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

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

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

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

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

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

Wood has given us the following catalogue of his works: 1. “A Conference dialogue-wise held between the lady Jane Dudley and Mr. John Feckenham, four days before her death, touching her faith and belief of the sacrament, and her religion, 1554.” In April 1554, he had been sent by the queen to this lady to commune with her, and to reduce her from the doctrine of Christ to queen Mary’s religion, as Fox expresses it. The substance of this conference may be seen also in Fox’s “Acts and Monuments of Martyrs.” 2. “Speech in the house of lords, 1553.” 5. “Two Homilies on the first, second, and third articles of the Creed.” 4. “Oratio funebris in exequiis ducissae Parmse,” &c. that is, “A funeral oration on the Death of the duchess of Parma, daughter of Charles V. and governess of the Netherlands.” 5. “Sermon at the exequy of Joan queen of Spain, 1555.” 6. The declaration of such scruples and staies of conscience, touching the Oath of Supremacy, delivered by writing to Dr. Home, bishop of Winchester, 1566.“7.” Objections or Assertions made against Mr. John Cough’s Sermon, preached in the Tower of London, Jan. 15, 1570.“8.” Caveat emptor:“which seems to have been a caution against buying abbey-lands. He had also written,” Commentaries on the Psalms,“and a” Treatise on the Eucharist,“which were lost among other things. Thus far Wood: but another author mentions, 9.” A Sermon on the Funeral of queen Mary, on “Ecclesiastes iv. 2.”

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

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

His chief works are, 1. “Entretiens sur les Vies et sur les Ouvrages des plus excellens Peintres anciens et modernes:” 1666 1688, 5 vols. 4to. 2. “Les Principes de l'Architecture, de la Sculpture, et de la Peinture, avec un dictionaire des termes propres de ces artes,” 1676, and 1691, 4to. 3. “De l'origi.ne de la Peinture, avec plusieurs pieces detachers,” 1660. 4. “Several Descriptions, as that of Versailles, of Entertainments given by the king, and of several Pictures,” collected into one vol. in 12mo., 5 “The Conferences of the royal academy of painting,” in one vol. 4to. 6. “The Description of the Abbey de la Trappe,” in 12mo. He also left some translations: viz. “An Account of what passed in Spain, when the count duke of Olivares fell under the king’s displeasure,” translated out of Italian “The Castle of the Soul,” written by St. Teresa, translated from the Spanish “The Life of pope Pius V.” translated from the Italian.

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

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

, a native of Venice, who flourished about the middle of the sixteenth century, established a great reputation at that time by his translations from Greek authors, a task which few, comparatively, were then able to perform. He translated, among others, the sixth book of Paul ^gineta, 1533 Aristotle’s Ethics, Venice, 1541, fol.; “Alexandri Aphrodisiensis Commentarius in primum priorum Analyticbrum Aristotelis,” ibid. 1542, fol. “Ammonii Hermeae Comment, in Isagogen Porphyrii,” ibid. 1545, 8vo “Porphyrius de abstinentia animalium,” ibid. 1547, 4to and “Oecumenius in Acta et Epistolas Catholicas,” Basil, 1552, 8vo. We have no account of his life or death, but he appears to have been a priest of the Benedictine order, and esteemed for his learning.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Fenton’s principal reputation as a poet rests on his “Mariamne,” and his share in the Odyssey; but his “Miscellaneous Poems,” printed in 1717, have procured him a place among the English Poets in Dr. Johnson’s collection, who has, upon the whole, a less favourable opinion of them than Dr. Warton, yet he allows him the praise of an excellent versifier and a good poet.

, a learned Spaniard, considered as a prodigy in the fifteenth century, may be termed the Crichton of Spain, whom he resembled in the marvellous and universal knowledge attributed to him. He was well skilled in languages and the sciences; understood the Bible, the works of Nicholas Lyranus, St. Thomas, St. Bonaventura, Alexander Ales, and Scotus; with those of Aristotle, Hippocrates, Galen, Avicenna, and several law authors. He was also a brave soldier, played on several instruments, was admired for his singing and dancing, and equalled any artist of Paris in painting. It is said that he foretold the death of Charles the Rash, duke of Burgundy, and in 1445, was the admiration of all the learned at Paris. Commentaries on Ptolemy’s Almagest, and on the Apocalypse, are ascribed to him, and a treatise “De Artificio omnis scibilis,” and other works.

, a physician of Messagna, in the territory of Otranto, where he was born, October, or according to Niceron, Nov. 2, 1569, cultivated the study of the Latin and Greek poets at an early age, and wrote elegant verses in both these languages. In 1583 he went to Naples with the intention of going through the courses of philosophy and medicine; but in 1591, all strangers were compelled to leave the place. Ferdinand, returning to his own country, taught geometry and philosophy until 1594) when the viceroy’s edict being revoked, he returned to Naples, pursued a course of medical studies, and receired the degree of doctor in medicine and philosophy. He then repaired to his native place, where he settled himself in practice, and remained to the end of his life, notwithstanding the tempting offers he received from several seats of learning. The duke of Parma, in particular, pressed him to take the professorship of medicine in the university of his city; and the same invitation, was given from the university of Padua. In 1605, he was chosen syndic-general of his country, and acquitted himself with great credit in that office. He died Dec. 6, 1638, in the sixty-ninth year of his age.

This physician composed a considerable number of treatises, but only the four following are known, as having been printed: 1. “Theoremata Medica et Philosophica,” Venice, 1611. 2. “De vita proroganda, seu juventute conservanda et senectute retardanda,” Naples, 1612. f5. “Centum Historiae, seu Observationes et Casus Medici,” Venice, 1621 a treatise which relates to most of the diseases of the body, and is distinguished by considerable erudition. It has been several times reprinted in Germany and Holland. 4. “Aureus de Peste Libellus,” Naples, 1631.

, a celebrated Persian poet, and, according to sir William Jones, at the head of all Persian poets, was a native of Tus or Meshed. He was originally a peasant, but his talents procuring him distinction, he was admitted to the court of the sultan Mahmud, who reigned in the city of Gazna, at the close of the tenth and the beginning of the eleventh centuries, and entertained several poets in his palace. Ferdusi, happening to find a copy of an old Persian history, read it with great eagerness, and found it involved in fables, but bearing the marks of high antiquity. The most ancient part of it, and principally the war of Afrasiab and Kosru, or Cyrus, seemed to afford an excellent subject for an heroic poem, which he accordingly began to compose. Some of his episodes and descriptions were shewn to the sultan, who commended them exceedingly, and ordered him to comprize the whole history of Persia in a series of epic poems. The poet obeyed, and after the happiest exertion of his fancy and art for near“thirty years, finished his work, which contained sixty thousand couplets in rhyme, all highly polished, with the spirit of our Dryden, and the sweetness of Pope. He presented an elegant transcript of his hook to Mahmud, who coldly applauded his diligence, and dismissed him. Many months elapsed, and Ferdusi heard no more of his work: he then took occasion to remind the king of it by some little epigrams, which he contrived to let fall in the palace; but, says sir William Jones,” where an epic poem had failed, what effect could be expected from an epigram“At length the reward came, which consisted only of as many small pieces of money, as there were couplets in the volume. The high-minded poet could not brook this insult; he retired to his closet with bitterness in his heart, where he wrote a most noble and animated invective against the sultan, which he sealed up, and delivered to a courtier, who, as he had reason to suspect, was his greatest enemy, assuring him that it was” a diverting tale,“and requesting him to give it to Mahmud,” when any affair of state or bad success in war should make him more uneasy and splenetic than usual." Having thus given vent to his indignation, he left Gazna in the night, and took refuge in Bagdad, where the calif protected him from the sultan Mahmud, who demanded him in a furious and menacing letter. Ferdusi is supposed to have died in the 411th year of the Hegira, or A. D. 1020.

The work of Ferdusi remains entire, a glorious monument of eastern genius and learning; which, if ever it should be understood in its original language, will contest the merit of invention with Homer himself, whatever be thought of its subject, or the arrangement of the incidents. The whole collection of his works is called “Shahnama,” and contains the history of Persia, from the earliest times to the invasion of the Arabs, in a series of very noble poems; the longest and most regular of which is an heroic poem of one great and interesting action, namely the delivery of Persia by Cyrus from the oppressions of Afrasiab, king of the Transoxan Tartary, who, being assisted by the emperors of India and China, had carried his conquests very far, and had become exceeding formidable to the Persians. The poem is longer than the Iliad the characters in it are various and striking the figures bold and animated; and the diction every where sonorous, yet noble; polished, yet full of fire. Of Ferdusi’s satire against the sultan, there is a translation in a “Treatise on Oriental Poetry,” added to the Life of Nader-Shah in French. Sir William Jones said it is not unlike the XagiTts of Theocritus, who, like the impetuous Ferdusi, had dared to expose the vices of a low-minded king.

, a German artist, born at Vienna in 1689, had different masters. He quitted Vienna in 1718, and exercised his art with success at Bamberg, went from thence to Dresden, in company with Alexander Thiele, in whose landscapes he inserted the figures and animals. He also passed over to England, where he married, became involved in his circumstances, and, according to report, was found dead at the door of his lodgings, apparently exhausted by cold, want, and misery, in 1740. The style and subjects of this painter resemble those of Berghem and Wouwermans. The ruins which adorn his landscapes are selected in a grand taste, and often executed with a finish that discriminates the rougher surface of hewn stone from the polished one of marble. He combined with great force of colour great truth of imitation. He etched well in aqua fortis, and his prints are eagerly sought for by the curious.

, an eminent experimental philosopher, mechanist, and astronomer, was born in Bamffshire, in Scotland, 1710, of very poor parents. At the very earliest age his extraordinary genius began to unfold itself. He first learned to read, by overhearing his father teach his elder brother: and he had made this acquisition before any one suspected it. He soon discovered a peculiar taste for mechanics, which first arose on seeing his father use a lever. He pursued this study a considerable length, while he was yet very young; and made a watch in wood-work, from having once seen one. As he ha'd at first no instructor, nor any help from books, every thing he learned had all the merit of an original discovery; and such, with inexpressible joy, he believed it to be.

As soon as his age would permit, he went to service; in which he met with hardships, which rendered his constitution feeble through life. While he was servant to a farmer (whose goodness he acknowledges in the modest and humble account of himself which he prefixed to his “Mechanical Exercises”), he contemplated and learned to know the stars, while he tended the sheep and began the study of astronomy, by laying down, from his own observations only, a celestial globe. His kind master, observing these marks of his ingenuity, procured him the countenance and assistance of some neighbouring gentlemen. By their help and instructions he went on gaining farther knowledge, having by their means been taught arithmetic, with some algebra, and practical geometry. He had got some notion of drawing, and being sent to Edinburgh, he there began to take portraits in miniature, at a small price; an employment by which he supported himself and family for several years, both in Scotland and England, while he was pursuing more serious studies. In London he first published some curious astronomical tables and calculations; and afterwards gave public lectures in experimental philosophy, both in London and most of the country towns in England, with the highest marks of general approbation. He was elected a fellow of the royal society, and was excused the payment of the admission fee, and the usual annual contributions. He enjoyed from the king a pension of fifty pounds a year, besides other occasional presents, which he privately accepted and received from different quarters, till the time of his death; by which, and the fruits of his own labours, he left behind him a sum to the amount of about six thousand pounds, although all his friends had always entertained an idea of his great poverty. He died in 1776, at sixty-six years of age, though he had the appearance of many more years.

Mr. Ferguson must be allowed to have been a very uncommon genius, especially in mechanical contrivances and executions, for he executed many machines himself in a very neat manner. He had also a good taste in astronomy, with natural and experimental philosophy, and was possessed of a happy manner of explaining himself in an easy, clear, and familiar way. His general mathematical knowledge, however, was little or nothing. Of algebra he understood but little more than the notation; and he has often told Dr. Hutton he could never demonstrate one proposition in Euclid’s Elements; his constant method being to satisfy himself, as to the truth of any problem, with a measurement by scale and compasses. He was a man of a very clear judgment in any thing that he professed, and of unwearied application to study benevolent, meek, and innocent in his manners as a child humble, courteous, and communicative instead of pedantry, philosophy seemed to produce in him only diffidence and urbanity.

The list of Mni ^Ferguson’s public works, is as follows: 1. “Astronomical Tables and Precepts, for calculating' the true times of New and Full Moons, &c.” 1763. 2. “Tables and Tracts, relative to several arts and sciences,” 1767. 3. “An easy Introduction to Astronomy, for young gentlemen and ladies,” second edit. 1769. 4. “Astronomy x explained upon sir Isaac Newton’s principles,” fifth edit. 1772. 5. “Lectures on select subjects in Mechanics, Hydrostatics, Pneumatics, and Optics,” fourth edit. 1772. 6. “Select Mechanical Exercises, with a short account of the life of the author, by himself,” 1773, a narrative highly interesting and amusing. 7. “The Art of Drawing in Perspective made easy,” 1775. 8. “An Introduction to Electricity,” 1775. 9, “Two Letters to the Rev. Mr. John Kennedy,” 1775. It). “A Third Letter to the Rev. Mr. John Kennedy,” 1775. He communicated also several papers to the Royal Society, which were printed in their Transactions. In 1805, a very valuable edition of his Lectures was published at Edinburgh by Dr. Brewster, in 2 /vols. 8vo, with notes and an appendix, the whole adapted to the present state of the arts and sciences.

