities of his family, his daughter having before had nothing from him except some pieces of gold presented to him by Mr. Selden’s executors and other pqrsons of quality. The library consisted of ten thousand volumes printed and manuscript, and cost the primate many thousand pounds. Both the king of Denmark and cardinal Mazarine offered a good price for it by their agents here; but the executors were forbidden, by an order from Oliver and his council, to sell it to any one without his consent; so it was at last bought by the soldiers and officers of the then army in Ireland, who, out of emulation to the former noble action of queen Elizabeth’s army, were incited by some men of public spirit to the like performance, and they had it for much less than the real worth, or what had been offered for it before by the agents above mentioned. They had also with it all the manuscripts which were not of his own hand-writing, and a choice though not numerous collection of ancient coins. But, when this library was carried over into Ireland, the usurper and his son, who then commanded in chief there, would not bestow it upon the college, lest perhaps the gift should not appear so considerable there as it would do by itself; and therefore they gave out that they intended it for a new college or hall which they said they intended to build and endow. But it proved that, as these were not times, so they were not persons capable of any such noble or pious work; and this library lay in the castle of Dublin till Cromwell’s death; and, during the anarchy and confusion that followed, the rooms where it was kept being left open, many of the books, and most of the best manuscripts, were stolen away, or else embezzled by those that were intrusted with them.

, an ingenious writer, was the son of a gentleman-farmer in the county of Dublin, where he was born about 1720. He was descended from the venerable prelate of whom we have just given an account, but was of a Roman catholic family. He received a good classical education, though with no view to any of the learned professious. When grown up, he became a farmer, in imitation of his father, but after some years’ experience, had little success, and having sold his farm, stock, &c. settled for some time as a linen-draper in Dublin: for this business, however, he seems to have been as little qualified as for the other, and was a great loser. In truth he had that secret love of literature about him which generally inspired a train of thought not very compatible with the attention which trade requires: and finding himself, after some years, a widower with a family of four children, and but little prospect of providing for them in any business, he took orders in the church of Rome, sent his three sons for education to the college of Lombard in Paris, and his daughter to a monastery, where she soon after died. He then came to London, and while revolving plans for his support, and the education of his children, Mr. Molloy, an Irish gentleman, who had formerly been a political writer against sir Robert Walpole, died, and left him a legacy of three hundred pounds. With this money Mr. Usher thought of setting up a school, as the most likely way of providing for his sons; and with this view he communicated his intentions to the late Mr. John Walker, author of the Pronouncing Dictionary, and many other approved ' works on the construction and elegance of the English language. Mr. Walker not only approved the plan, but joined him as a partner in the business, and they opened a school under this firm at Kensington Gravel-pits. Mr. Usher’s acquaintance with Mr. Walker commenced during the former’s excursions from Dublin to Bristol, which latter place Mr. Walker’s business led him to visit occasionally. Their acquaintance soon grew into a friendship, which continued unbroken and undiminished to the close of Mr. Usher’s life. But the school these gentlemen were embarked in, did not altogether answer Mr. Walker’s purposes. Whether the profits were too little to divide, or whether he thought he could -do better as a private teacher, it is difficult to say; but Mr. Walker, after trying it for some time, quitted the connection, and commenced a private teacher, which he very successfully continued to the last. They parted, however, with the same cordiality they commenced, and the civilities and friendships of life were mutually continued.

Mr. Usher being now sole master of the school, he cultivated it with diligence and ability, and with tolerable success, for about four years; when he died of a consumption, at the age of fifty-two, in 1772. Mr. Usher’s first publication was a small pamphlet called “A New System of Philosophy,” in which he censures Locke, as leaning too much towards naturalism, a doctrine which he considered as the bane of every thing sublime, elegant, and noble. He next wrote some letters in the Public Ledger, signed “A Free Thinker” in which he shews the inconsistency and impolicy of the persecutions at that time going on against the Roman catholics. His next publication was entitled “Clio, or a discourse on Taste, addressed to a young lady;” in which he endeavours to prove, that there is in several respects an universal standard of taste in the soul of man, which, though it may be depraved or corrupted by education and habit, can never be totally eradicated. To this very ingenious essay, which is touched with elegance and observation, though, perhaps, with too much refinement, he afterwards added “An Introduction to the Theory of the Human Mind,” intended as a refutation of those deists who attack revealed religion under an apparent appeal to philosophy, but, by the occasional shifting of principles and systems, and a dexterous use of equivocal language, draw the dispute into a kind of labyrinth, in which the retreats are endless, and the victory always incomplete.

, a learned botanist, was born in the parish of St. Margaret, Westminster, May 25, 1642; educated at Westminster school under Dr. Busby; whence he was elected to Trinity college, Cambridge; B. A. 1662; M. A. 1666; LL. D. Com. Reg. 1682; and was master of the grammar school at Enfield about 1670. He resided in the old manor-house in that town called Queen Elizabeth’s Palace; and, being much attached to the study of botany, had a very curious garden there; and planted, among other trees, a cedar of Libanus, which (till within these few years) was one of the finest in the kingdom, measuring (in October 1793) 12 feet in the girth. In an account of the most remarkable gardens, near London in 1691, by J. Gibson, printed in the Archaeologia, vol. XII. p. 188, Dr. Uvedale is said to have “the greatest and choicest collection of exotics that perhaps was any where in this land.” Dr. Pulteney, hi his brief memoirs of Dr. Leonard Plukenet, says, “I regret that I cannot collect any material anecdotes relating to his friend and fellow collegian Dr. Uvedale, of whom Plukenet ever speaks in a style which indicates that he held him in great esteem.” “The garden which he cultivated at Enfield appears to have been rich in exotic productions; and though he is not known among those who advanced the indigenous botany of Britain, yet his merit as a botanist, or his patronage of the society at large, was considerable enough to incline Petiver to apply his name to a new plant, which Miller retained in his Dictionary, but which has since passed into the genus Polymnia, of the Linnsean system; the author of which has nevertheless retained Uvedalia, as the trivial name.” In the British Museum (Bibl. Sloan. 4064, Plut. 28 F.) are fifteen letters from him to sir Hans Sloane; also letters from him to Dr. Sherard, and Mr. James Petiver. Dryden, Dr. Uredale, and other learned men, having agreed to translate Plutarch’s Lives from the original Greek, Dr. Uvedale translated the Life of Dion, and the work was published in 1684. A whole length portrait of him, and another of his wife, were in the possession of the late admiral Uvedale, of Bosmere-house, Suffolk.

, a French poet of the lower order, was born January 1720, at Ham in Picardy, and carried to Paris, at five years old, by his father, a small tradesman, but he was so headstrong, wild, and dissipated in his youth, that nothing could make him attend to literature. This his biographers seem willing to consider as an advantage, and as giving a degree of originality to his works; yet they tell us that he afterwards read all the best French books. He invented a new species of poetry, which his countrymen called le genre Poissard (the Billingsgate style). In bringing this style to perfection, he carefully studied the manners of the fish-women, and their dialect, and introduced it in his most popular performances, and obtained from his admirers the title of the Teniers of poetry. His various Poissard operas, songs, parodies, &c. had great success but were mostly recommended by his manner of reciting or singing them; for then, say our authorities, it was not imitation, it was nature herself. But this nature, this Poissard style, this freedom of phrase, and licentious expressions, render the works of Vad6 very dangerous, and always disgusting to hearers of taste. They also exposed him to all the temptations of dissolute company; and his passion for gaming, convivial pleasures, and women, shortened his clays. He was become sensible of his errors, and had resolved to be wiser and better, but his resolution came late, and he was cut off in his thirty-seventh year, July 4, 1757. His collected works were published in 1758, 4 vols. 8vo, and since, in 1796, in 4to, with plates, but apparently only a selection, and probably as much as modern taste could bear.

, in German Von Watte, one of the most learned men of his nation or time, was born at St. Gal, Nov. 29, 1484, of which city his father, Joachim Von Watte, was a senator. After some education at home he was sent to Vienna to pursue the higher studies, but for some time entered more into the gaieties of the place, and was distinguished particularly for his quarrels and his duels, until by the sensible and affectionate remonstrances of a merchant of that city, to whose care his father had confided him, he was induced to devote his whole time and attention to books, and never relapsed into his former follies. When he had acquired a competent share of learning he wished to relieve his father from any farther expence, and with that honourable view taught a school at Villach, in Carinthia; but finding this place too remote from literary society, he returned to Vienna, and in a short time was chosen professor of the belles lettres, and acquitted himself with such credit, and gained such reputation by some poetry which he published, that the emperor Maximilian I. honoured him with the laurel crown at Lintz in 1514. After some hesitation between law and physic, both of which he had studied, he determined in favour of the latter, as a profession, and took his doctor’s degree at Vienna in 1518. He appears to have practised in that city, and afterwards at St. Gal, until the controversies arose respecting the reformation. After examining the arguments of the contending parties, he embraced the cause of the reformers; and besides many writings in favour of their principles, befriended them in his rank of senator, to which he had been raised. In 1526 he was farther promoted to the dignity of consul of St. Gal, the duties of which he performed so much to the satisfaction of his constituents that he was re-elected to the same office seven times. He died April 6, 1551, in his sixty-sixth year. He bequeathed his books to the senate of St. Gal, which were ordered to be placed in the public library of the city, with an inscription, honourable both to his character and talents. The latter were very extensive, for he was well versed and wrote well on mathematics, geography, philosophy, and medicine. He was also a good Latin poet, and, above all, a sound divine and an able controversial writer. Joseph Scaliger places him among the most learned men of Germany. He was intimate with our illustrious prelate, archbishop Cranmer, but preceded him in some of the doctrines of the reformation. About 1536 he wrote a book entitled “Aphorismorum libri sex de consideratione Eucharistiae,” &c. which was levelled at the popish doctrine of the corporal presence, and thinking it a proper work for the archbishop to patronize, presented it to him; but Cranmer had not yet considered the question in that view, and therefore informed Vadian that his book had not made a convert of him, and that he was hurt with the idea of being thought the patron of such unscriptural opinions. Vadian therefore pursued the subject at home, and wrote two more volumes on it. The only medical work he published was his “Consilium contra Pestem, Basil, 1546, 4to. Those by which he is best known in the learned world, are, 1. A collection of remarks on various Latin authors, in his” Epistola responsoria ad Rudulphi Agricolas epistolam,“ibid. 1515, 4to. 2. His edition of” Pomponius Mela,“first printed at Vienna in 1518, fol. and often reprinted. 3.” Scholia qoaedam in C. Plinii de Nat. Hist, librum secundum,“Basil, 153 1, fol. 4.” Chronologia Ablmtum Monasterii St.Galli“”De obscuris verborum significationibus epistola;“” Farrago antiquitatum Alamannicarum,“&c. and some other treatises, which are inserted in Goldnst’s” Alamanniae Scnptores."

The French edition of Valdesso referred to above was published at Paris in 1565, and was taken from an Italian translation of the original Spanish: in which, it is said, were preserved, not only some of the idioms, but also many words of the Spanish original. Mr. Ferrar’s English translation was printed at Oxford in 1638, but without his name; and if it should be asked why Mr. Ferrar, who was perfect master of the Spanish, as well as the Italian language, chose to translate from a translation rather than the original, he himself has given the reason in his own preface: “These truly divine meditations of sir John Valdesso, a nobleman of Spain (who died almost a hundred years ago), having been so acceptable to pious Vergerius, to learned Caelius Secundus Curio, and to many other both French and Italian Protestants, that they have been translated out of the original Spanish copy, and printed three or four times in those languages; it seemeth to me a reasonable, and a charitable desire, to print them now in English, without any alteration at all from the Italian copy, the Spanish being either not extant, or not easy to be found.”

In the mean time Valdesso had made many converts to the reformed opinions, until the Spanish Inquisition interfered, and either compelled his disciples to fly or to recant. He died at Naples in 1540. He wrote some commentaries on different parts of the Bible; but his “Considerations” are his principal work.

, is the name, real or assumed, of a celebrated alchymist, and one of the founders of modern chemistry. The few particulars we have of his life are so contradictory that many have supposed that no such person ever existed, and that the name Basil Valentine, which is composed of a Greek and Latin word, signifying a powerful king, was a disguise under which some adept rvished to conceal his real name, and at the same time indicate the sovereign power of chemistry. At what time this adept lived is also a disputed point. Some say he lived ia the twelfth century, others make him a native of Erfurt, born in 1394, and give 1415 as the date of his writings, or as the time when he began to write, but this last is certainly inadmissible, as he mentions the morbus Galliots and Luts Gallica as being common in Germany, which we know could not be the ase before the end of the fifteenth century.