, who at an early period of life obtained a considerable degree of celebrity as a Scotch poet, was born at Edinburgh Sept. 5, 1750, or 1751, and was educated partly in his native city, and partly at Dundee, from whence he was sent to the university of St. Andrew’s, where his diligent application, and probably his turn for poetry, obtained him the patronage of Dr. Wilkie, himself a poet, and author of the “Epigoniad,” but some gross irregularities having procured him to be expelled, he returned to Edinburgh, without resolving on any permanent employment. Having an opulent relation, he visited him in hopes, by his interest, to procure some sinecure place, but at the end of six months, this relation ordered him abruptly to leave his house, and Fergusson returned to Edinburgh, stung with indignation; and as soon as he recovered from a severe illness, brought on by disappointment and the fatigue of his journey, he composed two elegies, one on “The Decay of Friendship,” and the other “Against repining at Fortune.” He was now so destitute, that he submitted to copy papers in a public office, but not liking the employment, and quarrelling with his employer, he soon left the office in disgust.

Hitherto he had lived rather in obscurity; and happy had it been for him, if he had been suffered to remain in that obscurity; but, possessing an inexhaustible fund of wit and good nature, he was viewed with affection by all to whom he was known; and his powers of song, and almost unrivalled talent for mimicry, led him oftener into the company of those who wished for him merely to enliven a social hour, than of such as by their virtue were inclined, or by their influence were able, to procure him a competent settlement for life. The consequence of this was great laxity of manners, and much of his life was disgraced by actions which, in his cooler moments, he reflected on with abhorrence. His conscience indeed was frequently roused, and once so powerfully that all his vivacity forsook him. From this state of gloom, however, he gradually recovered, and, except that a settled melancholy was visible in his countenance, had apparently recovered his health, when one evening befell, and received a violent contusion on the head, which was followed by a delirium that rendered it necessary for his friends to remove him to the lunatic hospital of Edinburgh, where, after two months’ confinement, he died Oct. 16, 1774. He was interred in the Canongate church-yard, where his friends erected a monument to his memory that was afterwards removed to make way for a ipore elegant monument, by his enthusiastic admirer Robert Burns, who resembled him in too many features. Most of Fergusson’s poems were originally published in the “Weekly Magazine,” but have since been collected in a volume, and often printed. The subjects of them are sometimes uncommon, and generally local or temporary. They are of course very unequal. Those in the English language are scarcely above mediocrity; but those in the Scottish dialect have been universally admired by his countrymen; and when it is considered that they were composed amidst a round of dissipation, they may be allowed to furnish complete evidence of his genius and taste.

, a very celebrated French mathematician, though by profession a lawyer, was considered by the writers of his own country as having rendered no less service to mathematical science than Descartes, and as having even prepared the way for the doctrine of infinites, afterwards discovered by Newton and Leibnitz. He was not only the restorer of the ancient geometry, but the introducer of the new. He was born at Toulouse in 1590, educated to the law, and advanced to the dignity of counsellor to the parliament of Toulouse. As a magistrate, his knowledge and integrity were highly esteemed. As a mani of science he was connected with Descartes, Huygens, Pascal, and many others. He is said also to have cultivated poetry. He died in 1664. His mathematical works were published at Toulouse in 1679, in two volumes, folio. The first volume contains the treatise of arithmetic of Diophantus, with a commentary, and several analytical inventions. The second comprises his mathematical discoveries, and his correspondence with the most celebrated geometricians of his age. His son, Samuel Fermat, was also eminent as a literary man, and wrote some learned dissertations.

, an English antiquary, was the son of William Feme, of Temple Belwood, in the isle of Axholme, in Lincolnshire, esq. by Anne his wife, daughter and heir of John Sheffield, of Beltoft; and was sent to Oxford when about seventeen years of age. Here he was placed, as Wood conceives, either in St. Mary’s-hall, or University college: but leaving the university without a degree, he went to the Inner Temple, and studied for some time the municipal law. In the beginning of the reign of James I. he received the honour of knighthood, being about that time secretary, and keeper of the king’s signet of the council established at York for the north parts of England. He probably died about 1610, leaving several sons behind him, of whom Henry, the youngest, was afterwards bishop of Chester, the subject of our next article. In 1586 sir John published “The Blazon of Gentry, divided into two parts, &c.” 4to. This is written in dialogues, and, though in a language uncommonly quaint and tedious, contains critical accounts of arms, principles of precedence, remarks upon the times, &c. which are altogether curious. The nobility of the Lacys, earls of Lincoln, which forms a part of it, was written in consequence of Albert a Lasco, a noble German, coming to England in 1583, and claiming affinity to this family of Lacy, and from this, Feme says, he was induced to open their descents, their arms, marriages, and lives. The discourse is curious, and during the century that elapsed after its publication, before the appearance of Dugdaie’s Baronage, must have been peculiarly valuable.

, D. D. bishop of Chester, the youngest son of the preceding sir John Feme, was born at York in 1603, and educated at the free-school of Uppingham in Rutlandshire, to which he was sent by sir Thomas Nevill of Holt in Lancashire, who had married his mother. He was afterwards, in 1618, admitted commoner of St. Maryhall, Oxford, but after two years 1 residence there, was removed to Trinity college, Cambridge, of which he became fellow; apd when he had taken his degree of bachelor of divinity, was domestic chaplain to Dr. Morton, bishop of Durham. The year after he was presented to the college living of Masham in Yorkshire, and his brother-in-law Mr. Nevill gave him that of Medborn in Leicestershire. The?­bishop of Lincoln afterwards preferred him to the archdeaconry of Leicester. In 1642 he took his doctor’s degree, and kept the act at the commencement. Thence he went into Leicestershire, where he had an opportunity of waiting on the king, and preaching before him as ho was going to Nottingham to setup his standard. The king made him his chaplain extraordinary, and he preached before his majesty again at Nottingham. In 1642 he published his “Case of Conscience touching rebellion,” and is said to have been the first that wrote openly in his majesty’s cause, but this probably obliged him to leave Medborn, and take shelter in Oxford, where he preached, without any emolument, at St. Aldate’s church. Here he was incorporated doctor in divinity, and was made chaplain in ordinary to the king, who at the same time sent him a message, that he was sorry he could confer nothing else with it. He was afterwards appointed chaplain to one of the lords commissioners at the treaty of Uxbridge, where at the request of some of them, he stated the case between piscopary and presbytery, and was not answered by the parliamentary commissioners, although one of them, the earl of London, lord chancellor of Scotland, declared that he should. Dr. Feme attended the king at Oxford until he had taken Leicester, and was present at the unfortunate battle of Naseby, after which he went to Newark, and continued preaching until the king ordered the garrison to surrender. His next retreat was to Yorkshire, where he remained with his relations, until his majesty sent for him to the treaty of the Isle of Wight. His majesty had so much respect for him, as to desire a copy of the last sermon he preached there.

During the usurpation, Dr. Feme appears to have lived in privacy, but, as the only privilege now left to him, as a clergyman, he carried on disputes with the Roman catholics, which occasioned some of his publications. On the restoration, Charles II. as his royal father had promised Dr. Feme the reversion of the mastership of Trinity college, Cambridge, now conferred that office upon him, which he kept a year and a half, and was twice chosen vicechancellor. He was also promoted to the deanery of Ely; and upon Dr. Walton’s death, he was made bishop of Chester, and consecrated at Ely house chapel, Feb. 9, 1661, but held it only ahout five weeks, dying March 16, 1661, at his relation Mr. Nevill’s house, in St. Paul’s churchyard, London, and was buried in Westminster-abbey. He was a man of great learning, piety, and loyalty, and of singular candour and modesty. The character given of him by one who knew him from his youth, was, that if he had any fault, it was that he could not be angry.

He is said to have afforded some assistance to Dr. Walton in his celebrated Polyglot, besides which he published, 1. “The Resolving of Conscience,” &c. on the question of taking up arms against the king, printed at Cambridge in 1642, and Oxford in 1643, and two other tracts in answer to his opponents on the same subject. 2. “Episcopacy and Presbytery considered,” Lond. 1647. 3. “Certain, considerations of present concernment touching the reformed church of England, against Ant. Champney, doctor of the Sorbonne,” ibid. 1653. 4. “On the case as it stands between the church of England and of Rome on the one hand, and those congregations which have divided from it on the other,” ibid. 1655. 5. “On the division between the English and Romish church upon the reformation,” ibid. 1655. 6. “Answer to Mr. Spencer’s book, entitled” Scripture mistaken," 1660. He published also several sermons.

, or Fernelius, physician to Henry II. of France, was born at Mont-Didier in Picardy, in 1506, or as some say in 1497. He was not very young when he was sent to Paris, to study rhetoric and philosophy; but made so quick a progress, that, having been admitted master of arts after two years’ time, the principals of the colleges strove who should have him to teach logic, and offered him a considerable stipend. He would not accept their offers; but chose to render himself worthy of a public professor’s chair by private studies and lectures. He applied himself therefore in a most intense manner, all other pleasure being insipid to him. He cared neither for play, nor for walking, nor for entertainment, nor even for conversation. He read Cicero, Plato, and Aristotle, and the perusal of Cicero procured him this advantage, that the lectures he read on philosophical subjects were as eloquent as those of the other masters of that time were barbarous. He also applied himself very earnestly to the mathematics.

This continual study drew upon him a long fit of sickness, which obliged him to leave Paris. On his recovery he returned thither with a design to study physic; but before he applied himself entirely to it, he taught philosophy in the college of St. Barbara. After this, he spent four years in the study of physic; and taking a doctor’s degree, confined himself to his closet, in order to read the best authors, and to improve himself in mathematics, as far as the business of his profession would suffer him; and to gain time, he used to rise at four o‘clock in the morning, and studied until the hour when he was obliged either to read lectures pr to visit patients. Coming home to dine, he shut himself up among his books, until called down to table; and after dinner, he returned to his study, which he did not leave without necessary occasions. Coming home at night, he followed the same course he remained among his books until called to supper returned to them the moment he had supped and did not leave them till eleven o’clock, when he went to bed.

In the course of these studies, he contrived mathematical instruments, and was at great expence in having them made. His wife, however, was alarmed at those expences, by which even a part of her fortune was wasted. She murmured, cried, and complained to her father, who was a counsellor at Paris. Fernet submitted at last, sent all his instrument-makers away s and applied himself seriously to the practice of physic. But, as visiting patients did not employ his whole time, he resumed the same office in which he had been engaged already, of reading public lectures upon Hippocrates and Galen. This soon gained him a great reputation through France, and in foreign countries. His business increasing, he left off reading lectures; but as nothing could make him cease to study in private, he spent all the hours he could spare in composing a work of physic, entitled “Physiologia,” which was soon after published. He was prevailed upon to read lectures on thii new work, which he did for three years; and undertaking another work, which he published, “De vensesectione,” he laid himself under a necessity of reading lectures some years longer; for it was passionately desired that he would also explain this new book to the young students.

While he was thus employed, he was sent for to court, in order to try whether he could cure a lady, whose recovery was despaired of; and having succeeded, this was the first cause of that esteem which Henry II. who was then, dauphin, and was in love with that lady, conceived for him. This prince offered him even then the place of first physician to him; but Fernel, who infinitely preferred his studies to the hurry of a court, would not accept the employment, and had even recourse to artifice, in order to, obtain the liberty of returning to Paris. He represented first, that he was not learned enough to deserve to be entrusted with the health of the princes; but that, if he were permitted to return to Paris, he would zealously employ all means to become more learned, and more capable of serving the dauphin. This excuse not being admitted, he pretended, in the next place, to be sick, and sent to the prince a surgeon, who was accustomed to speak familiarly to him, and who told him, that Fernel had a pleurisy, which grief would certainly render mortal; and that his grief was occasioned by being absent from his books and from his family, and by being obliged to discontinue his lectures, and lead a tumultuous life. The prince, giving credit to this story, permitted Fernel to retire. A man, Bayle observes, must be excessively in love with his studies, and a philosophical life, when he employs such tricks to avoid what all others are desirous to obtain.

When Henry came to the throne, he renewed his offer; but Fernel represented, that the honour was due, for several reasons, and as an hereditary right, to the late king’s physician; and that, as for himself, he wanted some time for experiments concerning several discoveries he had made relating to physic. The king admitted this: but as soon as Francis the First’s physician died, Fernel was obliged to fill his place at Henry the Second’s court. Here just the contrary to what he dreaded came to pass: for he enjoyed more rest and more leisure at court than he had done at Paris; and he might have considered the court as an agreeable retirement, had it not been for the journeys which the new civil war obliged the king to take. Being returned from the expedition of Calais, he made his wife come to Fontainbleau: but this good woman was so afflicted at being obliged to leave her relations, that she fell sick soon after, and died delirious; and her death grieved Fernel to such a degree, that he died within a month after she was buried, in 1558. Fernel acquired a vast estate by his business. Plantius, his disciple and biographer, tells us, that while he was with him, his gains amounted often to above 12,000 livres a year, and seldom under 10,000. He is considered as one of the great restorers of medicine, and the first after Galen who wrote ably on the nature and cause of diseases. His posterity were long respected on his account.

His works are, 1. “Monalosph atrium partibus constans quatuor, &c.” Paris, 1526. 2. “De Proportionibns, libri duo,” ibid. 1528. 3. “Cosmo-theoria libros duos complexa,” ibid. 1528. 4. “De naturali parte Medicinsr, libri septem,” ibid. 1532. 5. “De vacuandi ratione, liber,” ibid. 1545. 6. “De abditis rerum cau.njs, libri duo, 17 ibid. 1548. This work underwent nearly thirty subsequent editions. 7.” Medicina, ad Henricum II. &c.“1554. This collection has been still more frequently reprinted, with some changes of the title. 8.” Therapeutices universalis, seu medendt rationis libri septem,“Lugduni, 1659. 6.” Consiliorum Medicinalium liber,“Paris, 1532; many times reprinted. 10.” Febrium curandarum methodus generalis,“Francfort, 1577; a posthumous work. 11.” De Luis venereae curatione perfectissima liber,“Antwerp, 1579. dited by Gisselin, a physician of Bruges. Some other parts of his works have been translated, or edited separately since his death. Eloy remarks, that as many thin 0-5 taken from the Arabian writers are found in the works of Fernel, and as the elegant Latinity in which he has repeated them is generally admired, the following bon mot has been applied to him” Fscees Arabuin melle Latinitatis condidit."