, author of the heretical sect called Valeutinians, was an Egyptian, and, according to Danaeus, was educated at Alexandria. He aspired to the episcopal dignity; but being set aside by another, who was afterwards martyred, he formed the design to oppose the true doctrine of Christ. He came to Rome A.D. 140, during the pontificate of Hyginus, and there created great disturbances. In 143, he was censured by the church, and excluded the congregation; which was so far from humbling him, that he retired into Cyprus, where he propagated his erroneous doctrines with still greater boldness: He was learned, eloquent, and had studied the Grecian language, particularly the Platonic philosophy. Thus, from nice and witty, or sophistical, distinctions, mixing the doctrine of ideas, and the mysteries of numbers with the Theogony of Hesiod, and the Gospel of St. John, which was the only one received by him, he formed a system of religious philosophy, not very different from that of Basilides and the Gnostics, and in some respects more absurd than either. The rise of his heresy was in the reign of Adrian. Fleury places it A. D. 143, as do Danasus, Tillemont, and Echard. Valentine himself died A.D. 160. His errors spread at Rome, in Gaul, and Syria, but particularly in the Isle of Cyprus and Egypt, and continued until the fourth century. Bishop Hooper, in his tract “De Haeresi Valentiniana,” has deduced this heresy from the Egyptian mysteries. Irenseus was the principal writer against Valentinus, to whom may be added Tertullian, Clemens Alexandriuus, &c. and among the moderns, Buddeus “Dissert. de hreresi Valentiniana.” The author of this heresy is said to have at last abjured his errors, and was received into the church again, but we have no farther account of his personal history.

, or Valeriano Bolzam, an ingenious and learned Italian, was born at Belluno, in the state of Venice, about 1477. He lost his father at nine years of age, and was reduced with his mother and brethren to great poverty, which so retarded his studies that he was fifteen years old before he learned to read; but his uncle Urbanus Bolzanius (see vol. VI. p. 36), who was afterwards preceptor in the Greek language to Leo X. took him under his protection, and had him liberally educated. He studied the Latin and Greek tongues under Valla and Lascaris; and made so wonderful a progress, that he was accounted one of the most learned men of his age. Going to Rome under the pontificate of Julius II. he became the favourite of John de Medicis (afterwards Leo X.), who committed to his care the conduct and instruction of two nephews; and the cardinal Julius de Medicis, who entered upon the pontificate in 1523, under the name of Clement VII. shewed him the same regard. He offered him first the bishopric of Justinople, and then that of Avignon; but Valerianus refused them both, being fully satisfied with the place of apostolic notary. He was in imminent danger, when Rome was taken in 1527; and the year after retired to Belluno, for the sake of that tranquillity which he had never found at court. Yet he suffered himself to be drawn from his retirement by Hypolite de Medicis, one of his pupils; who, being made a cardinal in 1529, chose him for his secretary. He continued in this office till the death of the cardinal in 1535; and seems to have passed the next two years with his other pupil Alexander de Medicis, who had been made first duke of Florence in 1531. Upon the death of Alexander, in 1537, he retired to Padua; where he spent the remainder of his life among his books, and died in 1558.

He composed several learned and curious works, some of which were published in his life-time, some not till after his death. Among the former are, “De Fulminum significationibus,” Romae, 1517, printed also in the 5th volume of Grsevius’s Roman Antiquities. “Pro Sacerdotum barbis defensio,” Romae, 1531, occasioned by an intention to renew a decree, pretended to be made by an ancient council, and confirmed by pope Alexander III. by which priests were forbidden to wear long beards. “Castigationes Virgilianae iectionis,” printed in Robert Stepbens’s Virgil at Paris, 1532, and since reprinted with the best editions of this poet. “Hieroglyphica, sive de sacris Egyptiorum aliarumque gentium literis Commentariorum libri LVIII.” Basil, 1566. In this he attempts to illustrate, from Egyptian, Greek, and Roman symbols, almost every branch of science and art, but is supposed to display more imagination than judgment. Among the works published after his death are, “Diaiogo della volgar lingua, non prima uscito in luce,” 4to; “Antiquitatum Belluuensium libri quatuor,” 8vo; and “Contarenus, sive de literatorum infelicitate libri duo,” 8vo; all printed at Venice in 1620, by the direction and under the care of Alorsio Lollini, bishop of Belluno. The last piece contains a great number of curious anecdotes; and is entitled “Contarenus,” because the first book of it is a dialogue between Caspar Contareno, a Venetian ambassador, and some learned persons at Rome. It has been often printed at Amsterdam, 1647, in 12mo, “cum Cornelii Tollii Appendice,” at Helmstadt, 1695, in 12mo; and at Leipsic, 1707, in 8vo, with two other pieces upon similar subjects, namely, “Alcionius de Exilio,” and “Barberius de miseria Poetarum Grascorum,” and a preface by Joannes Burchardus Menkenius, the editor. Mr. D'Israeli, who has written so well on this interesting subject, considers Valerianus’s as “a meagre performance, iti which the author shews sometimes a predilection for the marvellous, which happens so rarely in human affairs; and he is so unphilosophical, that he places among the misfortunes of literary men, those fatal casualties to which all men are alike liable.” “Yet,” adds Mr. D'Israeli, “evert this small volume has its value; for, although the historian confines his narrative to his own times, he includes a sufficient number of names to convince us that to devote t>nf life to authorship is not the true means of improving our happiness or our fortune.”

, or Henry de Valois, a French critic of great abilities and learning, was born at Paris in 1603, of parents, whose circumstances supported them without any profession. He began his studies at Verdun in 1613, under the Jesuits, and the greatest hopes were formed of him from his childhood. He was recalled to Paris five years after, and continued there in the college of Clermont; where he learned rhetoric under Petavius, who, as well as father Sirmond, conceived a great esteem for him. After having maintained his theses in philosophy with much applause, he went to Bourges in 1622, to study the civil law; and at the end of two years returned to Paris, where he was received advocate. He frequented the bar for seven years, but more to oblige his father than out of any fondness for the law, which he at length quitted, and devoted himself entirely to literary pursuits. Greek and Latin authors were all his study, and all his pleasure. Sunday he consecrated to devotion, Saturday afternoon he allotted to his friends; but all the rest of the week was spent in reading and labour. His own library not sufficing, he borrowed books of every body; and he used to say, that he learned more from other people’s books than his own, because, not having the same opportunity of reviewing them, he read them over with more care. He acquired a great reputation by his learning and publications, when a misfortune befel him, which interrupted the course of his studies. He had always a weak sight; but continual application had hurt him so, in this respect, that he lost his right eye, and saw very indifferently with the left. This put him under the necessity of having a reader; for, though his father was of too sparing a humour to make him an allowance for this purpose, yet the defect was supplied by the generosity of his friends. His father, however, died in 1650; and then his circumstances were better suited to his necessities. The same year he composed an oration in praise of Christina queen of Sweden, who had just ascended the throne; and her majesty, by way of acknowledging the favour, promised to send him a gold chain, and gave him at the same time an invitation to accompany the learned Bochart to Sweden. But the chain never came, and the invitation ended in nothing, for which Valesius himself is said to have been to blame, having been so imprudent, while he was meditating this journey, as to make use of some satirical expressions on the learned in those parts; which, being related to the queen, occasioned her majesty’s neglect of him.

In 1734, Valesius had published at Paris, in 4to, “Excerpta Polybii, Diodori Siculi, Nicolai Damasceni, Dionysit Halicarnassensis, Appiani Alexandrini, Dionis, & Joannis Antiocheni, ex Collectaneis Constantini Augusti Porphyrogenitae, nunc primum Greece edita, Latine versa cum notis.” The emperor Constantine Porphyrogenetes, who died in the year 959, had made extracts from the Greek historians of such things as he thought most useful; and had ranged these extracts under certain titles and common places, in number fifty-three. Each contained two books; one of “Extracts from the writers of Universal History,” another of “Extracts from the Historians of the Emperors.” Only two of these titles are extant: one “de Legationibus,” the first book of which was published by Fulvius Ursinus, at Antwerp, 1582, in 4to; the second by David Ho3schelius, at Augsburg, 1603, in 4to; and both under the title of “Eclogse Legationum, &c.” The other title is “de Virtutibus & Vitiis,” and is the work under present consideration. A merchant of Marseilles had brought an ancient manuscript of it from the Isle of Cyprus, and sold it to Mons. Peiresc, who sent it to Paris. Here it lay neglected a long time till at length Pithaeus engaged Valesius to translate and publish it: which he did, and very properly dedicated it to Peiresc, to whom the public is obliged for it, and of whose ardour, in the promotion of letters, we have the following anecdote. Some time after, Valesius had read a passage in an ancient author, relating to the harbour of Smyrna, which could not be understood without viewing the situation upon the spot. He acquainted Peiresc with this difficulty; who immediately sent a painter, to take a view of that port, and afterwards communicated it to Valesius. Valesius thanked Peiresc for the trouble he had been at; but added, probably not in very guarded language, that it did not clear up the doubt so well as he could wish. Peiresc, vexed that he had been at so much expence, wrote back, that he had endeavoured to give him satisfaction; and that, if he had not succeeded, it must not be ascribed to either himself or the painter, but to his own temper and humour, which were satisfied with nothing.

In 1636 he gave a good edition of “Ammianus Marcellinus,” in 4to, corrected in a great number of places from the manuscripts, and illustrated with very ingenious and learned notes. A second edition, with more notes of Valesius, and those of Lindenbrog, came out at Paris, 1681, in folio, edited by his brother Adrian Valesius; and James Gronovius also published a third at Leyden, 1693, fol. and 4to. The critical talents and learning which Valesius had displayed in these publications, recommended him as the most proper person to superintend a work of greater importance, an edition of the ancient ecclesiastical historians. M. de Montchal, abp. of Tholouse, a learned man, whom the clergy of France had requested to give an edition of these historians, undertook the affair; and applied to Valesius to assist him privately. But Valesius was too jealous of his reputation, to let another person enjoy the fruits of his labours; and therefore absolutely refused his aid. The archbishop, either too much taken up with the business of his see, or despairing of success in what he had undertaken, soon after excused himself to the clergy; and at the same time advised them to apply to Valesius, as a man who was every way qualified for the task. To this Valesius had no objection, and his employers by way of encouragement settled a pension upon him. This was about 1650, and the Historians were published in Greek and Latin, with good notes, in the following order: “Eusebii Pamphili historia ecclesiastica, ejusdemque libri de vita Constantini, & panegyricus atque oratio Constantini ad sanctos,” Paris, 1659; “Socratis & Sozomeni historia ecclesiastica,” 166S; “Theodoreti et Evagrii historia ecclesiastica, item excerpta & historia ecclesiastica Philostorgii,” 1673. These were reprinted in 3 vols. folio, first at Amsterdam in 1699, and then at Cambridge in 1720; to which last edition some remarks, but very inconsiderable ones, scattered up and down in various authors, were collected and subjoined by the editor William Reading.

In 1660, Valesius was honoured with the title of historicgrapber of France; and had also a pension settled on him by the king, in consideration of his edition of Eusebius, which had appeared the year before. In 1662 he lost his left eye, so that now he was blind; and, notwithstanding all the skill of oculists, the most that could be done for him was, to enable him to see a little with the left eye, a new cataract, almost as soon as it was removed, forming itself again in the right. In 1663 he had an addition to his pension from the crown. He had hitherto lived among his books, but now, at the age of sixty, he surprized his friends by marrying a handsome young woman, by whom he had seven children. He died the seventh of May, 1676, having spent the two last years of life in all the miseries of one oppressed with infirmities. He was a man of great abilities and learning, and an admirable critic; but his disposition was far from being amiable. He was sparing in his praise, but so tenacious of the respect he thought due to him, as to resent the smallest attempt to criticise or find fault with what he wrote, and this irritable temper increased with his years.

, or Adrien de Valois, brother of Henry, and a very learned man also, was born at Paris in 1607, and educated in the college of Clermont there, under the Jesuits. He followed the example of his brother, and had the same counsellors in his studies, the fathers Sirmond and Petavius. History was his principal object; and he spent many years in searching into the most authentic records, manuscript as well as printed. His long perseverance in these pursuits enabled him to give the public an elaborate Latin work, entitled “Gesta Francorum, seu de rebis Francicis,” in 3 vols. folio; the first of which came out in 1646, the two others in 1658. This history begins with the year 254; and ends with 752. It is written with care and elegance, and may serve for an excellent commentary upon the ancient historians of France, who wrote rudely and barbarously: but some have considered it as a critical work filled with rude erudition, rather than a history. Colbert asked him one day concerning his Latin history of France, and pressed him to continue it; but he answered the minister, that he might as well take away his life, as put him upon a work so full of difficulties, and so much beyond what his age could bear; for he was then in years. He is the author of several other Latin works; as “Notitia Galliarum, ordine alphabetico digesta,” 1675, in folio; a work of great utility in explaining the state of ancient Gaul. He was the editor, as we have mentioned, of the second edition of “Ammianus Marcellinus;” to which, besides additional notes of his brother and Lindenbrog, he added notes and emendations of his own. He wrote also a Panegyric upon the king, and a life of his brother. There is also a “Valesiana.”

, a man of letters of great emience in the fifteenth century, was born at Rome in 1407. His father was a doctor of civil and common law, and advocate of the apostolic consistory. He was educated at Rome, and learned Greek under Aurispa; but in consequence of the troubles which arose on the death of pope Martin, and the advancement of Eugenius to the papal chair, he retired to Pavia. Here he read lectures on rhetoric, and wrote his three books “De Voluptate ac vero bono.” From thence he removed to Milan, and read the same lectures: and before 1435 read them to Alphonsus, king of Arragon, Sicily, and Naples, that learned patroa of letters, who took minutes of his lectures, and acknowledged his literary obligations to him. While in this place he wrote his book on free-will, against Bbetius, and his detection of the forged gift which Constantine is said to have made, of liome, to pope Sylvester, which was first published in 1492. Here too he translated Homer into Latin, and began his six books of “Elegantiae linguae Latinae.” All this while he had followed Alpbonsus in his wars, and had exposed his person in several sea-fights; and, among his other literary undertakings he had written three books of logical disputations, in which, having reduced the ten predicaments, or elements, to three, he was accused of heretical pravity by the inquisitor-general.

He next turned his thoughts to Livy, and drew up notes on that author on the following occasion. It was the custom of Alphonsus to have some ancient author read by one of the literati about his court, during his public dinners, where the king himself gave some opinion on the subject of the book, and invited the different guests to give theirs; and, as the discussion of any particular point pleased him, he divided the sweetmeats among the competitors, and poured out a glass of wine to the reader. This office had fallen on Beccadelli and Valla, who, from intimate friends, became inveterate enemies, by disputing about passages in Livy on these occasions. Valla became equally hostile to Bartholomew Facio (see Facio), whom Alphonsus had made his historiographer, and had appointed Valla at the same time to write the Life of his royal father Ferdinand. The first copy of this Life, in three books, drawn up in two months, and submitted to the king for his correction, was privately overlooked by Facio, who, boasting of having detected five hundred errors in it, was answered by Valla in four books of invectives, or recriminations, in the last of which he inserted his corrections and notes on the first six books of Livy, on the Punic war. These books he had heard Beccadelli read before Alphonsus, and his enemies charged him with saying that he would undertake to correct these better than Aretine, Guarini, and eve Petrarch himself, whose corrections were in the ms. at Naples sent to the king by Cosmo de Medici from Florence. Valla’s frequent attacks on barbarous Latinists and ignorant theologists of his time exposed him to imminent danger from the inquisition; bat he generally found a protector in the king.

We have no account of his education, but it probably was liberal, and he seems to have made a rapid progress in the accomplishments suited to his rank in life. A gay, lively disposition led him to the army, in which at a very early age he bore an ensign’s commission, but does not appear to have remained long a candidate for higher promotion. His course of desultory reading, or the company he kept, seems to have given him a taste for the drama, which he cultivated with the greatest success, and divided with Congreve the merit of reviving the comic muse. In some of his winter-quarters he became acquainted with sir Thomas Skipwith; who being a sharer in a theatrical patent, though little concerned in the conduct of it, young Vanbrugh shewed him the outlines of two plays; and sir Thomas encouraged him to finish “The Relapse,” which, notwithstanding its gross indecencies, being acted in 1697, succeeded beyond their warmest expectations, placed Vanbrugh in a high degree of reputation, and stimulated him (under the patronage of lord Halifax) to complete his “Provok'd Wife;” which was successfully brought out at Lincoln’s Inn Fields in 1698. Though both these comedies met with greater applause than the author expected, yet both were liable to the severest censure, and verified the observation of Pope,

Thus far the satirist was well founded party-rage warped his understanding when he censured Vanbrugh’s plays, and left him no more judgment to see their beauties than sir John had when he perceived not that they were the only beauties he was formed to compose.“Walpole, perhaps, was not aware of the handsome apology Dr. Swift and Mr. Pope have made, in the joint preface to their miscellanies” In regard to two persons only we wish our raillery, though ever so tender, or resentment, though ever so just, had not been indulged. We speak of sir John Vanbrugh, who was a man of wit, and of honour; and of Mr. Addison, whose name deserves all the respect from every lover of learning.“And notwithstanding Walpole’s own contribution of wit and flippancy to depreciate the character of Vanbrugh’s Blenheim and Castle-Howard, we are far more inclined to the opinion of our illustrious artist and elegant writer, str Joshua Reynolds, delivered, as it is, with the modesty that distinguishes, however seldom it accompanies, superior genius.” In the buildings of Vanbrugh, who was a poet as well as an architect, there is a greater display of imagination than we shall find, perhaps, in any other; and this is the ground of the effect we feel it) many of his works, notwithstanding the faults with which many of them are charged. For this purpose Vanbrugh appears to have had recourse to some principles of the Gothic architectore, which, thoueh not so ancient as the Grecian, is more so to

our imagination, with which the artist is more concerned than will; absolute truth.“”To speak of Vanbrugh,“adds sir Joshua,” in the language of 'a painter, he had originality of invention; he understood light and shadow, and had great skill in composition. To support his principal object, he produced his second and third groupes or masses. He perfectly understood in his art, what is the most difficult in ours, the conduct of the back-ground, by which the design and invention are set off to the greatest advantage. What the back-ground is in painting, in architecture is the real ground on which the building is erected; and no architect took greater care that his work should not appear crude and hard, that is, that it did not abruptly start out of the ground without expectation or preparation. This is a tribute which a painter owes to an architect who composed like a painter, and was defrauded of the due reward of his merit by the wits of his time, who did not understand the principles of composition in poetry better than he, and who knew little or nothing of what he understood perfectly, the general ruling principles of architecture and painting. Vanbrugh’s fate was that of the great Perrault. Both were the objects of the petulant sarcasms of factious men of letters, and both have left some of the fairest monuments which, to this day, decorate their several countries; the fagade of the Louvre; Blenheim, and Castle Howard."

Castle-Howard Vanbrugh built for Charles, earl of Carlisle, deputy to the earl marshal, who gave him the appointment of Clarenceux, king-at-arms, in 1704. The appointment, however, was remonstrated against by the superseded heralds, and the college at large felt the slight put upon them by having a total stranger made king-at-­arms, and who was likewise ignorant of the profession of heraldry and genealogy. Swift’s pun was, that he might now build houses He was knighted at Greenwich, September 9, 1714, appointed comptroller of the royal works January 6, 1714-5, and surveyor of the works at Greenwich hospital, August 17, 1716. It was designed to have given him the place of garter but finding that the younger Anstis had a reversionary grant, he resigned his tabard to Knox Ward, esq. February 9, 1725-6, and died March 26 following, at Whitehall. His country residence was Vanbrugh-Fields, at Greenwich,- where he built two seats, one called the Bastile, standing on Maize, or Maze-Hill, on the east side of the park. Lady Vanbrugh, his relict, sold it to lord Trelawny, who made it his residence: the name was taken from the French prison of which it was a model. It is said, but no time is mentioned, that on a visit to France, his curiosity and natural taste exciting him to take a survey of the fortifications in that kingdom, he was taken notice of by an engineer, secured by authority, and carried to the Bustile, where his confinement was so much softened by humanity, that he amused himself by drawing rude draughts of some comedies. This circumstance raised such curiosity at Paris, that he was visited by several of the noblesse, and by their means procured his liberty before any solicitation for it came from England. He had another built in the same style at Blackheath, called the Mincepye-house, now or lately inhabited by a descendant. Lady Vanbrugh, his relict, died April 26, 1776, aged ninety, and their only son, an ensign of the second regiment of the foot-guards, died of the wounds he received in a battle fought near Tournay, in 1745.

Vander-Linden wrote many books upon physic, which are enumerated in our authorities, and one “De Scriptis Medicis.” This, which is a catalogue of books upon physic, was printed and enlarged several times by the author in his life-time; and very considerably so after his death, by a German, named Merklinns, who published it in a thick quarto, under the title of “Lindenius Renovattis,” at Nuremberg, in 1686, but it never was either correct or complete, and has since given place to more recent works of the kind, particularly Eloy’s Dictionary. Vander-Linden was also the editor of “Celsus,” Leyden, 1657, 12mo, and left an edition of the works of Hippocrates, published there in 1665, 2 vols. 8vo, Greek and Latin. With this he had taken great pains, but did not live to finish more than a correct text, to attain which he carefully compared all the old editions and several manuscripts, and restored a great number of passages, which were not correct even in Foesius’s edition. His Latin translation is that of Cornarius, because the oldest, and that commonly used. Having been attacked by his last illness a little before this edition was finished, he was prevented from publishing the notes which he intended.

This work was quickly followed by another, on the problems called by geometricians, '“problems of situation.” Leibnitz was of opinion, that the analysis made use of in his time, by the geometricians, was not applicable to all questions in the physical sciences; and that a new geometry should be invented, to calculate the relations of positions of different bodies, in space; this he called “geometry of situation.” Excepting, however, one application, made by Leibnitz himself, to the i game of solitaire, and which, under the appearance of an object of curiosity, scarcely worthy the sublimity and usefulness of geometry, is an example for solving the most elevated and important questions, Euler was almost the only one who had practised this geometry of situation. He had resorted to it for the solution of a problem called the cavalier, which, also, appeared very familiar at first sight, and was also pregnant with useful and important applications. This problem, with the vulgar, consisted merely in running through all the cases of the chess-board, with the knight of the game of chess; to the profound geometrician, however, it was a precedent for tracing the route which every body must follow, whose course is submitted to a known law, by conforming to certain required conditions, through all the points disposed over a space, in a prescribed order. Vandermonde was chiefly anxious to find in this species or analysis, a simple notation, likely to facilitate the making of calculations; and he gave an example of this, in a short and easy solution "of the same problem of the cavalier, which Euler had rendered famous.

In the year following (1772) he printed a third memoir; in which he traced out a new path for geometers, discover* ing by learned analytical researches, irrational quantities of a new species, shewing the sequels of which these irrationals are the terms or the sum, and pointing out a,direct and general method of making in them all the possible reductions. In the same year appeared his work on the “Elimination of unknown quantities in Algebra,” or the art of bringing back those equations which include many unknown quantities, to equations which contain only one. In 1778 he presented, in one of the public sittings of the academy, a new system of harmony, which he detailed more fully in another public sitting of 1780. This system obtained the approbation of the three great musicians of his time, Gluck, Philidor, and Piccini.

, Vandenvelde, or Vandevelde (William), called the Old, one of a distinguished family of painters, was born at Leyden in 1610. He was originally bred to the sea, but afterwards studied painting, and retained enough of his former profession to make it the source of his future fame. In marine subjects, he became a most correct and admirable designer, and made an incredible number of drawings on paper, heightened with Indian ink, which he sketched after nature, with uncommon elegance and fidelity.

Rubens, discovering in his pupil an amiable temper joined to the most promising talents, took a pleasure in cultivating both, by not concealing from him any part of that knowledge which he had himself attained by long experience. Vandyck was yet young when he was capable of executing pictures, which astonished, as much from the facility with which they were painted, as the general knowledge which reigned throughout the whole. Rubens, at this time, gave him two pieces of advice; the first was, to devote himself to portraits, in which he foresaw he would excel; and the second to make the tour of Italy, where he would have an opportunity of extending his studies. Vandyck accordingly, after making Rubens presents of two or three historical paintings, and a portrait of that artist’s wife, esteemed one of his best, set out for Italy, and made his first residence at Genoa, where he painted many excellent portraits. From thence he went to Venice, where he so deeply imbibed the tints of Titian, that he is allowed to approach nearer to the carnations of that master than even Rubens. He then went to Rome and lived splendidly, avoiding the low conversation of his countrymen, and was distinguished by the appellation of the Pittore Cavalieresco. Soon after his arrival there, he had an opportunity of exercising his abilities upon the portrait of cardinal Bentivoglio, which is justly esteemed the mostiperfect of the kind that ever came from the pencil of this- artist. While at Rome he received an invitation to Palermo, and there he painted prince Philibert of Savoy, the viceroy, and a paintress Angosciola (see Angosciola, vol. II.) then at the age of ninety-one. But the plague soon drove him from Sicily, and he returned to Genoa, where he had gained the highest reputation, and left many considerable works in the Balbi, Durazzo, and other palaces.