, a celebrated self-taught mechanic, was born at Bassano, in the territory of Padua, in 1692. His first occupation being that of a sawyer, for his parents were very poor, he invented a saw which worked by the wind, and went on progressively to several more curious inventions, such as making clocks in iron, hydraulic machines, &c. till he was noticed by the great men of Italy. In his native town of Bassano, he constructed a famous bridge over the Brenta, remarkable for the boldness of its design, and the solidity of its construction. He died soon after the completion of this work. An history of his life and inventions was published at Venice in 1764, by a writer whose name was Memo, 4to.

, a French lawyer, born at Toulon, in 1645, became an advocate in the parliament of Paris, and died in that city, in 1699. Though a layman, he lived with the rigour of a strict ecclesiastic; and though a lawyer, his works turn chiefly upon subjects of sacred learning. They are full of erudition, but not remarkable for brilliancy or clearness. They are, 1. “A large Commentary on the Psalms,” in Latin, 1683, 4to. 2. “Reflections on the Christian Religion,” 1679, 2 vols. 12mo. 3. “A Psalter,” in French and Latin. 4. Some controversial writings against the Calvinists, and others. 5. “A Letter and Discourse to prove that St. Augustin was a Monk,” an opinion which several learned men have rejected.

, surnamed Fulgentius, who flourished in the sixth century, was an African by birth, and a disciple of St. Fulgentius. When that prelate was banished by the Arians to Sardinia, Ferrandus accompanied him; but on his return he was chosen deacon of the church of Carthage, and entered with much zeal into the question which was the subject of warm discussion at that day, “whether it could be said that one of the persons of the Trinity suffered on the cross.” Ferrandus died about the year 530, leaving behind him many works that were highly esteemed by his contemporaries. The most considerable, “A Collection of Ecclesiastical Canons,” for restoring discipline in the churches of Africa, is one of the most ancient collections of canons among the Latins. It consists of between two and three hundred abridged from the councils of Africa, Ancyra, Laodicea, Nice, Antioch, &c. A life of Fulgentius has also been ascribed to Ferrandus, but by some authors it has been ascribed to another of the prelate’s pupils.

, an English gentleman of considerable learning and ingenuity, of great personal worth, and at the same time an enthusiast of a singular description, was the third son of Nicholas Ferrar, a merchant in London, and was born Feb. 22, 1592, in the parish of St. Mary Stayning, in Mark-lane, London. His lather traded very extensively to the East and West Indies, and to all the celebrated seats of commerce. He* lived in high repute in the city, where he joined in commercial matters with sir Thomas and sir Hugh Middleton, and Mr. Bateman. He was a man of liberal hospitality, but governed his house with great order. He kept a good table, at which he frequently received persons of the greatest eminence, sir John Hawkins, sir Francis Drake, sir Walter Raleigh, and others with whom he was an adventurer; and in all their expeditions he was ever in the highest degree attentive to the planting the Christian Religion in the New World. At home also he was a zealous friend to the established church, and always ready to supply his prince with what was required of him. He lent 300l. at once upon a privy-seal a sum at that time notinconsiderable. He had the honour of being written Esq. by queen Elizabeth.

His wife was Mary, daughter of Laurence Wodenoth, esq. of an ancient family in Cheshire. By her he had a numerous family, to whom he gave a pious education. Their daily practice was to read, and to speak by memory, some portion of the Scriptures, and parts of the Book of Martyrs; they were also made acquainted with such passages of history as were suited to their tender years. They were all instructed in music in performing on the organ, viol, and lute, and in the theory and practice; of singing in the learned and modern languages in curious needleworks, and all the accomplishments of thai time. The young men, when arrived at years of discretion, had permission each to choose his profession, and then no expence was spared to bring him to a distinguished excellence in it. For, this was an invariable maxim with the parents, that, having laid a firm foundation in religion and virtue, they would rather give them a good education without wealth, than wealth without a good education.

Of Nicholas, the subject of this article, we are told that he was a beautiful child, of a fair complexion, and lightcoloured hair. At four years of age he was sent to school, and at five he could read perfectly, or repeat with propriety and grace, a chapter in the Bible, which the parents made the daily exercise of their children. By the brightness of his parts, and the uncommon strength of his memory, he attained with great ease and quickness whatever he set himself to learn; yet was he also remarkably studious. From the early possession of his mind with ideas of piety and virtue, and a love for historical information, the Bible in his very early years became to him the book above all others most dear and estimable; and next to this in his esteem was Fox’s Book of Martyrs, from which he could repeat perfectly the history of his near kinsman, bishop Ferrar. And, when in his riper years he undertook the instruction of the family, he constantly exercised them also in the reading and in the study of these two books. He was particularly fond of all historical relations; and, when engaged in this sort of reading, the day did not satisfy him, but he would borrow from the night; insomuch that his mother would frequently seek him out, and force him to partake of some proper recreation. Hence, even in his childhood, his mind was so furnished with historical anecdotes, that he could at any time draw off his schoolfellows from their play, who would eagerly surround him, and with the utmost attention listen to his little tales, always calculated to inspire them with a love of piety and goodness, and excite in them a virtuous imitation.

When he was very young he was taught Latin, at London, at the desire of his master, though others thought it too soon: but he was so eager and diligent in his application, that he soon surpassed all his companions, though his seniors. He was of a grave disposition, and very early shewed a great dislike of every thing that savoured of worldly vanity In his apparel he wished to be neat, but refused all that was not simple and plain. When bands were making for the children, he earnestly entreated his mother that his might not have any lace upon them, like those of his brothers, but be made little and plain, like those of Mr. Wotton (a clergyman whom he knew), “for I wish to be a preacher as he is.”

Young Ferrar was good-natured and tender-hearted to the highest degree; so fearful of offending any one, that, upon the least apprehension of having given displeasure, he would suddenly weep in the most submissive manner, and appear extremely sorry. His temper was lovely, his countenance pleasing; his constitution was not robust, but he was active, lively, and cheerful. Whatsoever he went about, he did it with great spirit, and with a diligence and discretion above his years. When it was time to send him to some greater school, where he might have a better opportunity to improve himself in the Latin tongue, his parents sent him and his brother William to Euborn, near Newbery, in Berkshire, the house of Mr. Brooks, an old friend, who had many other pupils, who was a religious and good man, but a strict disciplinarian. While preparations were making for this journey, an event took place which made the deepest and most lively impression upon the mind of young Nicholas, and strongly marks his character and the bent of his disposition. He was but six years of age, and being one night unable to sleep, a fit of scepticism seized his mind, and gave him the greatest perplexity and uneasiness. He doubted whether there was a God and, if there was, what was the most acceptable mode of serving him In extreme grief he rose at midnight, cold and frosty and went down to a grass-plat in the garden, where he stood a long time, sad and pensive, musing and thinking seriously upon the great doubt which thus extremely perplexed him. At length, throwing himself on his face upon the ground, and spreading out his hands, he cried aloud, “Yes, there is, there must be a God; and he, no question, if I duly and earnestly seek it of him, will teach me not only how to know, but how to serve him acceptably. He will be with me all my life here, and at the end will hereafter make me happy.” His doubts now vanished, his mind became easy, and he returned to his apartment; but the remembrance of what he felt on this occasion made him ever after strongly commiserate all who laboured under any religious doubt or despair of mind. And, in the future course of his life, he had repeated opportunities to exert his benevolence to those who experienced similar unhappiness.

In 1598 he was sent to Euborn school, where in Latin, Greek, and logic, he soon became the first scholar of his years. He strengthened his memory by daily exercise; he was a great proficient in writing and arithmetic, and attained such excellence in short-hand as to be able to take accurately a sermon or speech on any occasion. He was also well skilled both in the theory and practice of vocal and instrumental music. Thus accomplished, in his fourteenth year, his master, Mr. Brooks, prevailed with his parents to send him to Cambridge, whither he himself attended him, and admitted him of Clare-hall, presenting him, with due commendation of his uncommon abilities, to Mr. Augustin Lindsell, the tutor, and Dr. William Smith, then master of the college. His parents thought proper, notwithstanding the remonstrance of some friends against it, to admit him a pensioner for the first year, as they conceived it more for his good to rise by 'merit gradually to honour. In this situation, by excellent demeanour and diligent application to his studies, he gained the affections and applause of all who knew him, performing all his exercises with distinguished approbation. His attention and diligence were such, that it was observed his chamber might be known by the candle that was last put out at night, and the first lighted in the morning. Nor was he less diligent In his attendance at chapel, so that his piety and learning went on hand in hand together. In his second year he became fellow-commoner. In 1610 he took his degree of B. A. At this time he was appointed to make the speech on the king’s coronation day, (July 25) in the college hall; and the same year he was elected fellow of that society, His constitution was of a feminine delicacy, and he was very subject to aguish disorders; yet he bore them out in a great measure by his temperance, and by a peculiar courageousness of spirit which was natural to him. His favourite sister, married to Mr. Collet, lived at Bourn Bridge, near Cambridge, and as the air of Cambridge was found not well to agree with him, he made frequent exctirsioas to her house, where he passed his time in the pursuit of his studies, and in the instruction of his sister’s children. But his tutor, Mr. Lindsell, Mr. Ruggle (author of the Latin comedy called Ignoramus), and others of the fellows, having now apprehension of his health, carried him to Dr. Butler, the celebrated physician of Cambridge, who conceived a great affection for him, but finding the disorder baffled all his skill, could only recommend a spare diet and great temperance; and upon his relapsing, in the autumn of 1612, the doctor prescribed as the last re^ medy, that in the spring he should travel.

He was now almost of seven years’ standing in the university, and was to take his master’s degree at the ensuing Midsummer, 1613, and he had already performed with credit all his previous exercises. It being made known to the heads of the university that he was to travel, and to have the opportunity of going with that noble company which then went with the lady Elizabeth to conduct her to the Palatinate with the Palsgrave her husband, his degree was immediately granted; and having set out in the retinue of the lady Elizabeth, he accompanied her to Holland. 'But inclining to pursue a different route, he took leave of her royal highness there, and visited most of the German universities, at some of which he studied a considerable time, and at them and other parts of Europe, he spent five years, returning home in 1618, being then twenty-six years of age, and highly improved and accomplished by his travels. During this long residence abroad he had purchased many rare articles of curiosity, scarce and valuable books, and learned treatises in the language of those different countries; in collecting which he certainly had a principal eye to those which treated the subjects of a spiritual life, devotion, and religious retirement. He bought also a great number of prints, engraved by the best masters of that time, relative to historical pasr sages of the Old and New Testament; all which, upon his return home, he had the satisfaction to find were safely arrived there before him, but very little of this treasure is now remaining. The Ferrar family being firm in their loyalty to the king, their house at Giclding was plundered in the civil wars; and, in a wanton devastation, all these things perished, except some of the prints, not of great value, which were in the possession of the editor of Mr. Ferrar’s life, the late Dr, Packard. Soon after Mr. Ferrar’s return, sir Edwyn Sandys, who had heard a high character of him from many who had known him in Italy, sought his acquaintance; and, being exceedingly taken with his great abilities, took the first opportunity to make him known to the earl of Southampton, anxi the other principal members of the Virginia company. In a very little time he was made one of a particular committee in some business of great importance; whereby the company having sufficient proof of his extraordinary abilities, at the next general court it was proposed and agreed that he should be king’s counsel for the Virginia plantation ki the room of his brother John, who was then made the deputy governor. And when his name, according to custom, was entered in the lord chamberlain’s book, sir Edwyn Sandys took care to acquaint that lord with his uncommon worth which, indeed, daily more and more appeared in every thing he undertook and as he wanted no ability, so he spared no diligence in ordering all their affairs of consequence, and thus became deeply engaged in cares of a public nature. Yet his own inclinations at his. return led him rather to think of settling himself again at Cambridge, to which he was the more induced as he still held the physic fellowship in Clare-hall. But this he now saw could not be done; and besides, his parents, now grown old, requested their beloved son to remain with them. Therefore all he could obtain in this respect from them, and from his business, was the liberty now and then to pass a few days with his old acquaintance and friends still remaining in Cambridge.

His transactions while connected with the Virginia company, occupy a very large portion of his life published by Dr. Peckarcl, but will not now be thought the most interesting part of it. The reputation, however, which he had acquired, as a man of business, was such, that after the Virginia company had been dissolved, he was in 1624, chosen member of parliament. He must, however, have sat a very short time, as he began soon to put in execution his scheme of retiring from the world, and leading a monastic life in the heart of a protestant country. For this purpose in the last mentioned year, he purchased the lordship of Little-Gidding, in the county of Huntingdon,^ where his mother, his sister Mrs. Collet, with all her family, and other relations to the amount of forty persons, came to reside as soon as it could be prepared for their reception. The better to carry on this plan, by his personal assistance, Mr. Ferrar applied to Dr. Laud, then bishop of St. David’s, and was ordained deacon. On this, some of his noble friends, not knowing his intention, offered him preferments in the church, but these he declined, as being unworthy to receive them, and informed his friends that he had taken deacon’s orders only that he might be legally authorised to give spiritual assistance to those with whom he might be concerned.