According to Walpole, Vandyck’s prices were 40l. for a half, and 60l. for a whole length; but from some documents communicated by Mr. Malone, it appears that he painted, for the royal family at least, at the rate of 251. each portrait, and sometimes less. From the number of his works he must have been indefatigable; for though he was not above forty-two when he died, they are not exceeded by those of Rubens. He lived sumptuously, kept a great table, and often detained the persons who sat to him, to dinner, for an opportunity of studying their -countenances, and of retouching their pictures again in the afternoon. In summer he lived at Eltham in Kent. He was not only luxurious in his living, but in his pleasures; and this, with a sedentary life, brought on the gout, and hurt his fortune. He sought to repair it by the silly pursuit of the philosopher’s stone, in which probably he was encouraged by the example or advice of his friend sir Kenelm Digby. Towards the end of his life, the king bestowed on him for a wife, Mary, the daughter of the unfortunate lord Gowry, and soon after his marriage he set out for Paris, in hopes of being employed in the Louvre; but disappointed in this, he returned to England, and proposed to the king, by sir Kenelm Digby, to paint the walls of the Banquetting-house at Whitehall, of which the ceiling was already adorned by Rubens -, and Vandyck’s subject was to have been the history and procession of the order of the garter. The proposal struck the king’s taste, and, in Walpole’s opinion, was accepted; though, he adds, that “some say it was rejected, on the extravagant price demanded by Vandyck I would not specify the sum, it is so improbable, if I did not find it repeated in Fenton’s notes on Waller; it was fourscore thousand pounds!” But the sum being expressed in figures, this was probably a typographical error of 80,000l. for 8000l. The rebellion, however, prevented further thoughts of the scheme, as the death of Vandyck would have interrupted the execution, at least the completion of it. He died in Blackfriars Dec. 9, 1641, and was buried in St. Paul’s near the tomb of John of Gaunt.

It does not, however, appear that he was concerned in any measures against the king, but continued in London, without acting in the rebellion. And although on December 1, 1645, the parliament, debating on propositions of peace with the king, voted, that it be recommended to his majesty 10 create sir Henry Vane, senior, a baron of the kingdom, he never accepted any commission or employment under them. Before the murder of the king, he retired to his seat at Raby castle, neither he nor his sons being concerned therein. The earl of Clarendon is severe in his character of sir Henry Vane. He certainly was at one time in full confidence with the king, but his taking part against Strafford did incalculable mischief to the royal cause. Clarendon allows that, in his judgment, “he liked the government, both in church and state.” As to what his lordship observes, “of his growing at last into the hatred and contempt of those who had made most use of him, and died in universal reproach;” it may, says Collins, be more justly represented, that he saw the vile use they made of their power, and, contemning them, chose retirement. He lived to the latter end of 1654, when he departed this life, at his seat at Raby-castle, in the sixtyninth year of his age.

Upon the breaking out of the rebellion he adhered to the interest of the parliament with enthusiastic zeal. He began with carrying to the House of Peers the articles of impeachment against archbishop Laud; and was nominated one of the ]ay members of the assembly of divines. In 1643 he was appointed one of the commissioners sent by parliament to invite the Scots to their assistance. Under this character he distinguished himself as the “great contriver and promoter of the solemn league and covenant;” though, even at that time, he was known to have an equal aversion to it and to presbytery, which he demonstrated afterwards upon all occasions, being a zealous independent. In 1644, he was the grand instrument of carrying the famous self-denying ordinance, a delusive trick, which for a time gave life and spirit to the independent cause; and in his speech, upon introducing the debate on that subject, observed, that, though he had been possessed of the treasurership of the navy before the beginning of the troubles, without owing it to the favour of the parliament, yet he was ready to resign it to them; and desired that the profits of it might be applied towards the support of the war. He was likewise one of the commissioners at the treaty of Uxbridge, in Jan. 1644-5, and of that of the Isle of Wight in 1648; in which last, as he was now determined to procure, if possible, a change in the government, he used all his efforts to retard any conclusion with his majesty till the army could be brought to London; and for that purpose amused the king’s party by the offer of a toleration for the common prayer and the episcopal clergy. Like many others, however, he did not foresee the consequences of his favourite measures, and therefore did not approve of the force put upon the parliament by the army, nor of the execution of the king; withdrawing for some time from the scene while these things were acted. But, upon the establishment of the commonwealth, 1648-9, he was appointed one of the council of state, in which post he was continued till the memorable dissolution of the parliament by Cromwell in 1643. On this occasion Cromwell, who treated individual members with personal insolence, took hold of sir Henry Vane by the cloak, saying, “Thou art a juggling fellow.” Vane, however, was too much of a republican to submit to his, or any authority, and was therefore, in 1656, summoned by Cromwell to appear before him in council. On his appearance Cromwell charged him with disaffection to his government, which appeared in a late publication of his called “A healing question proposed and resolved.” Vane acknowledged the publication, and avowed his displeasure with the present state of affairs. Cromwell therefore ordered him to give security for his good behaviour; but instead of this, which such a man as sir Henry Vane might probably find very difficult, he delivered to Cromwell a justification of his conduct; and this not being satisfactory, he was imprisoned in Carisbrooke castle, the spot on which he had so recently contributed to injure the cause of his legitimate sovereign. About four months after, he was released, and Cromwell tried to bring down his spirit by threatening to deprive him of some of his estates by legal process, that is, by such perversion of the law as he might find some of his creatures capable of attempting; intimating at the same time, that all this should drop, and he be gratified with, what he pleased, provided he would comply with the present government. But he remained inflexible, as well during Cromwell’s life, as during the short reign of Richard, against whom many meetings of the republicans were held at his house near Charing Cross.

Lord Clarcndoq styles him a man of a very profound dissimulation, of a quick conception, and very ready, sharp, and weighty, expression; of a pleasant wit, a great understanding, which pierced into and discerned the purposes of other men with wonderful sagacity, whilst he had himself vtdtum clausum, that no man could make a guess of what he himself intended; of a temper not to he moved, though compliant, when it was not seasonable to contradict, without losing ground by the condescension. Burnet represents him as naturally a very fearful man, whose head was as darkened in his notions of religion as his mind was clouded with fear; for, though he set up a form of religion in a way of his own, yet it consisted rather in withdrawing from all other forms, than in any new particular opinion or form; from which he and his party were called seekers, and seemed to wait for some new and clearer manifestations. Baxter calls them the Vanuts. In their meetings sir Henry preached and prayed often himself, but with a peculiar darkness, which ran likewise through his writings, to a degree that rendered them wholly unintelligible. He inclined to Origen’s notion of an universal salvation to all, both the devils and the damned; and to the doctrine of pre-existence.

His writings, which were of a very peculiar cast, were, 1. “A healing Question, propounded and resolved, upon occasion of the late public and seasonable call to humiliation, in order to love and union amongst the honest party, 1656,” 4to. It was written upon occasion of a general fast; and contained, says Ludlow, the state of the republicans’ controversy with the king, the present deviation from that cause for which they engaged, and the means to unite all parties in the accomplishment of it. 2. “The retired Man’s Meditations; or, the mystery and power of godliness shining forth in the living world,” &c. 1656, 4to, an enthusiastic treatise on our Saviour’s coming down to erect a fifth monarchy upon earth, which would last 1000 years. 3. “Of the Love of God and Union with God,” 1657, 4to. Of this book lord Clarendon says, “When I had read it, and found nothing of his usual clearness and ratiocination in his discourse, in which he used much to excel the best of the company he kept, and that, in a crowd of very easy words, the sense was too hard to find out, I was of opinion that the subject-matter of it was of so delicate a nature that it required another kind of preparation of mind, and, it may be, another kind of diet than men are ordinarily supplied with.” 4. “An Epistle General to the mystical body of Christ on earth, the church universal in Babylon, who are pilgrims and strangers on the earth, desiring and seeking after the heavenly country,” 1662, 4to. 5. “The Face of the Times; whereby is briefly discovered, by several prophetical Scriptures, from the beginning of Genesis to the end of the Revelation, the rise, progress, and issue, of the enmity and contest between the seed of the woman and the seed of the serpent, to the final breaking of the serpent’s head, to the total and irrecoverable ruin of the monarchies of this world,” &c. 1662, 4to. 6. “The People’s Cause stated. The valley of Jehosaphat considered and opened, by comparing 2 Chron. xx. with Joel iii. Meditations concerning man’s life government friendship enemies death;” penned during his imprisonment, and printed at the end of his trial, in 1662, 4to.

, a writer who has generally been distinguished by the title of Atheist, was born at Tourosano, in the kingdom of Naples, in 1585; and was the son of John Baptist Vanini, steward to Don Francis de Castro, duke of Tourosano, and viceroy of Naples. His Christian name was Lucilio: but it was customary with him to assume different names in different countries. In Gascony, he called himself Pompeio; in Holland, Julius Ceesar, which name he placed in the title-pages of his books; and, at Toulouse, when he was tried, he was called Lucilio. He had an early taste for literature, and his father sent him to Rome to study philosophy and divinity, and on his return to Naples, he continued his studies in philosophy, and applied himself some time to physic. Astronomy likewise employed him much, which insensibly threw him into the reveries of astrology: but he bestowed the principal part of his time upon divinity. The title of “Doctor in utroque Jure,” which he assumes in the title-page of his dialogues, may indicate that he had applied himself to the civil and canon law; and from his writings, it certainly appears that he understood both. He finished his studies at Padua, where he resided some years, and procured himself to be ordained priest, and became a preacher, with what success is not known. His mind appears to have been perverted or confused by the reading of Aristotle, Averroes, Cardan, and Pomponatius, who became his favourite guides. His admiration of Aristotle was such, that he calls him “the god of philosophers, the dictator of human nature, and the sovereign pontiff of the sages.” The system of Averroes, which is but a branch of that of Aristotle, was so highly approved of by him, that he recommended it to his scholars at their first entrance upon the study of philosophy. He styles Pomponatius his “divine master,” and bestows great encomiums upon his works. He studied Cardan very much, and gives him the character of “a man of great sense, and not at all affected with superstition.” It is supposed that he derived from these authors those infidel doctrines which he afterwards endeavoured to propagate. Father Mersene assures us, that Vanini, before he was executed at Toulouse, confessed to the parliament, that at Naples he had agreed with thirteen of his friends to travel throughout Europe, for the sake of propagating atheism, and that France had fallen to his share: but this is very improbable, as the president Gramond, who was upon the spot, says nothing of such a scheme in his account of Vanini’s trial and execution. It is more probable, that his inclination to travelling, or perhaps the hopes of procuring an agreeable settlement, led him to the several places through which he passed; and that he spread his singular sentiments according as he had opportunity.