In the establishment he now formed, one useful branch was a school for the education of the children of the neighbourhood, free of expence. In this part of his plan there was nothing remarkably different from the exercises that were customary in those days in other schools, except, perhaps, a higher degree of strictness and ceremony. In other respects the reader will perhaps think there was ceremony enough, from perusing the following specimens of Mr. Ferrar’s domestic plan.

On the first Sunday of every month they always had a communion, which was administered by the clergyman of the adjoining parish; Mr. Nicholas Ferrar assisting as deacon. All the servants who then received the communion, when dinner was brought up, remained in the room, and on that day dined at the same table with Mrs. Ferrar and the rest of the family. When their early devotions in the oratory were finished, they proceeded to church in the following order: First, the three school-masters, in black gowns and Monmouth caps. Then, Mrs. Ferrar’s grandsons, clad in the same manner, two and two. Then, her son Mr. John Ferrar, and her son-in-law Mr. Collet, in the same dress. Then, Mr. Nicholas Ferrar, in surplice, hood, and square cap, sometimes leading his mother. Then 3Vlrs. Collet, and all her daughters, two and two. Then all the gervants, two and two. The dress of all was uniform. Then, on Sundays, all the Psalm children, two and two, or children who were taught to repeat the Psalms from memory.

As they came into the church, every person made a low obeisance, and all took their appointed places. The masters and gentlemen in the chancel; the youths knelt on the upper step of the half-pace; Mrs. Ferrar, her daughters, and all her grand-daughters, in a fair island seat. Mr. Nicholas Ferrar at coming in made a low obeisance a few paces farther, a lower and at the half-pace a lower still then went into the reading-desk, and read the morning service according to the book of Common Prayer. This service over, they returned in the same order, and with the same solemnity. This ceremonial was regularly observed every Sunday, and that on every common day was nearly the same. They rose at four at five went to the oratory to prayers; at six, said the Psalms of the hour for every hour had its appointed Psalms, with some portion of the Gospel, till Mr. Ferrar had finished his Concordance, when a chapter of that work was substituted in place of the portion of the Gospel. Then they sang a short hymn, repeated some passages of scripture, and at half past six went to church to mattins. At seven said the Psalms of the hour, sang the short hymn, and went to breakfast. Then the young people repaired to their respective places of instruction. At ten, to church to the Litany. At eleven to dinner. At which season were regular readings in rotation from scripture, from the Book of Martyrs, and from short histories drawn up by Mr. Ferrar, and adapted to the purpose of moral instruction. Recreation was permitted till one; instruction was continued till three church at four, for evensong supper at five, or sometimes six diversions till eight. Then prayers in the oratory and afterwards all retired to their respective apartments." To preserve regularity in point of time, Mr. Ferrar invented dials in painted glass in every room: he had also sun-dials, elegantly painted with proper mottos, on every side of the church; and he provided an excellent clock to a sonorous bell.

Four of Mr. Collet’s eldest daughters being grown up to woman’s estate, to perfect them in the practice of good housewifery, Mr. Ferrar appointed them, in rotation, to take the whole charge of the domestic ceconomy. Each had this care for a month, when her accounts were regularly passed, allowed, and delivered over to the next in succession. There was also the same care and regularity required with respect to the surgeon’s chest, and the due provision of medicines, and all things necessary for those who were sick, or hurt by any misfortune. A convenient apartment was provided for those of the family who chanced to be indisposed, called the infirmary, where they might be attended, and properly taken care of, without disturbance from any part of the numerous family. A large room was also set apart for the reception of the medicines, and of those who were brought in sick or hurt, and wanted immediate assistance. The young ladies were required to dress the wounds of those who were hurt, in order to give them readiness and skill in this employment, and to habituate them to the virtues of humility and tenderness of heart. The office relative to pharmacy, the weekly inspection, the prescription, and administration of medicines, Mr. Ferrar reserved to himself, being an excellent physician; as he had for many years attentively studied the theory and practice of medicine, both when physic fellow at Clare Hall, and under the celebrated professors at Padua. In this way was a considerable part of their income disposed of.

In order to give some variety to this system of education, he formed the family into a sort of collegiate institution, of which one was considered as the founder, another guardian, a third as moderator, and himself as visitor of this little academy. The seven virgin daughters, his nieces, formed the junior part of this society, were called the sisters, and assumed the names of, 1st, the chief; 2d. the patient; 3d, the chearful 4th, the affectionate; 5th, the submiss 6th, the obedient; 7th, the moderate. These all had their respective characters to sustain, and exercises to perform suited to those characters. For the Christmas season of 1631 he composed twelve excellent discourses, five suited to the festivals within the twelve days, and seven to the assumed name and character of the sisters. These were enlivened by hymns and odes composed by Mr. Ferrar, and set to music by the music-master of the family, who accompanied the voices with the viol or the lute.

We shall notice only one other part of this strange system, which was their nightly watchings. It was agreed that; there should be a constant double night-watch, of men at one end of the house, and of wome.n at the other. That each watch should consist of two or more persons. That the watchings should begin at nine o'clock at night, and end at one in the morning. That each watch should, in those four hours, carefully and distinctly say over the whole book of Psalms, in the way of Autiphony, one repeating one verse, and the rest the other. That they should then pray for the life of the king and his sons. The time of their watch being ended, they went to Mr. Ferrar’s door, bade him good-morrow, and left a lighted caudle for him. At one he constantly rose, and betook himself to religious meditation, founding this practice on the passage, “At midnight will I rise and give thanks;” and some other passages of similar import. Several religious persons, both in the neighbourhood, and from distant places, attended these watchings; and amongst these the celebrated Mr. Richard Crashaw, fellow of Peterhouse, who was very intimate in the family, and frequently came from Cambridge for this purpose, and at his return often watched in Little St. Mary’s church, near Peterhonse. It is some*­what more singular that a late worthy prelate, Dr. Home, has given his sanction, if not to the severity, at least to a moderate observation, of this mode of psalmody, in the following words, *on a part of his commentary on the 134th Psalm:

“Bless ye the Lord, all ye servants of the Lord, who by night stand in the house of the Lord. Bless him in the chearful and busy hours of the day: bless him in the solemn and peaceful watches of the night.”

“The pious Mr. Nicholas Ferrar exhibited in the last century an instance of a Protestant family, in which a constant course of Psalmody was appointed, and so strictly kept up, that, through the whole four and twenty hours of day and night, there was no portion of time when some of the members were not employed in the performing that most pleasant part of duty and devotion.”

This extraordinary course of life pursued at Gidding, the strictness of their rules, their prayers, literally without ceasing, their abstinence, mortifications, nightly watchings, and various other peculiarities, gave birth to censure in some, and inflamed the malevolence of others, but excited the wonder and curiosity of all. So that they were frequently visited with different views by persons of all denominations, and of opposite opinions. They received all who came with courteous civility; and from those who were inquisitive they concealed nothing, as indeed there was not any thing either in their opinions, or their practice, in the least degree necessary to be concealed. Notwithstanding this, they were by some abused as Papists, by others as Puritans. Mr. Ferrar himself, though possessed of uncommon patience and resignation, yet in anguish of spirit complained to his friends, that the perpetual obloquy he endured was a sort of unceasing martyrdom. Added to all this, violent invectives and inflammatory pamphlets were published against them. Amongst others, not long after M. Ferrar' s death, a treatise was addressed to the parliament, entitled, “The Arminian Nunnery, or a brief description and relation of the late erected monastical place, called the Arminian Nunnery at Little Gidding in Huntingdonshire: humbly addressed to the wise consideration of the present parliament. The foundation is by a company of Ferrars at Gidding,” printed by Thomas Underhill, 1641.

Among other articles of instruction and amusement in this monastery, Mr. Ferrar engaged a bookbinder who taught his art to the whole family, females as well as males, and what they called pasting-printing, by the use of the rolling-press. By this assistance he composed a full harjnony or concordance of the evangelists, adorned with many beautiful pictures, which required more than a year for the composition, and was divided into 150 heads or chapters. This book was so neatly done by pieces pasted together from different copies of the same type, as to have the appearance of having been printed in the ordinary way. The employment of the monks, in transcribing books, before the aera of printing, must have surely given rise to such a waste of time, as any printing-press could have executed in a month, what cost a year’s labour in this patch-work way. The book, however, was so much admired that the king desired to see it, and had another made like it, which, we are told, was bound by Mary Collett, one of Ferrar’s nieces, “all wrought in gold, in a new and most elegant fashion.”

How long this strange institution might have lasted, if left to itself, cannot be ascertained. In 1635 old Mrs. Ferrar, who was a sort of lady abbess, died, and her son, the founder, on Dec. 2, 1637. The third day before his death, he ordered a place to be marked out for his grave, and being told that the place was accordingly marked, he requested his brother, before all the family, to take out of his study three large hampers full of books, which had been there locked up many years and said, “They are comedies, tragedies, heroic poems, and romances let them be immediately burnt upon the place marked out for my grave, and when you shall have so done, come back and inform me.” When information was brought him that they were all consumed, he desired that this act might be considered as the testimony of his disapprobation of all such productions, as tending to corrupt the mind of man, and improper for the perusal of erery good and sincere Christian. Soon after his death, certain soldiers of the parliament resolved to plunder the house at Gidding. The family being informed of their hasty approach, thought it prudent to fly; while these military zealots, in the rage of what they called reformation, ransacked both the church and the house; in doing which, they expressed a particular spite against the organ. This they broke in pieces, of which they made a large fire, and at it roasted several of Mr. Ferrar’s sheep, which they had killed in his grounds. This done, they seized all the plate, furniture, and provision, which they could conveniently carry away. And in this general devastation perished the works which Mr. Ferrar had compiled for the use of his household, in the way we have already described, consisting chiefly of harmonies of the Old and New Testament.

The life of this extraordinary, and in most respects, amiable man, will be considered in different lights according to the views and objects of the reader. His early abilities, his travels, and the attention deservedly paid to his very singular talents and acquisitions at a period when the powers of the mind are scarcely matured, will excite our respect and admiration. His very active and able conduct in support of the Virginia company, realizes the expectations which his earlier abilities had raised, and displays a scene in which we must equally admire his spirit, temper, and judgment. To see openings so brilliant, talents so varied and useful, knowledge of such importance, buried in a cloister, disappoints the eager hopes, and leads us to indulge a spirit of invective against institutions, once perhaps defensible, but in a better aera of refinement at least “useless,” and often unjust to society. His biographer, Dr. Peckard, seemed indignant at the appellation of “useless enthusiast,” which Mr. Gough applied in his British Topography and that eminent antiquary afterwards allowed that it was certainly unjust so far as regarded the institution at Little Gidding; for to assist their neighbours in medicine, in advice, and in every thing in their power, was one of their objects. But he asks if the charge of enthusiasm was not well founded, and if in a comparative view “useless,” was a term wholly improper? To give medicine occasionally, to advise, or bestow alms, within a limited circle, were not the sufficient employments of a mind equally able and comprehensive, stored with the wisdom of antiquity, experienced in business, and matured by travel and exercise. In the way in which his devotional exercises were conducted, we must perhaps find something to blame. His too literal interpretation of some passages in scripture, which led him to rise at one in the morning, must not only have been ultimately injurious to his own constitution, but, by depriving the constitution of repose at the time best and most naturally adapted to it, must have rendered the body and mind less fit for those social duties which are the great objects of our existence. The frequent watchings of the rest of the family were equally exceptionable, and the ceremonies which he used only as marks of reverence might be interpreted by his weaker dependents as signs of adoration. It is the broken and the contrite heart, not the frequently-bent knee, that God seems to require: it is the bowing down of the spirit, rather than the body, that he will not despise. If we look at the result of this retirement, the works composed by Mr. Ferrar, we shall find nothing very advantageous to the credit of this institution.

The only publication by Mr. Ferrar, but without his name, was a translation from Valdesso, entitled “The hundred and ten Considerations, &c. written in Spanish, bi ought out of Italy by Vergerius, and first set forth in Italian, at Basil by Caelius Secundus Curio, 1550. Afterwards translated into French, and printed at Lyons, 1563, and again at Paris, 1565. And now translated out of the Italian into English, with notes. Whereunto is added a preface of the author’s to his Commentary on the Romans, Oxford, printed by Litchfield, 1638.”

, the martyred bishop of St. David’s in the sixteenth century, was an ancestor of the preceding, and born in Halifax parish, Yorkshire, probably at Ewood. He became, when a young man, a canon regular of the order of St. Austin, but in what priory or abbey is uncertain. Having partly received his academical education in Cambridge, he retired to a nursery for the canons of St. Austin, i.t Oxford, called St. Mary’s-college (where Erasmus had before studied), and here we find him in 1526, and also in Oct. 1533, when as a member of the said college, he was admitted to the reading of the sentences, having a little before been opponent in divinity. About the same time he became chaplain to archbishop Cranmer, after whose example he married, a practice at that time disallowed among the popish clergy, and in the time of queen Mary, made the ground of a criminal charge. Dodd, who treats him with more respect than some protestant biographers, adopts from Wood the account, that he was among the first of the university of Oxford that received a tincture of Lutheranism, in which he was confirmed by Thomas Garret, curate of Honey-lane in London, who provided him with books for that purpose, and that in the year above-mentioned he was chosen prior of a monastery of his order, called Nostel, or St. Oswald’s, in Yorkshire, which he surrendered to the commissioners upon the dissolution in 1540, being gratified with a pension of 100l. per annum.