It has been remarked that we have very few dates in the biography of Vanini. We can only therefore say generally that, after he had commenced his travels, he went through part of Germany and the Low Countries, to Geneva, and thence to Lyons; whence, having presumed to vent his irreligious notions, under the pretext of teaching philosophy, he was obliged to fly. He passed over into England, and in 1614 was at London, where he was imprisoned for nine and forty days, “well prepared,” says he, with that air of devotion which runs through all his writings, “to receive the crown of martyrdom, which he longed for with all the ardour imaginable.” Being set at liberty, he repassed the sea, and took the road to Italy. He first stopped at Genoa, and undertook to teach youth; but, it being discovered that he had infused pernicious notions into their minds, he was forced to abandon that city. He then returned to Lyons, where he endeavoured to gain the favour of the ecclesiastics by a pretended confutation of Cardan and other atheistical writers, in which he artfully contrived, by the weakness of his arguments, to give his opponents the advantage. This work was printed at Lyons, in 1615, 8vo, under the title of “Amphitheatrum eeternae Providentiae Divino-Magicum, Christiano-Physicum, necnon Astrologo-Catholicum, adversus veteres Philosophos Atheos, Epicureos, Peripateticos, & Stoicos. Autore Julio Ceesare Vanino, Philosopho, Theologo, ac Juris utriusque Doctore;” dedicated to the count de Castro, the protector of his family and his benefactor; and it so far imposed orVtbe licensers of books, as to receive their approbation. But Vanini being apprehensive that his artifice might be detected, went again into Italy; where being accused of reriving and propagating his former impieties, he returned to France, and became a monk in the convent of Guienne, a/nd from this he is said to have been banished for immorality. He then retired to Paris, where he endeavoured to introduce himself to Robert Ubaldini, the pope’s nuncio; and, in order to make his court to him and the clergy in general, undertook to write an apology for the council of Trent. He procured likewise several friends, and had access to the mareschal de Bassompierre, who made him his chaplain, and gave him a pension of two hundred crowns. Upon this account, he dedicated to him his “Dialogues,” which were printed at Paris in 1616, 8vo, with this title, “Julii Caesaris Vanini, Neapolitani, Theologi, Philosophi, & Juris utriusque Doctoris, de admirandis Naturae Reginae Deaeque Mortalium arcanis, libri quatuor.” This work likewise was printed with the king’s privilege, and the approbation of three learned doctors, either from carelessness or ignorance. In his “Amphitheatrum” he had taken some pains to disguise his irreligion; but in these “Dialogues,” his sentiments are too obvious, and notwithstanding their having escaped the censors of the press, the faculty of the Sorbonne soon discovered their tendency, and condemned them to the flames. Finding himself now become generally obnoxious, and in consequence reduced to poverty, he is said to have written to the pope, that, “If he had not a good benefice soon bestowed upon him, he would in three months’ time overturn the whole Christian religion;” but although it is not impossible that Vanini might have written such a letter for the amusement of his friends, it is scarcely credible that he should have sent it to Rome. Whatevermay be in this, it is certain that he quitted Paris in 1617, and returned to Toulouse; where he soon infused his impious notions into the minds of his scholars, in the course of his lectures on physic, philosophy, and divinity. This being discovered, he was prosecuted, and condemned to be burnt to death, which sentence was executed Feb. 19, 1619. Gramond, president of the parliament of Toulouse, gives us the following account of his death. “About the same time, Feb. 1619, by order of the parliament of Toulouse, was condemned to death Lucilio Vanini, who was esteemed an arch-heretic with many persons, but whom I always looked upon as an atheist. This wretch pretended to be a physician, but in reality was no other than a seducer of youth. He laughed at every thing sacred: he abominated the incarnation of our Saviour, and denied the being of a God, ascribing all things to chance. He adored nature, as the cause of all beings: this was his principal error, whence all the rest were derived; and he had the boldness to teach it with great obstinacy at Toulouse. He gained many followers among the younger sort, whose foible it is to be taken with any thing that appears extraordinary and daring. Being cast into prison, he pretended at first to be a catholic; and by that means deferred his punishment. He was even just going to be set at liberty, for want of sufficient proofs against him, when Franconi, a man of birth and probity, deposed, that Vanini had often, in his presence, denied the existence of God, and scoffed at the mysteries of the Christian religion. Vanini, being brought before the senate, and asked what his thoughts were concerning the existence of a Gpd answered, that < he adored with the church a God in three persons,‘ and that * Nature evidently demonstrated the being of a deity:’ and, seeing by chance a straw on the ground, he took it up, and stretching it forth, said to the judges, ‘ This straw obliges me to confess that there is a God;’ and he proved afterwards very amply, that God was the author and creator of all things, nature being incapable of creating any thing. But all this he said through vanity or fear, rather than an inward conviction; and, as the proofs against him were convincing, he was by sentence of parliament condemned to die, after they had spent six months in preparing things for a hearing. I saw him in the dung-cart, continues Gramond, when he was carried to execution, making sport with a friar, who was allowed him in order to reclaim him from his obstinacy. Vanini refused the assistance of the friar, and insulted even our Saviour in these words, ‘ He sweated with weakness and fear in going to suffer death, and I die undaunted.* This profligate wretch had no reason to say that he died undaunted: I saw him entirely dejected, and making a very ill use of that philosophy of which he so much boasted. At the time when he was going to be executed he had a horrible and wild aspect; his mind was uneasy, and he discovered in all his expressions the utmost anxiety; though from time to time he cried out that he ’ died like a philosopher.' Before the fire was applied to the wood-pile, he was ordered to put out his tongue, that it might be cut off; which he refused to do; nor could the executioner take hold of it but with pincers. There never was heard a more dreadful shriek than he then gave; it was like the bellowing of an ox. His body was consumed in the flames, and his ashes thrown into the air. I saw him in prison, and at his execution; and likewise knew him before he was arrested. He had always abandoned himself to the gratification of his passions, and lived in a very irregular manner. When his goods were seized there was found a great toad alive in a large crystal bottle full of water. Whereupon he was accused of witchcraft; but he answered, that that animal being burned, was a sure antidote against all mortal and pestilential diseases. While he was in prison he pretended to be a catholic, and went often to the sacrament, but, when he found there were no hopes of escaping, he threw off the mask, and died as he had lived.”

Vanini has not been without his apologists, who bay* considered him rather as a victim to bigotry and envy, than as a martyr to impiety and atheism. They even go so far as to maintain that neither his life nor his writings were so absurd or blasphemous as to entitle him to the character of a despiser of God and religion. The arguments of these apologists may be found in Buddeus’s “Theses de Atheismo et Superstitione,” in Arp’s “Apologia pro Vanino,” 1712, and in Heister’s “Apologia pro medicis.” The life of Vanini has been written several times; but that by M. Durand, entitled “La Vie et les Sentimens de Lucilio Vanini,” and printed at Rotterdam, 1727, in 12 mo, comprises every thing which has been said of him, bnt by no means justifies the zeal of his apologists. An English translation of Durand was published in 1730.

, another eminent artist, was born at Meulebeke, a small distance from Courtray, in 1548, and was successively the disciple of Lucas de Heere, at Ghent, and Peter Vlerick, at Courtray; but his principal knowledge in the art of painting was acquired at Rome, where he studied for three years. There he designed after the antiques, and the curious remains of Roman magnificence; the temples, baths, ruinous theatres, sepulchral monuments and their decorations, and, in short, every elegant and noble object that invited his attention. He also studied after nature in the environs of Rome, sketching every scene that pleased his imagination, or could afford him materials for future compositions in the landscape-style; and having practised to paint with equal freedom in fresco and in oil, he executed several historical works as well as landscapes, for the cardinals and nobility of Rome, with extraordinary approbation.

After he had taken his doctor’s degree he continued to attend Boerhaave’s lectures for about twenty years, and having within this period been himself appointed a professor, his fame and talents brought a vast addition to the number of medical students at Leyden, who came from Germany, France, and England, to what was then the greatest and perhaps the only school of medicine in Europe. Celebrated as the school of Leyden was, however, from the joint labours of Boerhaave and Van Swieten, it was at last disgraced in the person of the latter. His growing reputation excited the envy of some of his contemporaries, who having nothing else to object, took the mean advantage of his being a Roman catholic, and insisting that the law should be put in force, obliged him to resign an office which he had filled with so much credit to the university. Van Swieten submitted to this treatment with dignified contempt, and being now more at leisure, began his great work, his Commentaries on Boerhaave’sAphorisms, the first volume of which was finished, and the second nearly so, when the empress Maria Theresa invited him to her court; and although he felt some reluctance at quitting the studious life he had hitherto led, he could not with propriety reject the offer, and accordingly arrived at Vienna in June 1745. Here he was appointed first physician to the court, with a handsome establishment, and some time after the dignity of baron was conferred upon him. How well he merited these honours, the favourable change effected by him in the state of medical science sufficiently proved. He was now in the prime of life, and perhaps few men in Europe were better qualified, by extent of knowledge, to lay the foundation for a school of medicine. He was not only thoroughly versed in every branch of medicine, in botany, anatomy, surgery, chemistry, &c. but was well acquainted with most of the European languages. He was a good Greek and Latin scholar, and wrote the latter with ease and elegance, and in his lectures was frequently happy in his quotations from the Greek and Latin classics. He was also well versed in all the branches of mathematics, and natural philosophy; and had paid no little attention to divinity, law, politics, and history. Such attainments procured him the confidence of his sovereign, whom he easily prevailed upon to rebuild the university of Vienna in an elegant style, and with every accommodation for the pursuit of the different sciences. The botanical garden was enlarged, and the keeping of it given to M. Langier; and a clinical lecture was established in one of the principal hospitals by M. De Haen. It was in 1746 that Van Swieten first began to execute his plan for reforming the study of medicine in the university of Vienna, by giving lectures in the vestibule of the imperial library; and when his business as first physician increased, he called in the aid of able professors who understood his views; among whom were the celebrated Storck and Crantz. Having been appointed keeper of the imperial library, his first measure was to abolish a barbarous law that had long been in force, which prohibited any person from making notes or extracts from any of the books. Van Swieten, on the contrary, laid the whole open to the use of readers, and provided them with every accommodation, and ample permission to transcribe what they pleased. He also prevailed on the empress to increase the salaries of the professors of the university, and to provide for the education of young men of talents. He was himself a most liberal patron to such as stood in need of this aid, and employed his whole influence in their favour; and he lived to promote the interests of learning in general throughout the Austrian dominions to an extent hitherto unknown.

, an Italian historian, poet, and critic, was born at- Florence in 1502. His father, a lawyer, placed him with a master, who reported that he was not fit for literature, and advised him to breed the boy up to merchandise. He was accordingly sent to a counting-­house, and there his masters discovered that he never was without a book, and minded nothing but reading. His father then, after examining him, found that he had been deceived by the school-master, and determined to give his son a learned education, and for that purpose sent him to Padua and Pisa. Unfortunately, however, he prescribed the study of the law, which Varchi relished as little as commerce; and although, out of filial respect, he went through the usual courses, he immediately, on his father’s death, relinquished both the study and practice of the law, and determined to devote all his attention to polite literature. In this he acquired great reputation; but when Florence became distracted by civil commotions, he joined the party in opposition to the Medici family, and was banished. During his exile he resided at Venice, Padua, and Bologna, where his talents procured him many friends; and his works having diffused his reputation more widely, Cosmo de Medicis had the generosity to forgive the hostility he had shewn to his family, and, respecting him as a man of letters, recalled him home, and appointed him his historiographer. In this capacity he recommended him to write the history of the late revolutions in Florence. All this kindness, accompanied with a handsome pension, produced a great change in the mind of the republican Varchi, who became now the equally zealous advocate of monarchy. As soon as he had finished a part of it, he submitted it to the inspection of his patron, and some copies were taken of it. These being seen by soma persons who suspected that he would make free with their characters, or the characters of their friends, they conspired to assassinate the apostate author, as they thought him; and having one night attacked him, left him weltering in his blood, but his wounds were not mortal; and although it is said he knew who the assassins were, he declined appearing against them. He was, however, so much affected by the affair, that he embraced the ecclesiastical profession, and obtained some preferment. He died at Florence in 1565. His history, which extends from 1527 to 1538, was not published until 1721, at Cologne, and reprinted at Leydeu 1723; but both these places are wrong, as both editions were published in Italy. There is a recent edition, Milan, 1803, 5 vols. 8vo. The style, like that of all his works, is pure and elegant, though a little too much elaborated. The facts, of course, are strongly tinctured with an attachment to the house of Medici.

, a celebrated French mathematician and priest, was born at Caen in 1654. He was the son of an architect in middling circumstances, but had a college education, being intended for the church. Having accidentally met with a copy of Euclid’s Elements, he was inclined to study it, and this led him to the works of Des Cartes, which confirmed his taste for geometry, and he even abridged himself of the necessaries of life to purchase books which treated on this science. What contributed to heighten this passion in him was, that he studied in private: for his relations observing that the books he studied were not such as were commonly used by others, strongly opposed his application to them; and as there was a necessity for his being an ecclesiastic, he continued his theological studies, yet not entirely sacrificing his favourite subject to them. At this time the Abbé St. Pierre, who studied philosophy in the same college, became acquainted with him. A taste in common for rational subjects, whether physics or metaphysics, and continued disputations, formed the bonds of their friendship, and they became mutually serviceable to each other in their studies. The abbe, to enjoy Varignon’s company with greater ease, lodged in the same house with him; and being in time more sensible of his merit, he resolved to give him a fortune, that he might fully pursue his inclination. Out of only 18 hundred livres a year, which he had himself, he conferred 300 of them upon Varignon; and when determined to go to Paris to study philosophy, he settled there in 1686, with M. Varignon, in the suburbs of St. Jacques. There each studied in his own way; the abbé applying himself to the study of men, manners, and the principles of government whilst Varignon was wholly occupied with the mathematics. Fontenelie, who was their countryman, often went to see them, sometimes spending two or three days with them. They had also room for a couple of visitors, who came from the same province. “We joined together,” says Fontenelle, “with the greatest pleasure. We were young, full of the first ardour for knowledge, strongly united, and, what we were not then perhaps disposed to think so great a happiness, little known. Varignon, who had a strong constitution, at least in his youth, spent whole days in study, without any amusement or recreation, except walking sometimes in fine weather. I' have heard him say, that in studying after supper, as he usually did, he was often surprised to hear the clock strike two in the morning; and was much pleased that four hours rest were sufficient to refresh him. He did not leave his studies with that heaviness which they usually create; nor with that weariness that a long application might occasion. He left off gay and lively, filled with pleasure, and impatient to renew it. In speaking of mathematics, he would laugh so freely, that it seemed as if he had studied for diversion. No condition was so much to be envied as his; his life was a continual enjoyment, delighting in quietness.” In the solitary suburb of St. Jacques, he formed however a connection with many other learned men; as Du Hamel, Du Verney, De la Hire, &c. Du Verney often asked his assistance in those parts of anatomy connected with mechanics: they examined together the positions of the muscles, and their directions; hence Varignon learned a good deal of anatomy from Du Verney, which he repaid by the application of mathematical reasoning to that subject. At length, in 1687, Varignon made himself known to the public by a “Treatise on New Mechanics,” dedicated to the Academy of Sciences. His thoughts on this subject were, in effect, quite new. He discovered truths, and laid open their sources. In this work, he demonstrated the necessity of an equilibrium, in such cases as it happens in, though the cause of it is not exactly known. This discovery Varignon made by the theory of compound motions, and his treatise was greatly admired by the mathematicians, and procured the author two considerable places, the one of geometrician in the Academy of Sciences, the other of professor of mathematics in the college of Mazarine, to which he was the first person raised.

He recovered from his disease; but the remembrance of what he had suffered did not make him more prudent for the future. The whole impression of his “Project for a New System of Mechanics,” having been sold off, he formed a design to publish a second edition of it, or rather a work entirely new, though upon the same plan, but naorc extended. It must be easy to perceive how much learning he must have acquired in the interval; but he often complained, that he wanted time, though he was by no means disposed to lose any. Frequent visits, either of French or of foreigners, somti of whom went to see him that they might have it to say that they had seen him, and others to consult him and improve by his conversation: works of mathematics, which the authority of some, or the friendship he had for others, engaged him to examine, and of which he thought himself obliged to give the most exact account; a literary correspondence with all the chief mathematicians of Europe; all these obstructed the book he had undertaken to write. Thus, says his biographer, a man acquires reputation by 'having a great deal of leisure time, and he loses this precious leisure as soon as he has acquired reputation. Add to this, that his best scholars, whether in the college of Mazarine or the Royal college (for he had a professor’s chair in both), sometimes requested private lectures of him, which he could not refuse. He sighed for his two or three months of vacation, for that was all the leisure time he had in the year, and he could then retire into the country, where his time was entirely his own.

, a French writer, more known than esteemed for several historical works, was descended from a good family, and born at Gueret in 1624. After a liberal education, of which he made the proper advantage, he became a private tutor to some young persons of quality; and then went to Paris, where he was well received as a man of letters, and had access to the Dupuy’s, whose house was the common rendezvous of the learned. He obtained afterwards a place in the kings’ library, by his interest with Nicolas Colbert, who was made librarian after the death of James Dupuy in 1655. Mr. Colbert, afterwards minister of state, commissioned his brother Nicolas to find out a man capable of collating certain manuscripts. Varillzte was recommended, and had the abbe" of St. Real for his coadjutor; and handsome pensions were settled upon both. But whether Varillas was negligent and careless, or had not a turn for this employment, he did not give satisfaction, and was therefore dismissed from his employment in 1662; yet had his pension continued till 1670. He then retired from the royal library, and spent the remainder of his days in study, refusing, it is said, several advantageous offers. He lived frugally and with oeconomy, and yet not through necessity, for his circumstances were easy. St. Come was the seat of his retirement; where he died June 9, 1696, aged seventy-two.

, usually styled the most learned of all the Romans, was born in the year of Rome 638, or 28 B.C. His immense learning made him the admiration of his time; which yet was the most flourishing for arts and glory that Rome ever knew. He was an intimate friend of Cicero; and his friendship was confirmed and immortalized by a mutual dedication of their learned works to each other. Thus Cicero dedicated his “Academic Questions” to Varro; and Varro dedicated his “Treatise on the Latin tongue” to Cicero, who, in a letter in which he recommends him as questor to Brutus, assures the commander, that he would find him perfectly qualified for the post, and particularly insists upon his good sense, his indifference to pleasure, and his patient perseverance in business. To these virtues he added uncommon abilities, and large stores of knowledge, which qualified him for the highest offices of the state. He attached himself to the party of Pompey, and in the time of the triumvirate was proscribed with Cicero: and, though he escaped with his life, he suffered the loss of his library, and of his own writings; a loss which would be severely felt by one who had devoted a great part of his hfe to letters. Returning, at length, to Rome, he spent his last years in literary leisure. He died in the 727th year of the city. His prose writings were exceedingly numerous, and treated of various topics in antiquities, chronology, geography, natural and civil history, philosophy, and criticism. He was, besides, a poet of some distinction, and wrote in almost every kind of verse. He is said to have been eighty when he wrote his three books “De Re Rustica,” which are still extant. Five of his books “De Lingua Latina,” which he addressed to Cicero, are also extant, and some fragments of his works, particularly of his “Menippean Satires,” which are medleys of prose and verse. Scaliger has likewise collected some of his epigrams from among the “Catalecta Virgilii. The first edition of Varro” De Lingua Latina“is a quarto, without date or place, but supposed to be Rome, 1471. There is a second, at Venice, 1474, 4to, and a third at Rome, 1474, fol. His whole works, with the notes of Scaliger, Turnebus, &c. were printed by Henry Stephens, 1573, 8vo, reprinted 1581; but the former edition is in greatest request among the curious, on account of a note of Scaliger' s, p. 212, of the second part, which was omitted in the subsequent editions. Varro” De Re Rustica“is inserted among the” Auctores de Re Rustica." The use which Virgil makes of this work in his Georgics entitles it *o some respect; and it is amusing as giving us a notion of the agriculture of his time, and the method of laying out gardens, and providing the luxuries of the table, in which the Romans were particularly extravagant. It contains many absurdities, however, and many of those remarks and pieces of information which would now be thought a disgrace to the meanest writer on agriculture. The rev. T. Owen, of Queen’s college, Oxford, and rector of Upper Scudamore, in Wiltshire, published a good translation of this work in 1800, 8vo.

Vasari died in 1574, and in 1588 his nephew published a work to commemorate and honour his uncle’s abilities, entitled, “Ragionamenti del Sig. Cavaliere Georgio Vasari pittore ed architetto sopra le invenzioni de lui depinta in Fiorenza nel palazzo di Loro Altezze Serenissime, &c.” It is not however to painting that Vasari is indebted for his present fame, but to his miscellaneous work; which, though crude and incorrect, affords the most ample source of our information concerning the painters of Italy before his time, or contemporary with himself. As an artist he had little originality, and the extravagances of genius mark the most predominant feature of his style.

an eminent publicist, was the son of a clergyman of Neufchatel, where he was born April 25, 1714. After completing his studies, he went to Berlin, where he became acquainted with some of the literati of that city, and thence to Dresden, and was introduced to the king of Poland and the elector of Saxony, who received him with great kindness, and some years after he was appointed privy- councillor to the elector. He was residing at Dresden in 1765 when his health began to decline, which obliged him to try the air of his native country; but this proved ineffectual, and he died at Neufehatel in 1767, in the fifty-third year of his age. He owed his literary reputation first to some publications, which, we believe, are not much known in this country, as a “Defence of Leibnitz’s philosophy against M. de Crousaz,” published in 1741, and dedicated to Frederick the Great, king of Prussia; and “Pieces diverses de morale et d'amusement,” published at Paris in 1746. But he became known to all Europe by his “Droit des gens, ou Principes de la Loi Naturelle,” published at Neufchatel in 1758, and translated into most European languages, and often reprinted. We have at least two editions of it in English, under the title of “The Law of Nations; or, principles of the Law of Nature: applied to the conduct and affairs of nations and sovereigns,” 1760, 4to, and 1793, 8vo. What particularlyrecommended this work to the favour of the English, was their finding the opinions of their countrymen generally adopted, and England brought as a proof of a wise and happy constitution. The opinions of Milton and Harrington are frequently confirmed, while the maxims of Puffendorf and Grotius, who often adapted their opinions to the states in which they lived, are refuted with strength and perspicuity. In general Vattel takes Wolff, the celebrated Saxon philosopher, for his guide; but in many places be differs totally from him, and this produced a controversy between them. The points on which they differ may be seen in a publication by Vattel, which appeared in 1762, entitled “Questions sur le Droit Naturel: et Observations sur le Traite du Droit de la Nature de M. le Baron de Wolff.” In the mean time Vattel’s “Law of Nations” became more and more the favourite of men who study such subjects, and has for many years been quoted as a work of high authority, and as in many respects preferable to Grotius and Puffendorf, being more methodical, more comprehensive, and more simple than either.

His book “De Ludicra Dictione,” printed in 1658, was written to oppose a bad taste, which then prevailed in France, when the works of Scarron and Dassouci were very popular; by shewing, that the Greeks and Komans knew nothing of the burlesque style, although Mons. le Clerc is of opinion, that something of it may be found in Aristophanes. He wrote this at the request of Balzac, who had a great dislike to this style; but Balzac died before it was published. As all the authors of antiquity, who have mixed any pleasantries or bon-mots in their writings, were necessarily to be examined in the course of this treatise, Vavassor had an opportunity of shewing very extensive reading. Another of his works, not approved much less than the former, is his book “De Epigrammate,” printed in 1669, and reprinted with his “Epigrams” in 1672, 12mo; in which there are many new and just observations. It however laid the foundation of a dispute between him and Rapin who, in his “Reflections on Aristotle’s poesy,” printed in 1674, after having said, that the epigram, of all the works in verse that antiquity has produced, is the least considerable, adds, “I find nothing considerable to say on those who have attempted any thing in this way among the moderns. It is one of the sorts of verse, in which a man has little success; for, it is a kind of a lucky hit if it proves well. An epigram is little worth unless it be admirable; and, it is so rare to make them admirable, that it is sufficient to have made one in a man’s life. Maynard has succeeded the best in this way of all our French poets.” A man jealous of his reputation, and naturally splenetic, which is said to have been Vavassor’s character, must have been extremely hurt with this; and accordingly the year after, 1675, he published “Remarks upon the Reflections of Rapin,” which had no name to them and, for the sake of abusing him, pretended not to know, while every body else knew very well, who the author of those reflections was. Rapin complained loudly of this ill-treatment; and Vavassor’s book, by way of re* dress, was suppressed by order of the society. Vavassor’s other treatises are chiefly theological.;-*ii his works were collected and printed at Amsterdam, 1709, in folio; with a prefatory discourse by Le Clerc.

, marechal of France, commissioner-general of fortifications, and the greatest engineer which France has produced, was the son of Urban le Prestre, seigneur de Vauban, a descendant of an ancient and noble family of Nivernois. He was born May 1, 1633, and was in the army at the early age of seventeen, where his uncommon talents and genius for fortification soon became known, and were eminently displayed at the sieges of St. Menehould, 1652 and 1653, of Stenay 1654, and of several other places in the following years. He consequently rose to the highest military ranks by his merit and services: and was made governor of the citadel of Lisle in 1668, and commissioner-general of fortifications in 1678. He took Luxemburg in 1684, and, being appointed lieutenant-general in 1688, was present, the same year, at the siege and capture of Philipsburg, Manheim, and Frankendal, under the dauphin. This prince, as a reward for his services, gave him four pieces of cannon, which he was permitted to chuse from the arsenals of these three towns, and place in his castle at Bazoche; an honour afterwards granted to the famous marechal Saxe. M. de Vauban commanded on the coast of Flanders in 1689, and was made marechal of France, Jan. 14, 1703. His dignity was expensive to him, but the king would not permit him to serve as an inferior officer, though he offered it in a very handsome manner. He died at Paris, March 30, 1707, aged seventy-four. He was a man of high and independent spirit, of great humanity, and entirely devoted to the good of his country. As an engineer, he carried the art of fortifying, attacking, and defending towns, to a degree of perfection unknown before his time. He fortified above 300 ancient citadels, erected thirty- three new ones, and had the principal management and direction of fifty-three sieges, and was present at one hundred and forty engagements. But his countrymen tell us that it was unnecessary for him to exert his skill in defending a fort; for the enemies of France never attacked those in which he was stationed. His works are, a treatise entitled “La Dixme Roïale,” 1707, 4to and 12mo, which displays some patriotic principles, but the plan is considered as impracticable. A vast collection of Mss. in 12 vols. which he calls his “Oisivetés,” contain his ideas, reflections, and projects, for the advantage of France. The three following works are also attributed to him, but whether he wrote them, or whether they have been compiled from his Memoirs, and adapted to his ideas, is uncertain: “Maniere de fortifier,” 8vo and 12mo, printed also at Paris by Michalet, 8vo, under the title of “L'Ingéieur François.” M. Hebert, professor of mathematics, and the abbe“du Fay, have written notes on this treatise, which is esteemed, and is said to have been revised by the chevalier de Cambrai, and reprinted at Amsterdam, 1702 and 1727, 2 vols. 4to; 2.” Nouveau Traite de l'Attaque et de la Défense des Places, suivant le Systeme de M. de Vauban, par M. Desprez de Saint Savin,“1736, 8vo, much esteemed; 3.” Essais sur la Fortification, par M. de Vauban,“1740, 12mo. As to the” Political Testament" ascribed to him, it was written by Peter le Pesant, sieur de Boïs Guillebert, lieutenant-general of the bailiwic of Rouen, who died 1714. M. de Vauban’s second cousin, Anthony de Prestre, known by the name of Puy Vauban, was also a very eminent engineer. He died lieutenant-general of the king’s forces, and governor of Bethune, April 10, 1731, aged seventy-seven.