This pension he enjoyed until his promotion to the see of St. David’s, to which he was consecrated Sept. 9, 154-8. He was the first bishop consecrated upon the bare nomination of the king, according to the statute which for that purpose was published in the first year of his (Edward VI.) reign. He had just before been one of the king’s "visitors in a royal visitation, and was at the same time appointed one of the preachers for his great ability in that faculty. As a bishop, Browne Willis says, he became a most miserable dilapidator, yielding up every thing to craving courtiers, and Wood speaks of him with all the rancour of a disciple of Gardiner. The fact, however, seems to be that when he first visited his diocese, he found, among other corruption^and dilapidations, that Thomas Young, the chaunter (afterwards archbishop of York), had pulled down the great hall in the palace for the sake of the lead, which he sold, and that he and Rowland Merick, one of the canons, and afterwards bishop of St David’s, had stripped the cathedral of plate and ornaments, which they likewise sold for their own benefit. On this Dr. Ferrar issued out his commission to his chancellor for visiting the chapter, as well as the restof the diocese, and a mistake in the drawing up of this commission appears to have given the bishop’s enemies the first advantage they had over him. The chancellor, tp whom he left the form of it, drew it up in the old popish words, in which the king’s supremacy was not sufficiently acknowledged, although the bishop professed to visit in the king’s name and authority. This, Young and Merick, with the bishop’s register, George Constantine, whom he had promoted, availed themselves of, not only to resist the commission, but to accuse the bishop of a pr&munire. The prosecution consequent on this, preventing him from, paying the tenths and first-fruits, afforded them another advantage, and he was imprisoned. They also exhibited fifty-six articles and informations against him, of the most frivolous kind, all which he fully answered; but the debt to the crown remaining unpaid, he was detained in prison until queen Mary’s reign, when he was attacked on the score of heresy, and on Feb. 4, 1555, was brought, in company with Hooper, Bradford, and other martyrs, before Gardiner, bishop of Winchester, who, after treating him with brutal contempt, sent him on the 14th of the same month to his diocese, where he was to be tried by his successor, Morgan, whose interest it was that he should be condemned. The principal charges against him were, his allowing the marriage of priests, denying the corporal presence in the sacrament, affirming that the mass is not a sacrifice propitiatory for the quick and dead, declaring that the host ought not to be elevated or adored, and asserting thai man is justified by faith alone. All these Morgan pronounced to be damnable heresies, degraded Dr. Ferrar from his ecclesiastical functions, and delivered him to the secular power. In consequence of this sentence, he was burned at Carmarthen, on the south side of the marketcross, March 30, 1555. It was remarkable, that one Jones coming to the bishop a little before his execution, lamented the painfulness of the death he had to suffer; but was answered, that if he once saw him stir in the pains of his burning, he should then give no credit to his doctrine. And what he said he fully performed, for he stood patiently, and never moved, till he was beat down with a staff.

His character, as we have already intimated, has been differently represented, bishop Godwin asserting that his ruin was owing to his own rigid, rough behaviour; but Fox seems clearly of opinion that the first prosecution against him was unnecessary and malicious, and that the second was commenced because he was a protestant. It is certain that many of the fifty-six articles which he was put to answer in the reign of Edward VI. were to the last degree frivolous, and showed themselves to be the offspring of a revengeful mind; such as riding a Scotch pad, with a bridle with white studs and snaffle, white Scotch stirrups, and white spurs wearing a hat instead of a cap whistling to his child laying the blame of the scarcity of herrings to the covetousness of fishers, who in time of plenty, took so many that they destroyed the breeders; and lastly wishing, that at the alteration of the coin, whatever metal it was made of, the penny should be in weight worth a penny of the same metal. It is also to be noticed that the fall of the duke of Somerset, then lord protector, to whom he was chaplain, seems to have exposed him to the resentment of his enemies.

According to Burnet, bishop Ferrar was one of the committee nominated to compile the English liturgy, but his name does not occur among those who compiled the new liturgy in 1547, and therefore Burnet probably means that he was one of those appointed to correct the liturgy in the time of Henry VIII. in 1540. It is more certain that he acquiesced in the brief confession of faith, in conjunction with other protestant bishops and martyrs imprisoned in London, which was signed May 8, 1554, by Ferrar, Taylor, Philpot, Bradford, Hooper, &c. &c. Mr. Butler, in his excellent life of bishop Hildesley, enumerates our prelate among the bishops of Sodor and Mann, to which, according to that account, he must have been preferred in 1545, and resigned it some time before Jan. 1546.

, an Italian author, was born of a noble family at Milan in 1518. After he had studied polite learning, philosophy, and physic, in the universities of Italy, he was chosen professor of ethics and politics, in the college founded by Paul Canobio at his instigation; and held this place eighteen years. The senate of Venice engaged him afterwards to remove to Padua, where he explained the philosophy of Aristotle, with so much skill and elegance, that Vimerat, who was professor at Paris under Francis I. returning to Italy upon the death of that king, fixed upon him, preferably to all others, for the publication of his works. He continued at Padua four years, and then returned to Milan; where he continued to teach philosophy till his death, which happened in 1586. Though he was excellently skilled in polite literature, yet he was principally famous for philosophy, being esteemed a second Aristotle, nor was he less illustrious for his probity than for his learning.

He was the author of several works; as, 1. “De Sermonibus Exotericis, Venet. 1575,” in which he treats of that part of Aristotle’s doctrine, which was intended for all sorts of people, without meddling with the Acroainatics, which were only for the use of his scholars. This book was reprinted at Francfort, 1606, with a new dissertation of “De disciplina Encyclica,” under the general title of “Clavis Philosophise Peripateticae Aristotelicae.” 2. “De Origine Romanorum,” Milan, 1607. Though death prevented Ferrari from putting the last hand to this work, Graevius thought proper to insert it in the first volume of his “Roman Antiquities,” and added his own corrections to it. 3. He translated Athenaeus into Latin, and wrote some notes upon Aristotle.

, of the same family with the former, was born at Milan about 1577. Heapplied with great success to philosophy and divinity, as well as to the Latin, Greek, Spanish, and French languages, and was admitted a doctor of the Ambrosian college. His vast knowledge of books, and abilities in all kinds of learning, induced Frederic Borromeo, archbishop of Milan, to appoint him to travel into divers parts of Europe, in order to purchase the best books and manuscripts, to form a library at Milan. Ferrari accordingly went over part of Italy and Spain, and collected a great number of books, which laid the foundation of the celebrated Ambrosian library. About 1638, he was appointed director of the college of the nobles, lately erected at Padua; which office he discharged two years, and then, on account of indisposition, returned to Milan. He died in 1669, aged 92.

He wrote, 1. “De Antiquo Ecclesiasticarum Epistolarum Genere, libri tres,” Milan, 1613. 2. “De Ritu Sacrarum Ecclesise Catholicae concionum libri tres,” Milan, 1620, a curious work, which was afterwards printed at Utrecht, 1692, with a preface by John Graevius. 3. “De Veterum acclamationibus et plausu libri septem,” Milan, 1627, likewise reprinted in the sixth volume of Gravius’s “Roman Antiquities.” Ferrari began several other works upon various points of antiquity, both ecclesiastical and profane, but though he lived forty-two years after the publication of the last-mentioned book, he did not publish any more. All his writings are full of learning and curious researches into antiquity, and he wrote with great clearnes and method, judgment and accuracy.

, of the same family with the famer, was born at Milan in 1607. He went through Is studies in the Ambrosian college, and after he had conpleted a course of philosophy and divinity, applied himself entirely to polite literature, in which he made so grat progress, that cardinal Frederic Borromeo procured hn a professorship of rhetoric in that college, when he vis but one and twenty years old. Six years after, the ipublic of Venice invited him to Padua, to teach eloquene, politics, and the Greek ianguage, in that university, whih was then extremely in its decline; but Ferrari restoredit to its former flourishing state. The republic rewarded hn by enlarging his pension every six years, which from fre hundred ducats was at last raised to two thousand. Afer the death of Ripamonte, historiographer of the city of Milan, Ferrari was appointed to write the history of tat city; and a pension of two hundred crowns was settledm htm for that purpose. He began, and composed eilit books; but finding he could not have access to the necssary materials in the archives of Milan, he desisted, id left what he had done to his heir, on condition thathe should not publish it. His reputation procured him f esents and pensions from foreign princes. Christimof Sweden, in whose honour he had made a public disccrse upon her mounting the throne, presented him withagden chain, and honoured him with her letters; and Louis IV. of France gave him a pension of five hundred crown for seven years. He died in 1682, aged seventy-five. He was remarkable for the sweetness, sincerity, and affability of his temper; and had so happy a way of mitigating persons exasperated against each other, that he acquire the title of “the Reconciler, or Pacificator.”

His works are, 1. “De re vestiaria libri tres,” Hua, 1642. In 1654 he added four books more to a s:ond edition. 2. “Analecta de re vestiaria, sive exercitcQiies ad Alberti Rubenii Commentarium de re vestiaria dato clavo. Accessit Dissertatio de veterum lucernis sepvhralibus,” Padua, 1670. This was afterwards, in 168 subjoined to his book “De re vestiaria,” and both are insated in the sixth and twelfth books of Graevius’s “Roman Aniquities.” 3. “Pallas Suecica; Panegyricus Sueconm Reginas imperium auspicanti dictus.” 4. “De laudibus Francisci Putei.” 5. “Prolusiones xxvi. Epistolae. —Formulae ad capienda Doctoris insignia. Inscriptiones. —Panegyricus Ludovico Magno Francorum Regi dictus.” Al these little pieces, and several others which had been printed separately, were collected and disposed into proper order by John Fabricius, who published them at Helmstad, 1710, in 2 vols. 8vo. 6. “Veneta Sapientia, seu de optimo civitatis statu prolusio.” 7. “Electorum libri duo.” In this work our author treats of several points of antiquity. 8. Origines Linguae Italicse,“Padua, 1676, folio. The authhor of the” Journal des Scavans, for April 1677,“gives the following judgment of this work” Scaliger had before treated of this subject, in twenty-four books, which are unfortunately lost. Though Ferrari has not taken so great an extent, yet we find a great deal of learning in him. But he appears so jealous of the language of his country, that he thinks every other origin, but what he gives it, as well as the French and Spanish from the Latin tongue, would be injurious to it. This hinders him from assenting to the opinion of cardinal Bembo, who supposes tha the Italian owes many of its words to the jargon of Langueedoc and Provence.“Menage has written a book upon the same subject, to correct the errors of Ferrari. 9.” De Pantomimis et Mimis Dissertatio.“10. ' Dissertiones dure altera de balneis, de gladiatoribus altera.” These two last are posthumous, and were published by John Fabricius, the former at Wolfenbuttel, 1714, in 8vo; the latter at Helmstad, 1720, in 8vo.

, a Jesuit of Sienna, was the author of a Syriac Dictionary, published in 1622, in 4to, under the name of “Nomenclator Syriacus.” The chief object the author is to explain the Syriac words in the Bible, in which he was assisted by some learned Maronites. He wrote also, “De Malorum aureorum cultura,” 1646, and “De Florum cultura,” 1633, both published at Rome. He died in 1655.

, an eminent artist of Valdugia, was born in 1484. He is by Vasari called “Gaudenzio Milanese.” Some have supposed him a scholar of Perugino, but Lomazzo, who was a nurseling of his school, names Scotto and Luini as his masters. His juvenile works prove what Vasari says, that he had profited by those of Lionardo da Vinci. He went young to Rome^ and is said to have been employed in the Vatican by Raffaello; and there, it is probable, that he acquired that style of design and tone of colour which eclipsed what before him had been done in Lombardy. He possessed a portentous feracity of ideas, equal to that of Giulio, but far different; instead of licentious excursions over the wilds of mythology, he attached himself to sacred lore, to represent the majesty of Divine Being, the mysteries of religion, and emotions of piety, and succeeded to a degree which acquired him the name of “eximie pius” from a Novarese synod. Strength was his element, which he expressed less by muscles forcibly marked, than by fierce and terrible attitudes, as in the Passion of Christ, at the grazie of Mu Jano, where he had Titian for a competitor; and in the Fall of Paul, at the conventuals of Vercelli, which approaches that of M. Angelo, at the Paolina; in the expression of character and mind, he is inferior perhaps only to Raffaelo; and at St. Cristoforo of Vercelli has shewn himself master of angelic grace, With a full and genial vein of colour, Gaudenzio unites an evidence which admits of no hesitation, and attracts the eye in the midst of other works. His tone is determined by the subject, as his carnations by character; but his draperies and parerga are commended more by caprice and novelty, than simplicity and grandeur. Whether it were modesty, situation, ignorance, or envy, that defrauded powers so eminent, of the celebrity often lavished on minor talents, is not now to be determined. Ferrari was little known, and less favoured by Vasari, whom the blind herd of dilettanti on either side of the Alps generally follow in their search of excellence in art. He is supposed to have died in 1550. There was another of the name John Andrew Ferrari, or De Ferrara, who was born at Genoa, in 1599, and was a disciple of Bernard Castelli; but, in order to obtain a more extensive knowledge in his profession, he studied afterwards for some time under Bernardo Strozzi. His application was attended with success, for he at last attained to such a degree of excellence, that he was equally expert in painting history, landscape, fruit, animals, and flowers; and those subjects he finished in a small size, but with extraordinary beauty and exactness, so that few of the princes or nobility of his time were satisfied without possessing some of his compositions. Benedetto Castiglioue was his disciple. He died in 1669.

, inventor of the first method of resolving biquadratic equations, was born at Bologna about 1520. He studied mathematics under the celebrated Cardan, who, having had a problem given him lor solution, gave it his pupil as an exercise of his ingenuity; and this led to the discovery of a new method of analysis, which is precisely that of biquadratics. Cardan published this method, and assigned the invention to its real author, who, had it not been for this liberal conduct of the master, would have been unknown to posterity. At the age of eighteen he was appointed a tutor in arithmetic, and was equal to the task of disputing with the most distinguished mathematicians of his own age. He was afterwards appointed professor of mathematics at Bologna, where he died in 1565. Ferrari, although, like many other learned men of his age, addicted to astrology, was an excellent classical scholar, a good geographer, and well versed in the principles of architecture.

, a learned lawyer, a good historian, a celebrated poet, and a most accomplished courtier, in the reigns of Henry VIII. Edward VI. Mary, and Elizabeth, was descended from an ancient family in Hertfordshire, and born in a village near St. Alban’s, about 1512. He was bred at Oxford, and removed thence to Lincoln’s-inn, where he applied himself with so much success to the study of the law, that he was soon taken notice of in Westminster-hall as an advocate, at the same time that he was much admired at court for his wit and good-breeding. His first rise in his profession, and at court, was owing to Cromwell earl of Essex, who was himself a man of great parts, and took a pleasure in countenancing and advancing others who had talents. Upon the fall of this patron, he quitted the public exercise of his profession as a lawyer; not, however, before he had given evident testimonies of his knowledge and learning, as appears from, 1. “The double translation of Magna Charta from French into Latin and English.” 2. “Other laws enacted in the time of Henry III. and Edw. I. translated into English.”

Afterwards he became the king’s menial servant, whom he attended in war as well as in peace, and served both with his pen and his sword, and rose so much in favour with Henry, as to receive from that monarch a very considerable grant in his native county, out of the king’s private estate. This was in 1535, yet he managed so ill, that some years after, when member of parliament for Plymouth, which he was elected in 1542, he had the misfortune, during the session, to be taken in execution by a sheriff’s officer, and carried to the compter. This, however, being represented to the house of commons, occasioned such a disturbance there, as not only produced his discharge, but a settled rule with respect to privilege. Yet Mr. Hatsell, in his “Collection of cases of Privileges of Parliament,” seems to be of opinion that the measures which were adopted, and the doctrine which was then first laid down with respect to the extent of the privileges of the house of commons, were more owing to Ferrars’s being a servant of the king, than that he was a member of the house of commons. He continued afterwards in high favour with Henry all his reign, who fully approved what the house of commons had done; and Ferrars seems to have stood upon good terms with the protector Somerset, in that of king Edward; since he attended him as a commis^ sioner of the carriage of the army into Scotland, in 1548. Edward also had a singular kindness for him, as appeared afterwards at a very critical juncture; for when the unfortunate duke of Somerset lay under sentence of death, the people murmuring on the one hand, and the king uneasy and melancholy on the other, it was thought expedient to do something to quiet and amuse the people, and if possible to entertain and divert the sovereign. In order to this, at the entrance of Christmas holidays, George Ferrars, esq. was proclaimed Lord Of Misrule, that is, a prince of sports and pastimes. This office, which required no common talents, he discharged for twelve days together at Greenwich, with great magnificence and address, and entirely to the king’s satisfaction. In this character, attended by the politest part of the court, he made an excursion to London, where he was very honourably received by officers created for that purpose, splendidly entertained by the lord mayor, and when he took leave, had a handsome present made him in token of respect.

But although he made so great a figure in the diversions of a court, he preserved at the same time his credit with all the learned world, and was no idle spectator of political affairs. This appears from the history of the reign of Mary, which though inserted in the chronicle, and published under the name of Richard Grafton, was actually written by Ferrars as Stow expressly tells us. Our author was an historian, a lawyer, and a politician, even in his poetry as appears from pieces of his, inserted in the celebrated work entitled * The Mirror for Magistrates,“&c. The first edition of this work was published in 1559, by William Baldwin, who prefixed an epistle before the second part of it, wherein he signifies, that it had been intended to reprint” The Fall of Princes,“by Boccace, as translated into English by Lidgate the monk; but that, upon communicating his design to seven of his friends, all of them sons of the Muses, they dissuaded him from that, and proposed to look over the English Chronicles, and to pick out and dress up in a poetic habit such stories as might tend to edification. To this collection Ferrars contributed the following pieces: 1.” The Fall of Robert Tresilian, Chief Justice of England, and other his fellows, for misconstruing the Laws, and expounding them to serve the Prince’s affections.' 7 2. “The Tragedy, or unlawful murder of Thomas of Woodstock, duke of Gloucester.' 13.” Tragedy of king Richard II.“4.” The Story of dame Eleanor Cobham, dutchess of Gloucester,“much altered and augmented in the second edition of 1587, in which are added, to the four already mentioned, 5.” The Story of Humphrey Plantagenet, duke of Gloucester, protector of England.“6.” The Tragedy of Edmund duke of Somerset." A farther account will be given of this work when we come to the article Sackville.

As to our author’s religion, it is very probable, if not certain, that he was a fixed, perhaps a zealous, protestant. This may reasonably be collected from his coming into public life under the protection of the lord Cromwell, who was undoubtedly of the protestant religion; and from the high credit in which he stood with the protector Somerset and king Edward, which it is scarce possible he could have attained, if he had not been so. In his history also of the reign of Mary, though he writes with much caution and moderation, and speaks highly of the personal virtues of that princess, yet he shews himself clearly of the reformed religion, especially in the large account he gives of the death of Cranmer, and of sir Thomas Wiat’s insurrection. He died in 1579, at Flamstead in Hertfordshire, and was buried in the parish church.

, or Farrars, a Warwickshire gentleman of good family, bred at Oxford, a poet likewise, and much in the good graces of Henry VIII. Wood calls him a very ingenious man; and says, that he wrote several tragedies and comedies, none of which are extant. He died in the year 1564.

There was a Henry Ferrars too, of the same county and family, bred at Oxford, and afterwards famous for his knowledge and skill in heraldry, genealogies, and antiquities. Wood says, that out of the collections of this gentleman, Dugdale laid part of the foundation of his elaborate work entitled “The Antiquities of Warwickshire illustrated;” and that, after Dugdale' s death, several of Ferrars’ s collections, that had come into his hands, were reposited in the Ashmolean Museum. Ferrars was well known to, and respected by, Camden, who, in his discourse of the antiquity of Coventry, makes this honourable mention of him: “Thus much of Coventry; yet have you not all this of me, but, willingly to acknowledge by whom I have profited, of Henry Ferrars of Baldesly, a man both for parentage and knowledge of antiquity very commendable, and my special friend; who both in this place, and also elsewhere, hath at all times courteously shewed me the right way when I was out, and from his candle, as it were, hath lightened mine.” Henry Ferrars had also, in his younger days, a good talent at poetry, some specimens of which, Wood tells us, he had seen scattered in divers books, printed in the reign of Elizabeth. He died in 1633, aged eighty-four “leaving behind him,” says Wood^ “the character of a well-bred gentleman, a good neighbour, and an honest man.”

, a Dominican, born at Valentia, in Spain, made a very distinguished figure among the divines of the seventeenth century. After teaching divinity for some time at Burgos, he was appointed first professor at Rome, where he remained for eighteen years and then was made prior of Salamanca and three years after prefect, or regent of the students. He died in 1682. His works consist of a “Commentary on the sum of St. Thomas,” 'which appeared at Salamanca and Rome, 1675 1696, in 8 vols. folio. They were at one time held in great estimation for perspicuity and precision.

, an eminent French anatomist and surgeon, was born Oct. 27, 1693, at Frepech in Agenois. He practised at Montpellier, and was a member of the faculty of that city and of Paris, member of the academy of sciences, and professor of physic in the royal colllege. He was the author of two works; one entitled “Lectures on Medicine,” the other, “Lectures on the Materia Medica” each in three volumes, 12ino, which were published in 1783, and proved the soundness of his knowledge. He held, however, some peculiar notions as to the formation of the voice, which he was not able to demonstrate to the satisfaction of his contemporaries. He died at Paris Feb. 28, 1769.

, a noble and learned Spaniard, was born at Labanezza, in 1652. After having gone through his studies at the university of Salamanca, he took orders, and obtained the cure of St. James of TaJavera, and afterwards was removed to that of St. Peter at Madrid, where he became distinguished by his wit and learning. He refused two bishoprics, although he was pressed by the court to accept them, preferring a quiet and literary life. The academy of Madrid chose him for one of its members in 1713, the year of its foundation; and the king confirmed this unanimous approbation of the literati, by appointing him his librarian. Ferreras was very useful to this growing academy, particularly by assisting in the composition of a Spanish Dictionary, which was undertaken and published by the academy, 1739, in six volumes, folio. He died, four years before, in 1735. He left several works in theology, philosophy, and history; the most considerable of which was a. general history of Spain, written in Spanish, and translated into French by licnnilly, in ten volumes, 4to. Though Mariana’s history is more elegantly written, yet all the Spanish literati agree, that it is not so exact and faithful as that of Ferreras. It ends in the reign of Philip II.

, of Vicenza, a poet and historian in the fourteenth century, was one of those who Contributed to revive good taste in Europej and to banish barbarism. He wrote a history of his own times, from 1250 to 1318, in seven books, which was inserted by Muratori., in the ninth volume of the writers on the history of Italy. A Latin poem by him, on the actions of Can de la Scala, or Scaliger, is also extant. He is said to have produced many other works in prose and verse; but there is no account of his life extant.

, in Latin Ferrettus, one of the learned civilians in the sixteenth century, was born at Castello Franco in Tuscany, Nov. 14th, 1489. At twelve years old he was sent to Pisa, where he studied the civil and canon law for three years; he spent two other years in the university of Sienna, after which he went to Rome, and was made secretary to cardinal Salviati. He was admitted an advocate at the age of nineteen years, after a public disputation before a numerous audience of cardinals and bishops. He then left his Christian name of Dominicus, and took that of Æmilius, according to a custom very prevalent among the literati of Italy. Having accepted of the chair of law-professor, he explained so learnedly the law de Rebus creditis (of things with which persons are trusted) that it gained him the title of secretary to Leo the Xth. He exercised that office for some years, after which he regigned it voluntarily, and retired into his native country. He left it again at the end of two years, his father having been killed there, and went to Tridino in the dukedom of Montferrat, where he married; and having continued there four years, he attended the marquis of Montferrat to Rome and to Naples, that marquis commanding part of the French army. This expedition of, the French proving unsuccessful, Ferreti endeavoured to return into his native country, but he was taken by the Spaniards, and could not obtain his liberty but by paying a ransom. He went into France, and taught the law at Valencewith so much reputation, that Francis I. made him counsellor in the parliament of Paris, and sent him as envoy to the Venetians, and to the Florentines. He acquitted himself so well of that employment, that it determined the marquis of Montferrat to send him to the court of Charles V. after he had obtained Francis I.'s consent for that journey. Ferreti attended the emperor in the expedition of Africa; and as soon as he was returned into France, the king sent him to the Florentines during the war in which they were engaged against the emperor. He went back to France when they were subdued, and followed the court to Nice, where the pope, Charles V. and the king of France had an interview: having afterwards resigned the post of counsellor in the parliament, he went to Lyons, and thence to Florence, where he was admitted a citizen. He was sent for to Avignon to teach the law there. His yearly stipend was at first 550 crowns, then 800, and then 1000; a sum that had never been given to any professor in that university. He gained the love both of the inhabitants and of the students, who shewed it in a very remarkable manner after his death; for when his successor Craveta began his lectures by strictures upon Ferreti, the scholars shewed their attachment to their old master by hissing and driving him from the place. He died at Avignon July 14, 1552. Ferreti was a man of general learning, and well acquainted with classical literature. He gave an edition of the principal orations of Cicero, printed at Lyons by Gryphius, 8vo, “M. T. Ciceronis Orationes Verrinae ac Philippics,” dedicated to cardinal Salviati. His “Opera Juridica” were published in 1553, and 1598, 4to. An epitaph written for him by Antonius Goveanus, speaks of him in the most extravagant terms of encomium.

, of Vincenza, was a Benedictine monk, and eminent as an antiquary. In 1672 he published, at Verona, his “Musae Lapidariae,” in folio, which is a colledlion, though by no means complete or correct, of the verses found inscribed on ancient monuments. Burman the younger, in his preface to the “Anthologia Latino,” seems to confound this Ferreti with him who flourished in the fourteenth century, speaking of his history of his own times. The exact periods of this author’s birth and death are not known.

, a skilful painter, was descended of a good family, and born at Rome in 1634, where, being in. easy circumstances, he pursued his inclination and taste for painting. He was a faithful imitator of Peter da Cortona, whose favourite disciple he was, and to whom he came so near in his ideas, his invention, and his manner of painting, that his cielings particularly are often mistaken, for Cortona’s. Generally, however, Mr. Fuseli says, Ferri has less grace of design, less ease in his actions and draperies, and less compass of mind; but he has more solidity and carefulness of finish than his master. Though he set great prices on his works, he was in continual employ. Pope Alexander VII. had a great esteem for him; and his three successors were no less favourable to him. The great duke sent for him to Florence, and assigned him a large pension to finish the works which Cortona had left imperfect. He entered so well into the spirit of them, and acquitted himself so worthily, that the whole work seems to be of the same hand. The great duke nominated him chief of the school of Florence, in which rank he continued for a long time. Ferri returned to Rome, where he appeared a great architect as well as a good painter. Several palaces and grand altars, as St. John of the Florentines, and that of the Chiesa Nuova, were raised from his designs. He diverted himself more with drawing than painting. He was much importuned for devices, figures for breviaries, and titles of books: several of which have been engraved by Spierre and Bloemart. The pope employed him in making cartoons for the Vatican; and few men have worked in more different ways. The cupola of St. Agnes, in the palace of Navona, was his last work. The chagrin he felt in seeing the angels of Bacici, a Genoese painter, which were directly under it, the force of whose colouring made his appear too weak, is said to have been the cause of his death. One day he told Lazaro Baldi, his companion, that his cupola appeared very different on the scaffold from what it did from below, and that the angels of Bacici gave him great pain; and, falling sick soon after, he died in 1689, at the age of fifty-five.