, an elegant French writer, was born of an ancient family at Chamberry in 1585. His father Antoine Favre, or Antony Faber, was first president of the senate of Chamberry, and published several learned works upon law-subjects. (See Favre.) Vaugelas was sent to the court very young, and there spent his whole life. He was gentleman in ordinary, and afterwards chamberlain, to the duke of Orleans, whom he attended in all his retreats out of the kingdom, and was afterwards governor to the children of prince Thomas. He had a pension from the crown early settled on him; but it never was paid him till Cardinal Richelieu employed the French academy upon forming a dictionary of the language. On that occasion the academy represented to the cardinal, that the only way to have one well executed, was to commit the chief management of it to Vaugelas. His pension was then re-established and punctually paid. But, although he had other advantages besides this, and a handsome patrimony from his father, and was not a man of luxury or extravagance, yet when he died in 1605, he did not leave enough to satisfy his creditors.

He was ont- of those who first corrected and refined the French language to an extraordinary degree of purity. He had cultivated it with peculiar care and attention from his infancy, and formed himself chiefly upon Coeffeteati, whose writings he held in such esteem, and, above all, his “Roman History,” that he could hardly allow any phrases or expressions to be pure and genuine but what were to be found in that work: which made Balzac say pleasantly, that, “in the judgment of Vaugelas, salvation was no more to be had out of the Roman History than out of the Roman church.” His principal talent was in prose: for though he wrote some verses in Italian that were admired, yet he could not succeed in his own language. His most important works are, 1. “Remarques sur la Langue Franchise, Paris, 1647,” in 4to. Mr. de la Monnoye has observed of the preface to this excellent treatise, that it is a masterpiece of elegance and solidity. 2. “Quint.-Curce de la vie & des actions d'Alexandre le Grand, traduit du Latin, Paris, 1653,” in 4to. Vaugelas spent thirty years in translating this author, perpetually altering and correcting it, as it was his principal object to make it a model of the purest style. Voiture, who was the intimate friend of Vaugelas, used to rally him on this fastidious nicety and long delay, and told him that it could never be finished; for that, while he was polishing one part, the language must needs undergo some revolution, and he would have all the rest to do over again: and he applied to him Martial’s epigram upon the barber, who was so long in shaving one part of the face, that the beard in the mean time grew again upon the other. It is allowed, however, that the French language owes much to Vaugelas, and Voltaire says his translation of Quintus Curtius was the first good book written with purity; and that there are few of the expressions and terms that are yet become obsolete.

, an English poet and translator, called the Silurist, from being a native of that part of Wales whose ancient inhabitants were called Silures, was born, in 1621, at Newton St. Bridget, in Brecknockshir. After being educated at home under Matthew Herbert, an able grammar- master, he was entered of Jesus college, Oxford, in 1638, but after two years residence, he departed without taking a degree, his father wishing him to study law in London. On the breaking out of the rebellion he was sent for home, and followed, as Wood says, “the pleasant paths of poetry and philology,” but afterwards studied and practised physic with reputation. He was, adds Wood, “esteemed by scholars an ingenious person, but proud and humorous.” He died in April 1695, and was buried in the parish church of Llansenfreid near Brecknock. His poetical works are, 1. “Olor Iscanus, a collection of some select poems,” Lond. 1650, 8vo. 2. “Silex scintillans, or the Bleeding Heart, sacred poems and private ejaculations,” 1650, 1655, 12mo. 3. “The Mount of Olives: or. Solitary Devotions,” 1652, 8vo. 4. “Thalia Rediviva,” poems, which Wood says were ready for the press in 1673, but knows not whether they were printed. Mr. Ellis has given a few specimens from Vaughan’s poetry, but without being able to applaud it much. He translated some parts of Plutarch’s Morals, which were printed in a second edition of his “Olor Iscanus;” Anselm’s “Blessed state of Man;” Guevara “On the praise and happiness of the Country Life;” the “Life of Paulinus bishop of Nola,” and a few other articles mentioned by Wood.

Henry Vaughan had a twin-brother, Thomas Vaughan, who styles himself in his strange writings, Eugenius Philalethes. He also came to Jesus college at the same time with his brother, but remained longer, and took one degree in arts, and was made fellow. He then entered into holy orders, and was made rector of St. Bridget, near Brecknock, a living conferred upon him by his kinsman, sir George Vaughan. But being interrupted in the quiet possession of this by the commotions of the times, he returned to Oxford, and distinguished himself for extravagant admiration of Cornelius Agrippa, and for many publications of the alchymical kind, replete with the grossest absurdities. Among these are his “Anthroposophia Theomagica,” dedicated to his brethren the Rosicrucians, Lond. 1650, 8vo, and his “Anima magica abscondita.” Dr, Henry More, on whom he had reflected, did him the honour to answer these publications in some “Observations” published the same year under the name of Alazonomastix Philalethes, and as he had made rather free with Vaughan, according to the controversial spirit of the times, and called him a Momus, a mimic, an ape, a fool in a play, a jackpudding, &c. Vaughan answered him in a work with a suitable title, “The Man-Mouse taken in a trap, and tortured to death for gnawing the margins of Eugenius Philalethes.” Mure again replied, but was afterwards ashamed of the controversy, and suppressed it in the edition of his collected works. Wood mentions other works, on magic, by Vaughan, the titles of which we may be excused transcribing. He is said to have died in consequence of some experiment with mercury, Feb. 27, 1665-6, and was buried in Oidbury church, Oxfordshire, at the expence of his friend and fellow Rosicrucian, sir Robert Moray, or Murray, of whom we have given an account in vol. XXII.

, a Latin poet and moral writer, was the son of Walter Vaughan, of the Golden Grove, in Carmarthenshire, esq. and younger brother to sir John Vaughan, first earl of Carbery, and patron of bishop Jeremy Taylor. He was born at Golden Grove in 1577, and became a commoner of Jesus college, Oxford, in 1591, where he took his degrees in arts. The fruits of his scholastic attainments began to appear uncommonly early, as he was only in his fifteenth year when he prepared for printing an easy paraphrase of Persius in English and Latin; and his publications which appeared in 1597 and 1598 bespeak a prematurity of genius. After taking his degrees in arts, he applied to the study of the law, but before he proceeded in that faculty, set out on his travels, and at Vienna performed the necessary exercises for a doctor’s degree, in which he was incorporated at Oxford in 1605. He afterwards appears to have meditated a settlement in Cambriol, Newfoundland, where he was living in 1628, but the time of his death is not mentioned. His Latin poems are, 1. the “Song of Solomon, and some of the Psalms,” translated, Lond. 1597. 2. “Varia Poemata de Sphaerarum online,” 1589, 8vo. 3. “Poemata continent. Encom. Roberti Comitis Essex,” 1598, 8vo. 4. “Cambrensium Caroleia,” &c. a poem on the nuptials of Charles I. 1625 or 1630, 8vo. His English works are, “The Golden Grove, moralized in three books,” 1608, 8vo, which seems to have suggested to bishop Taylor the title of one of his most popular works; and “The Golden Fleece,” 1626, 4to: both works of the moral kind, and replete with observations on the manners of the times, and the principal personages. A particular account of both is given in the “Bibliographer,” vol. II. by which it appears that Vaughan had translated a part of Boccalini’s Advices from Parnassus, and had published “Circles called the Spirit of Detraction, conjured and convicted,” and “Commentaries upon, and paraphrase of, Juvenal and Persius,” all in early life.

As a poet, he has long been deprived of his merit by his pieces having been attributed to his father, Nicholas lord Vaux, an error which Dr. Percy first detected, and the title of Thomas lord Vaux seems now indisputable. The largest collection of his poetry is in the “Paradise of dainty Devises,” lately reprinted in the “Bibliographer;” and Dr. Percy and Mr. Ellis have printed “The Assault of Cupid,” and the “Dyttye, or sonet made by the lorde Vaus in time of the noble queeneMarye, representinge the image of Deathe;” but the popular notion of lord Vaux’s having composed this last on his death-bed, seems unfounded. From the prose prologue to Sackville’s “Induction,” in the “Mirror for Magistrates,” it would seem that lord Vaux had undertaken to pen the history of king Edward’s two sons cruelly murdered in the Tower of London; but what he performed of his undertaking does not appear. Lord Vaux, as a poet, is more distinguished by morality of sentiment than by imagery; yet even in the latter, his two celebrated poems of “The Assault of Cupid,” and the “Aged Lover’s renunciation of Love,” are far from deficient and the sweet and touching simplicity of the ideas, and the airy ease of the language, entitle them to high commendation.

, or Lope-Felix de Vega Carpio, a celebrated Spanish poet, was born at Madrid, Nov. 25, 1562. He informs us that his father was a poet, but what he was besides, or the time of his death, is not known. It appears that he was an orphan when at school, about thirteen or fourteen years old, and was then impelled by so restless a desire of seeing the world, that he resolved to escape; and having concerted his project with a schoolfellow, they actually put it in execution, but were soon brought back to Madrid. Before this time, according to his own account, he had not only written verses, but composed dramas in four acts, which, as he tells us, was then the custom. Upon his return to Madrid, however, he abandoned this mode of composition, and ingratiated himself with the bishop of Avila by several pastorals, and a comedy in three acts, called “La Pastoral de Jacinto,” which is said to have formed an epoch in the annals of the theatre, and a prelude to the reform which Lope was destined to introduce.

He seldom passed a year without giving some poem to the press; and scarcely a month, or even a week, without producing some play upon the stage. His “Pastores de Belen,” a work in prose and verse on the Nativity, bad confirmed his superiority in pastoral poems; and rhymes, hymns, and poems without number on sacred subjects, had evinced his zeal in the profession he embraced. Philip IV. the great patron of the Spanish theatre, to which he afterwards is said to have contributed compositions of his own, at the aera of his accession, found Lope in full possession of the stage, and in the exercise of unlimited authority over the authors, comedians, and audience. New honours and benefices were immediately heaped on our poet, and in all probability he wrote occasionally plays for the royal palace. He published about the same time “Los Triumpbos de la F6” “Los Fortunas de Diana;” three novels in prose (unsuccessful imitations of Cervantes); “Circe,” an heroic poem, dedicated to the count duke of Olivarez and “Philomena,” a singular, but tiresome, allegory, in the second book of which he vindicates himself in the person of the nightingale from the accusation of his critics, who are there represented by the thrush.

Such was his reputation that he began to distrust the sincerity of the public, and seems to have suspected that there was more fashion than real opinion in the extravagance of their applause. This engaged him in a dangerous experiment, the publication of a poem without his name. But whether the number of his productions had gradually formed the public taste to his own standard of excellence, or that his fertile and irregular genius was singularly adapted to the times, the result of this trial confirmed the former judgment of the public; and his “Soliloquies to God,” though printed under a feigned name, attracted as much notice, and secured as many admirers, as any of his former productions. Emholdened probably by this success, he dedicated his “Corona Tragica,” a poem on the queen of Scots, to pope Urban VIII, who had himself composed an epigram on the subject. Upon this occasion he received from that pontiff a letter written in his own hand, and the degree of doctor of theology. Such a flattering tribute of admiration sanctioned the reverence in which his name was held in Spain, and spread his fame through every catholic country. The cardinal Barberini followed him with veneration in the streets; the king would stop to gaze at such a prodigy; the people crowded round him whereever he appeared; the learned and the studious thronged to Madrid from every part of Spain to see this phoenix of their country, this “monster of literature;” and even Italians, no extravagant admirers in general of poetry that is not their own, made pilgrimages from their country for the sole purpose of conversing with Lope. So associated was the idea of excellence with his name, that it grew in common conversation to signify any thing perfect in its kind; and a Lope diamond, a Lope day, or a Lope woman, became fashionable and familiar modes of expressing their good qualities.