, in Latin Ferrius, a most learned divine of Germany, was born of a considerable family at Metz, in 1591. He was sent to study divinity at Montaban, and made so uncommon a progress, that he was admitted a minister at Metz in 1610. Though he was but nineteen, he had then published a book of poems; the advertisement to which he finished in these words, “sat ludo nugisque datum.” He had eminent talents for preaching: his graceful presence, his venerable countenance, and fine delivery, adding great force to his eloquence, which was very powerful and moving. His enemies reported, falsely, that he was one of the ministers whom cardinal Richelieu had bribed to procure a coalition of the two religions; however, it is certain that he was grieved at the division of the p'otestants, and hoped that he could contribute somewhat to forward a re-union; and it is supposed that with this view he kept a correspondence with Dury (See Dury). His death happened in 1669, when above fourscore stones were found in his bladder, which had occasioned it. He had a very fine library, which he increased by several works of his own. In 1616 he published “Scholastic} Orthodox! Specimen,” in which he shews, that the protestant doctrine of grace has been taught by the schoolmen. This treatise gained him the esteem of Du Plessis Mornay, who wrote him a letter upon it, in which he advised him about another work he was upon, entitled “Le dernier desespoir de la Tradition,” &c. In 1630 he published at Leyden, “Vindiciae pro Scholastico Orthodoxo,” against Perinus, an eminent Jesuit, who had published in 1619 a book entitled “Thrasonica Pauli Ferrii Calvinistae.” In 1654 he published “General Catechisme de la Reformation,” which was answered by Bossuet; and left behind him collections for a history of Metz, which are referred to by Calmet, as abounding in curious researches; and a vast number of sermons, of which about eleven hundred are on the epistle to the Hebrews.

, an eminent lawyer, called sometimes the Cato of France, was born at Toulouse in 1506. He was admitted a doctor of law at Padua; and from a professor in the university of Toulouse, was raised to be a counsellor in the parliament of the same city. It is remarkable of him, that though he was a protestant in his heart for a good part of his life, he did not profess himself to be so till a little before his death. He had indeed often discovered that he was no bigotted papist; and was so strongly suspected of heresy in 1559, that he would have been imprisoned if he had not made his escape. He harangued, in 1562, in the council of Trent, whither he was sent ambassador by the French king; and he expressed himself in so bold a manner in favour of the interests of France, that the Italian priests were highly offended at him. He went afterwards ambassador to Venice, where he continued several years; and took occasion to assist father Paul in collecting materials for his “History of the Council of Trent.” On his return from Venice, Du Plessis Mornay, who knew his thoughts, pressed him so earnestly to declare the truth, that Ferrier openly professed himself a protestant, and the king of Navarre made him his chancellor. He was about seventy-six years old at the time of his renouncing popery; and he only lived to seventy-nine. He died in 1585. It has been said that he conspired with the chancellor de l'Hospital to break the knot which united the French king with the holy see; to assemble a national council, in which the king of France, after the example of the king of England, should be declared head of the Gallican church; and to usurp all the estates of the church of France. He was reckoned among the greatest men in Europe, and was the author of some literary works.

, a protestant minister and professor of divinity at Nismes, of the seventeenth century, is, contrary to his namesake in the preceding article, memorable for becoming a papist, even after having maintained in public disputation, in 1602, that “Pope Clement the VHIth was properly the Antichrist,” yet he was the first who began to yield in the political assemblies of the reformed in France. Many circumstances in his behaviour had made him suspected as a pensioner of the court, as a false brother, and a traitor to the churches. He did not, however, openly change his religion till a popular tumult arose against him > in which his house was plundered, and himself so near being murdered, that, for the sake of escaping he was obliged to lie three days concealed in a tomb. After this he settled at Paris, where he endeavoured to make his fortune. He published in 1614, the year after his conversion, a book of controversy upon the subject of antichrist. The king employed him in several important affairs; and in 1626 he was commanded to attend his majesty to Britanny, where he was honoured with the title of state and privy counsellor. Cardinal de Richelieu had a particular esteem for him. He died of a hectic fever in 1626. His family was numerous; and he made all his children promise that they would live and die in the catholic faith. His only daughter married M. Tardieu, lieutennnt-criminel of Paris, concerning which couple some curious anecdotes are recorded in Boileau’s tenth satire, and in the notes of St. Marc. Ferrier was the reputed author of a famous political work, entitled “Catholique d'Etat,” published in 1625, in answer to some libels which the king of Spain’s partizans had written against France, upon allying herself with the protestant powers to the injury of the catholic religion.

, a French Jesuit, and a native of Rouergue, and confessor to the king of France, was born in 1614, and turned a Jesuit in 1632. He had taught philosophy fonr years, divinity twelve years, and ethics two years. He had been principal of the college of Toulouse, and had acquitted himself very well of that employment. The Jesuits probably looked upon him as a very able man, since they designed to make him the king’s confessor, to which office he was promoted in 1670. He died in the convent of the Jesuits at Paris, October 29, 1674. He was one of the ablest antagonists of Jansenius’s followers, and his thesis concerning probability, which hq maintained at Toulouse the 8th and the llth of June 1659, made a considerable noise. He wrote a Latin answer to father Baron’s objections against the “Scientia media,” entitled “Responsio ad Objectiones Vincentianas,” Toulouse, 1668, 8vo. He intended also to publish a body of divinity, but only the first volume of it has been printed, which treats <c Of the Unity of God according to St. Augustin and St. Thomas’s principles." His other works are written in French, and relate for the most part to Jansenism. He wrote two letters against Arnauld, and he gave an account of all that passed in 1653, concerning the affair of Jansenism. According to the bibliographer of the Jesuits, he wrote a book concerning the immortality of the soul in 1660, and another on the beauty of Jesus Christ in 1657 but these were the production of John Ferrier, a Jesuit of Guienne.

a learned French civilian, was doctor of law in the university of Paris, in which city he was born 1639, and taught law at Paris, as fellow, till 1694, when he was appointed professor at Rheims, where he acquired great reputation, and died May 11, 1715, aged seven-seven, leaving a great number of works, which became very popular, and the booksellers of Paris, for whom he wrote, were enriched, but he was not. His talents were considerable; but a certain arrogance of manner, and bigotry to his own opinions, prevented him from being distinguished in his profession. The principal of his works are, 1.“Comtnentaires sur la Coutume de Paris,” 2 vols. 12mo. 2. “Traité des Fiefs,” 1680, 4to. 3. “Recueil des Commentateurs de la Coutume de Paris,” 1714, 4 vols. fol. 4. “La Jurisprudence du Code,” 1684, 2 vols. 4to. 5. “Du Digeste,” 1688, 2 vols. 4to. 6. “Des Novelles,” 1688, 2 vols. 4to. 7. “La Science des Notaires,” 1771, 2 vols. 4to. '8. “Le Droit du Patronage,” 1686, 4to. 9. *; Institution Coutumiere,“3 vols. 12mo. 10.” Introduction a la Pratique,“1758, 2 vols. 12mo.” Le Diet, de Droit," 1771, 2 vols. 4to, is by Claudius Joseph, his son, who was dean of the law faculty in the university of Paris.

, a French lawyer, was born in 1515, and was a counsellor of the parliament of Bourdeaux. He was an elegant writer in Latin, an imitator of the style of Terence, admired by Scaliger, and honoured by him with the name of Atticus. --He continued the history of France in Latin (which Paulus Æmilius, a writer of Verona, had given from the reign of Pharamond to 1488) as far as the end of the reign of Francis I. This work was published at Paris, by Vascosan, in 1554, fol. and 1555, 8vo. It is copious, but not too long, and abounds with curious anecdotes and very exact details. He wrote also “Observations sur la Coutume de Bourdeaux,” Lyons, 1565, fol. He had considerable employments. His death happened in 1563, when he was no more than forty-eight.

, an able antiquary, doctor and lawprofessor at Basil, and afterwards secretary of that city, was born July 6, 1647. His regular studies were philosophy and law, to which he joined a knowledge of Greek and Roman antiquities, induced at first by a tine museum which his father had, and which he afterwards greatly enriched. In 1667 he went to Grenoble and Lyons, where be contracted an acquaintance with Spoil; and after visiting some other parts of France, arrived in England, and formed an intimacy with many of its learned men, particularly Dr. Thomas Gale, who was then employed on his edition of Jamhlicus; and Fesch supplied him with some useful observations from an ancient manuscript in his library, an obligation which Gale has politely acknowledged. After his return to Basil, in 1672, he supported some theses “De Insignibus,” in which he displayed much learning, and which were reprinted in German in the form of a treatise. In 1678 he set out on a tour in search of antiquary lore, to Austria, Carinthia, and Italy, making some stay at Padua with his friend Charles Patin, who was then professor of medicine. He was unanimously admitted a member of the society of the Ricovrati, and pronounced on that occasion a panegyric on the republic of Venice, in Greek and Latin verse, before the principal personages of the city of Padua, and it was afterwards printed. At Rome he visited every object of curiosity, and made considerable additions to his collection of Greek and other rare medals. Having examined the very rare piece of Pylaemon Euergetes, king of Paphlagonia, he wrote a dissertation on it, which Gronovius reprinted in his Greek Antiquities. On his return home he took the degree of doctor in law, and was soon after chosen syndic of the city of Basil, and secretary, and regent of the schools. He died May 27, 1712. Besides the works above-mentioned, he published some dissertations on subjects of law and philology, and a discourse on the death of Brandmuller, the learned lawyer.

, was a celebrated grammarian of antiquity, who abridged a work of “Verrius Flaccus de signih'catione verborum,” as is supposed, in the fourth century. Flaccus’s work had been greatly commended by Pliny, Aulus Gellius, Priscian, and other ancient writers, but Festus in his abridgment took unwarrantable liberties; for he was not content with striking out a vast number of words, but pretended to criticize the rest, in a manner, as Vossius has observed, not favourable to the reputation of Flaccus. Another writer, however, in the eighth century, afterwards revenged this treatment of Flaccus, by abridging Festus in the same way. This was Paul the deacon, who so maimed and disfigured Festus, that it was scarce possible to know his work, which lay in this miserable state till, a considerable fragment being found in the library of cardinal Farnese, some pains were taken to put it again into a little order. The first, or princeps editio, is without a date, but supposed to have been printed in 1470, which, was followed by one with the date of 1471. Since that time there have been various editions by Scaliger, Fulvius Ursinus, Aldus Minucius, and others; but the most complete is the Delphin edition of Paris, 1681, in 4to, published by Dacier, or perhaps the reprint of it by Le Clero, Amst. 1699. It is also among the “Auctores Latinae Linguae,” collected by Gothofredus in 1585, and afterwards reprinted with emendations and additions at Geneva, in 1622. Scaliger says that Festus is an author of great use to those who would attain the knowledge of the Latin tongue with accuracy.

, an eminent painter, was born at Rome in 1589, and educated under Lodovico Civoli, a famous Florentine painter. As soon as he quitted the school of Civoli, he went to Mantua; where the paintings of Julio Romano afforded him the means of becoming a great painter, and from them he derived his colouring, and the boldness of his characters. Cardinal Ferdinand Gonzaga, afterwards duke of Mantua, discovering the merit of Fetti, retained him at his court, furnished him with means of continuing his studies, and at last employed him in adorning his palace. Few painters, according to a modern connoisseur, have possessed a greater freedom of pencil, a more harmonious style of colouring, or a greater knowledge of expression than Fetti. If he painted a head of character, he entered into the detail of it with such spirit, that it produced an astonishing relief; and that too without the least hardness, so judiciously are the tints varied. It is the same* with his large composition* the light and shade are ingeniously balanced the figures are grouped with so much art, and the general disposition is so well observed, that they produce the most striking and harmonious effects. His pictures are scarce, and mucb Bought alter. He painted very little for churches. Goingto Venice, he abandoned himself to disorderly courses, which put an end to his life in its very prime, in 1624, when he was only in his thirty-fifth year. The duke of Mantua regretted him exceedingly, and sent for his lather and sister, whom he took care of afterwards. The sister, who painted well, became a nun, and exercised her talent in the convent, which she adorned with several of her works. Other religious houses in Mantua, were also decorated with her paintings.

, a Franciscan friar, of the order of minims, celebrated as a botanist and natural philosopher, was born at Majie in Provence, in 1660. He first visited Cartbagena and Martinico, in 1703 and 1704, and afterwards travelled to the western coast of South America, investigating the natural productions of New Spain and the neighbouring islands, from 1707 to 1712. All these voyages he accomplished under the patronage of Louis XIV. by whom he was liberally pensioned, and who caused an observatory to be built for him at Marseilles, in which town Feuillee, worn out with his labours, died in 1732. He is said to have been of that modest simple character, which best becomes an ecclesiastic and a true philosopher, except perhaps 'in his resentment against Monsieur Frezier, a rival philosopher and naturalist, sent out likewise by Louis XIV. whom he criticises at some length, in a rather contemptuous style, in the preface to the Journal of one of his voyages.