The sensation produced by his death was, if possible, more astonishing than the reverence in which he was held while living. The splendour of his funeral, which was conducted at the charge of the most munificent of his patrons, the duke of Sesa, the number and language of the sermons on that occasion, the competition of poets of all countries in celebrating his genius and lamenting his loss, are unparalleled in the annals of poetry, and perhaps scarcel) equalled in those of royalty itself. The ceremonies attending his interment continued for nine days. His biographers, however, have been less careful to convey a just idea of this extraordinary man to posterity, and there is little in them that can throw any light upon his character as a man, or his history as an author. His intimate friend Montalvan praises him in general as a person of a mild and amiable disposition, of very temperate habits, of great erudition, singular charity, and extreme good breeding. His temper, he adds, was never ruffled but with those who took snuff before company; with the grey who dyed their locks; with men who, born of women, spoke ill of the sex; with priests who believed in gypsies; and with persons who, without intentions of marriage, asked others their age. These antipathies, which are rather quaint sallies of wit, than traits of character, are the only peculiarities which his intimate friend has t' >ught proper to communicate. We have already noticed his unreasonable complaints of illusage, neglect, and even poverty, which appear to have constituted the greatest blemish in his character. As an author, he is most known, as indeed he is most wonderful, for the prodigious number of his writings. Twenty-one million three hundred thousand of his lines are said to he actually printed; and no less than eighteen hundred plays of his composition to have been acted on the stage. Lord Holland has calculated that according to these accounts, allowing him to begin his compositions at the age of thirteen, we must believe that upon an average he wrote more than nine hundred lines a day; a fertility of imagination, and a celerity of pen, which, when we “consider the occupations of his life as a soldier, a secretary, a master of a family, and a priest; his acquirements in Latin, Italian, and Portuguese; and his reputation for erudition, become not only improhable, but absolutely* and, one may almost say, physically impossible. Yet although there does not now exist the fourth part of the works which he and his admirers mention, enough remains to render him one of the most voluminous authors that ever put pen to paper. Such was his facility, that he informs us himself, that more than an hundred times he composed a play and produced it on the stage in twentyfour hours. To this evidence we may add tins of Montalvan, that he wrote a comedy in two days, which it would not be very easy for the most expeditious amanuensis to copy out in the time. At Toledo he wrote fifteen acts in fifteen days, which, Montalvan adds, make five comedies. He also asserts that Lope wrote 1800 plays and 400 autos sacramentales, a species of dramatic composition” resembling' our old mysteries. That in all this there must be some exaggeration, cannot be doubted.

, an ancient Latin writer, lived in the fourth century, under the reign of Valentinian, to whom he dedicates a work, entitled “Epitome iflstitutorum rei militaris.” This is a compilation from many authors: yet the subject is treated with much method and exactness, and the Latinity, all things considered, exceedingly pure. Of the author little is known; he probably was a military man, and has the title of Conies. His work was first published without date or place, supposed at Utrecht, about 1473. The best editions since, are that of Schwebelius, 1767, 4to of Valart, Paris, 1762; and of Strasburgh, 1806, 8vo. It was also published, with other writers upon “Tactics,” Frontinus, Ælian, and Mnezs, at Leyden, 1644, in 12mo; and afterwards “Vesaliae Clivorum,” 1670, 8vo. There are also extant, under Vegetius’s name, if indeed the same Vegetius, of which Fabricius doubts, “Artis Veterinarise sive Mulomedidnae libri quatuor,” Basil, 1524, 4to; and afterwards, 1574, 4to.

, or Mapheus Veqids, a Latin poet of the fifteenth century, was born at Lodi in 1406. He studied law, in compliance with his father, but had a stronger predilection for poetry. He made, however, such proficiency as to be successively chosen professor of both in the university of Pavia. He went afterwards to Rome, and was secretary of the briefs under the popes Eugenius IV. Nicholas V. and Pius II. and died there in 1458. He wrote a great many works in prose, as “Dialogues de miseria et felicitate,” “Disputatio inter solem, terrain et aurum,” and others of the ascetic kind, ali inserted in the Library of the fathers. Dupin and other writers of the Romish church, bestow the highest commendations on one of his treatises “De educatione liberorum,” in which he borrows much from St. Augustine. Such was his enthusiasm for this saint, that he built a chapel in his church at Rome on the right hand of the great altar, and having caused the bones of St. Augustine, and of St. Monica his mother, to be placed in a very fine shrine, he removed them from Ostia to that chapel. He wrote a poem on the death of Astyanax, four books on the expedition of the Argonauts, four on the life of St. Antony, and other poems, in which there is more of copiousness than force, and more of ease than elegance. But his supplement to Virgil is his most remarkable effort. Fancying that the Æneid was imperfect, and wanted a denouement, he wrote a thirteenth book, which has been printed in some editions of Virgil, and even translated into Italian and French. In English we have likewise a translation, published in 1758, but it is of the burlesque kind, in imitation of Cotton.

, or Venantius Honorius Clementianus Fortunatus, a Christian poet of the sixth century, was a native of Italy, and studied at Ravenna. He applied himself to grammar, rhetoric, poetry, and jurisprudence, but was most attached to rhetoric and poetry, and was honoured by Hilduinus, the abbot of St. Denis, with the title of Scholasticissimus. It sems uncertain what was the cause of his leaving Italy for France, but the step was peculiarly fortunate for him, as his poetical genius procured him the most honourable reception. Princes, bishops, and persons of the highest ranks, became eager to confer on him marks of their esteem. He arrived in France during the reign of Sigebert, king of Austrasia, who received him with great respect. This being about the time of the king’s marriage with Brunehaut, in the year 566, Venantius composed an epithaiamium, in which he celebrated the graces and perfections of the new queen. It is also said, that he gave the king lectures on politics. The following year he went to Tours to perform a vow to St. Martin, whose image had cured him of a complaint in his eyes. He then went to Poictiers, and was invited by St. Radegonda, the foundress of a monastery there, to reside in the capacity of her secretary; and afterwards, when he became a priest, she appointed him her chaplain and almoner. He resided here for some years, employing his time in study and writing, and edifying the church as much by his example as by his works. He was much esteemed by Gregory of Tours and other prelates, and was at last himself raised to be bishop of Poictiers, which dignity, it is said, he did not long enjoy. He died about the commencement of the seventh century, some say in the year 609. His works consist of eleven books of poetry, mostly of the elegiac kind, and generally short: hymns adapted to the services of the church: epitaphs, letters to several bishops, and some to Gregory of Tours: courtly verses addressed to queen Radegonda, and her sister Agnes, usually sent with presents of flowers, fruit, &c. four books of the “Life of St. Martin,” in heroic verse: several lives of the saints. Editions of his works were published at Cagliari in 1573, 1574, and 1584, and at Cologne in 1600: but all these are said to be incomplete and incorrect, yet they shew the respect paid to him as the best Latin poet of his time. In 1603 Christopher Brower, a German Jesuit, produced a very correct edition, with notes, printed at Fulda, and reprinted at Mentz, in 1617, 4to; but this contains only his poems. His other works are in the “Bibliotheca Patrum,” of Lyons, 1677. The most complete edition is that of Rome, published under the title of “Venantii opera omnia quae extant, post Browerianam editionetn mine recens novis addiiamentis aucta, not. et scholiis illustr. opera Mich-Ange Luchi,” 1786—87, 2 vols. 4to.

, or Agostino de Musis, a very eminent engraver, was a native of Venice, and was the scholar of the celebrated Marc Antonio Raimondi. It is not certain at what period he began his studies under that great master, but the first dated print by Agostino appeared in 1509, at which time, it is probable, his tutor still resided at Venice. After the death of Raphael, which happened in 1520, Veneziano and Marc de Ravenna, his fellow- pupil, who had conjointly assisted each other, separated, and worked entirely upon their own account. When the city of Rome was taken and sacked by the Spaniards in 1527, Veneziano retired to Florence, and applied for employment to Andrea del Sarto, who was then in high repute; but del Sarto, dissatisfied with the dead Christ which he had engraved in 1516, after his design, refused to permit him to engrave any more of his pictures. Veneziano afterwards returned to Rome, where he followed his professional pursuits with great success, and where he died some time about 1540.

Mr. Venn was remarkably cheerful and facetious in conversation, so that piety, as recommended by him, was pleasant and alluring; and the young and the careless were often struck, in his company, with admiration at this circumstance. His works were, 1. “The Perfect Contrast, or the entire opposition of Popery to the Religion of Jesus the Son of God; a sermon preached at Clapham, November 5, 1758,” 8vo. A second edition was printed in 1778. 2. “Sermons on various subjects,” 1759, 8vo. 3. “The Variance between real and nominal Christians considered, and the cause of it explained,” a sermon, 1759, 8vo. 4. “The Duty of a parish priest,” a sermon preached at WakefieM, July 2, 1760, 8vo. 5. “Christ the joy of the Christian life, and death his gain,” a sermon preached at Haworth, on the death of William Grimshaw, minister of that parish, 1763, 8vo. 6. “The Complete Duty of Man, or a System of Doctrinal and Practical Christianity. Designed for the use of families,” 1764, 8vo. 7. “Man a condemned sinner, and Christ the strong hold to save him,” an assize sermon, 1769, 8vo. 8. “A full and free Examination of the rev. Dr. Priestley’s Address on the Lord’s Supper, with some siricrures on the treatise itself,” 1769, 8vo. 9. “A token of respect to the Memory of the rev. Mr. Whitfield,” preached at the countess of Huntingdon’s, Bath, 1770, 8vo. Jo. “Mistakes in religion exposed, in an essay on the Prophecy of Zachariah,” 1774, 8vo. 11. “The Conversion of Sinners the greatest charity: a sermon preached before the Society for promoting religions knowledge,” 1779, 8vo.

, a physician of the seventeenth century, was born of genteel parents at Petherton, near Bridgewater, in Somersetshire, in 1577, and in 1594 became a commoner of St. Alban’s-hall, Oxford. After taking a degree in arts, he studied physic, and practised for a time about Oxford. In 1613, he took his doctor’s degree, and returning to his own country, practised for many years at Bridgewater; but afterwards, at or near Bath. He was highly esteemed in that part of the country for skill in his profession, and maintained the character of an upright and charitable person. He died March 27, 1660, and was buried in St. Peter’s church in Bath, where a monument with a large inscription, by Dr. Pierce of that city, was erected to his memory.

, a nonconformist divine, was born about 1620, and educated in Emmanuel college, Cambridge. He does not appear to have had any preferment in the church, except the lectureship of St. Olave’s, Southwark, from which he was ejected for nonconformity in 1662. After this he preached at a dissenting meeting at Pewterers’-hall, Lime-street, as colleague to a Mr. Bragge, who outlived him and preached his funeral sermon. As Mr. Venning was a man of no faction himself, men of different factions and sects were generally disposed to do justice to his character, which was that of a man, the object of whose labours and writings was to promote piety. He was, in his charity sermons, a powerful advocate for the poor, among whom he distributed annually some hundreds of pounds. His oratory on this topic is said to have been almost irresistible; as some have gone to church with a resolution not to give, and have been insensibly and involuntarily melted into compassion, and bestowed their alms with uncommon liberality. He died March 10, 1673. He was the author of nine practical treatises, specified by Calamy, among which the principal are, 1. “Orthodox and Miscellaneous Paradoxes,” 1647, 12mo. 2. “Things worth thinking on, or helps to piety,” 12mo, often reprinted. 3. “His Remains,” with a portrait by Hollar," &c. He was also one of the compilers of the English-Greek Lexicon published in 1661, 8vo.

, one of the most prolific authors in the French series, deserves some notice as having been often mistaken for Claude Du Verdier, and even for Antony, who was dead long before this Gilbert was born. It is not known to what part of France he belonged. It appears that he was historiographer of France, and that after all his numerous publications, he was obliged in 1676 to apply for an asylum, for himself and his wife, in the hospital of Salpetriere, where he died in 1636. Bayle has a very superficial article on him. Joly allows him to have been the author of the historical works attributed to him, but doubts whether the romances under the name of Duverdier are not by another hand, and his reason is, that it is difficult to conceive a man’s continuing to write and publish for the long space of sixty years. This, however, is not absolutely decisive. Thirteen historical works are ascribed to Duverdier, all published in 12mo, in one, two, or more volumes each, consisting of histories of France, Turkey, Spain, England, Rome, and some lives. His romances amount to fourteen, but seem to be quite forgotten in his own country, and will not easily be revived in this by any list we can give. Some of them seem to be translations.