Feuillee published “Journal des Observations physiques, mathematiques, & botaniques, faites par l‘ordre du Hoi, sur les cotes orientates (occidentales) de l’Amerique meridionale, & dans les Indes occidentales, depuis l'anne 1707 jusques en 1712,” Paris, 1714, 2 vols. 4to, with numerous plates. This work is not elegant in style, but valuable for solid information upon all the subjects announced in its title, with various incidental matter besides. What relates to Peru makes a principal part of these volumes. In his descriptions of plants, their reputed medical virtues met with laudable attention from Feuillee, and are always added to his botanical descriptions, and he describes some species still unknown to us. The magnificent Flori-pondio (Datura arborea) was here first made known to botanists. He published another quarto volume, with a similar title, in 1725, in the preface to which he censures Frezier, as above mentioned. The appendix, of 7 1 pages, with 50 plates, describes many extremely interesting plants of Chili. These 100 botanical plates were, according to Haller, republished at Nuremberg in 1756 and 1757, in 2 vols. 4to, with a German translation of their descriptions. The original drawings of Feuillee, many of which were never published, remain in the Bibliotheque Nationale at Paris, but they are very rudely coloured, and without any pretensions to the skill of a painter.

, was a priest and canon of St. Cloud near Paris, whose preaching, those of his communion say, was zealous, and his doctrine sound. He had acquired a kind of licence to speak with the utmost freedom to persons of the first rank at court, and reprove their irregularities from whence this verse of the 119th Psalm was applied to him “I will speak of thy testimonies also, even before kings, and will not be ashamed.” Feuillet converted many sinners, which Boiieau alludes to when he says, “Laissez a Feuillet reformer Punivers;” and was the principal instrument in the conversion of M. de Chanteau, cou sin-german of M. de Caumartin, counsellor of state. The very instructive History he gave of this conversion was printed, with some of his other works, 1702, 12mo, and has been several times reprinted. Feuillet died at Paris, September 7, 1693, aged seventy-one. He left some “Letters,” and a “Funeral Oration” on Henrietta of England, duchess of Orleans.

, one of the bravest French officers in the seventeenth century, was the son of Francis de Pas, head chamberlain to Henry IV. descended from the ancient house of Pas in Artois, and of Magdeleine de la Fayette, and was born June I, 1590, at Saumur. He rose by his merit and birth to the highest military offices, commanded the king’s forces twice as chief, conducted the famous siege of Rochelle, where he was taken prisoner, and contributed greatly to the surrender of that important place, through the intrigues of Mad. de Noailles, his wife’s mother. Being afterwards sent into Germany as ambassador extraordinary, he did great service to the state, was made lieutenant-general of Metz, Toul, and Verdun at his return, and died at Thionville, March 14, 1640, of the wounds he had received the precceding year at the siege of that city, during which he was made prisoner. His “Negociations” were printed in Germany, 163:*, and 1634, Paris, 175:3, 3 vols. 12mo. Isaac de Pas, marquis de Keuqu.eres, his son, was also lieutenant-general of the king’s armies, counsellor of state in ordinary, governor of Verdun, and lieutenant-general of Toul. He was sent as ambassador to Germany, and Sweden, 1672, gave proofs of his courage and prudence during this latter embassy, and died ambassador extraordinary in Spain, May 6, 1688, after having been viceroy in America, 1660.

, son of Isaac, and grandson of the preceding Manasses de Pas, was born in 1648, but did not greatly signalize himself by his military talents till he was forty years old, when, in Germany, he performed so extraordinary services, at the head of only 1000 horse, that in the ensuing year, 1689, he was advanced to the rank of mareschal-de-camp. He then distinguished himself greatly in Italy, and was promoted to be a lieutenant-general in 1693, in which capacity he served till his death in 1711. Before his death he wrote to solicit the protection of Louis XIV. for his only son, and was successful in his application. The marquis of Feuquieres was an excellent officer, of great theoretical knowledge, but of a severe and censorious turn, and rendered not the less so by being disappointed of the mareschal*s staff. It was said by the wits, “that he was evidently the boldest man in Europe, since he slept among 100,000 of his enemies,” meaning his soldiers, with whom he was no favourite. His “Memoirs,” are extant in 4to, and in four volumes 12mo. They contain the history of the generals of Louis XIV. and except that the author sometimes misrepresents, for the sake of censuring, are esteemed as among the best books on the art military. The clearness of the style, the variety of the facts, the freedom of the reflections, and the sagacity of the observations, render these Memoirs well worthy of the attention, not only of officers, but of all enlightened students and politicians.

, a Lutheran divine, was born in the duciiy of Holstein, in 1672. After an useful elementary education, he studied philosophy and theology at Rostock and Wittemberg, where he was created doctor in philosophy, in 1692. In 1697, he was appointed pastor and superintendant of the diocese of Jessen, and afterwards became pastor of the church of St. Bartholomew at Zerbst, preacher to the court, confessor and ecclesiastical counsellor, and superintendant of the diocese of Zerhst, in Anhalt. In 1709 he was appointed professor of divinity, and assessor of the ecclesiastical consistory of that city. At the same time he preached once a week before the eJectress of Saxony, and was honoured with the post of ecclesiastical counsellor to the duie of Saxe-Gotha. His last appointment was that of confessor to the electress of Saxony, in. 1712, an office that he enjoyed but a few months, as he died in 1713, when only forty-one years of age. His works, enumerated by Moreri, are very numerous, and chiefly on theological subjects, but are now little known.

, a Franciscan friar, was born at Coutances in Lower Normandy, in 1541; and might have inherited a large estate, had he addicted himself to the military profession. Bayle thinks that he judged rightly of himself and his talents, and obtained a much greater reputation as a divine than as a soldier. It does not appear, however, that he attained any just eminence. Daille observes, that “he deserved his name Feu-ardent perfectly well: for that he was so transported with anger, hatred, and fury, as to be seldom in his right senses;” and he certainly was as fiery a zealot, and as bitter a persecutor, as the protestants ever had. He was one of the most seditious preachers who raised the disturbances against Henry III. and Henry IV. nor did he spare even the chief of the leaguers, when he thought him guilty of something that might prejudice the cause of the rebels. He wrote commentaries on some books of scripture, and translated some works of the fathers into French. He published at Pearls, in 1576j “The five books of Irenseus,” revised and corrected in several places from an ancient manuscript, with an addition of five entire chapters, which were in his manuscript 4t the end of the fifth book. He has added at the end of each chapter, such notes as he thought necessary for the better understanding of his author, which are for the most part useful and learned. The second edition, printed at Cologne in 1596, and again i 1630, and at Paris in 1639, is better than the first, as it contains the Greek passages of Irenseus, which were in Epiphanius, and some other ancient writers. Feuardent published also some books of controversy, which the catholics themselves own to have been written with too much passion. He died at Paris in 1610, and before his death is said to have attained a more calm and christian-like temper.

, Or Giudo Fabricius Boderianus, was born of a noble family in the territory of Boderie, in Lower Normandy, in 1541. He acquired great knowledge in the Oriental languages, and had, with his brother Nicholas, the principal part in the edition of the Polyglott of Antwerp, though that honour is usually given to the learned Arias Montanus. Le Fevre was secretary to the duke d'Alengon, brother of king Henry 111. and composed several works in French, verse and prose, but in a style so vulgar and confused, that none of them are read. He died 1598. Nicholas le Fevre de la Boderie, his brother, was also very ingenious; he died after 1605. Anthony le Fevre de la Boderie, another brother, distinguished himself in the reigns of Henry IV. and Louis XIII. by his skill in negociations, and his embassies to Rome, the Low Countries, and England, where he was loaded with presents. He discovered the marechal de Biron’s correspondence at Brussels, and rendered important services to Henry IV. He died 1615, aged sixty, and left “Traitc de la Noblesse, traduit de Tltalien de Jean-Baptiste Nenna,” printed 1583, 8vo. His “Letters on Negociations” were published 1749, 5 vols. 12mo, and he is also supposed to have been among the authors of the “Catholicon.” He married the sister of the marquis de Feuquieres, governor of Verdun, by whom he had two daughters; one died very young, the other married M. Arnauld d'Andilli 1613, who by her obtained the estate of Pomponne, and la Briotte.

, or Jacobus Fabku, Stapulensis, a man of genius and learning, was born at Estaples, in Picardy, about 1440; and was one of those who contributed to revive polite literature in the university of Paris. He became, however, suspected of Lutheranism, and was obliged to give way to the outrage of certain ignorant zealots, who suffered him not to rest. He then retired from Paris to Meaux, where the bishop was William Briconnet, a lover of the sciences and learned men; but the persecution raised by the Franciscans at Meaux obliging the bishop, against his inclination, to desert Faber, the latter was forced to retire to Blois, and from thence to Guienne. Margaret queen of Navarre, sister to Francis I. honoured him with her protection, so that he enjoyed full liberty at Nerac till his death, which happened in 1537, when he was little short of a hundred.

He was one of those, who, like Erasmus, though they did not outwardly depart from the church of Rome, and also disapproved in some things the conduct of those who established the reformation in Germany, yet at the bottom were inclined to a change. He took a journey to Strasburg, by the queen of Navarre’s order, to confer with Bucer and Capito concerning the reformation of the church. He published, so early as 1512, a translation of St. Paul’s epistles, with critical notes and a commentary, in which he frequently censures the Vulgate. He published in 1522 similar notes and commentary upon the other parts of the New Testament. Natalis Bedda, a divine of Paris, censured his divinity, as well as that of Erasmus; and the inquisitors of Rome under Clement VIIL put his commentary on the whole New Testament in the catalogue of prohibited books, till it should be corrected and purged from its errors. Father Simon has passed a judgment on this work of Faber' s, which he concludes by observing, that “he ought to be placed among the most able commentators of the age. But Erasmus, who wrote at the same time, and with infinitely more politeness, greatly lessened his reputation. The works of Faber are no longer read at Paris; whereas those of Erasmus are highly esteemed even at this day.”

His natural moderation left him when he wrote against his friend Erasmus, and the quarrel did not end at all to his advantage. Faber was angry at Erasmus, it is said, because he had not adopted all his opinions upon certain passages of scripture, when he published his notes on the New Testament. He therefore rudely attacked him, and accused him of having advanced impious notions. Erasmus defended himself; and when he had said what was Sufficient for that purpose, begged of his adversary the continuance of his friendship, assuring him that he had always loved and esteemed him. The letter he wrote him on this occasion is dated April 1517, the year that Luther began to preach. Erasmus was very sincere in his professions to Faber; and, accordingly, was much displeased with the compliments which he received from his friends on his victory, desiring them not to change their opinion of Faber on account of this quarrel. What Erasmus wrote on this head to Tonstal, the English ambassador at Paris in 1517, does much honour both to himself and Faber. “What you write concerning my answer to Faber, though J know you wrote it with a most friendly intention, yet gave me uneasiness on a double account; because it revives my past grief, and because you seem on this occasion to speak with less esteem than I could wish of Faber; a man who for integrity and humanity has scarcely his equal among thousands. In this single instance only has he acted unlike himself; in attacking a friend, who deserved not such usage, in so violent a manner. But what man was ever wise at all times? And I wish I could have spared my adversary: but now I am afflicted for two reasons; both because I am constrained to engage with such a friend, and because I perceive some to think less candidly of Faber, for whom it is my earnest desire that all should entertain the utmost esteem.” These liberal sentiments had their effect on Faber, who repented of his attack, and made no reply.

Some very singular things are related of his last hours. Margaret of Navarre was very fond of Faber, and visited him often. He and other learned men, whose conversation greatly pleased the queen, dined with her one day; when, in the midst of the entertainment, Faber began to weep. The queen asking the reason, he answered, That the enormity of his sins threw him into grief; not that he had ever been guilty of debaucheries, but he reckoned it & very great crime, that having known the truth, and taught it to persons who had sealed it with their blood, he had had the weakness to keep himself in a place of refuge, far from the countries where crowns of martyrdom were distributed. The queen, who was eloquent, comforted him; yet he was found dead a few hours after going to bed, which, considering his very advanced age, was not very extraordinary. He wrote several works in divinity, besides those above-mentipned, particularly an edition of the Psalter, in five languages, Paris, 1509, fol. “Traite de, Duplici, et unica Magdalena,” 4to “Agones martyruia mensis Januarii,” fol. without date of place or year, but of the beginning of the sixteenth century; a French version of the Bible, Antwerp, 1530, fol. very scarce, known by the name of the Emperor’s Bible, from the printer’s name. This translation, say the catholics, was the foundation of those which the protestants and doctors of Louvahi have published.

, a celebrated doctor of the Sorbonne, archdeacon of Lisieux, and grand vicar of Bourges, was born at Coutance, of a family which produced several persons of merit and learning. He gained great reputation by his works, which are, “Motifs invincibles pour convaincre ceux die la Religion pretendue Reformee,” 12mo, which, like all his works, is much esteemed by those of his communion. This was followed by some pieces in favour of the “Motifs invincibles,” against M. Arnauld,­who had attacked some parts of them; which dispute did not, however, prevent the doctors from being friends. He wrote also, I. “Nouvelle Conference avec un Ministre, touchant les Causes de la Separation des Protestans,” 1685. 2. “Recueil de tout ce qui s’est fait pour et contre les Protestans en France,” 4to. 3. “Instructions pour confirmer les nouveaux Convertis dans la Foi de PEglise.” 4. “L'Anti-Journal des Assemblies de Sorbonne:” this work, his admirers says, is full of wit and subtile criticism. He published also a new edition of Dominico Magrio’s work “on the Agreement of the seeming Contradictions in Holy Scripture,” Paris, 1685, 12mo, in Latin, &c. He died July I, 1716, at Paris.

, of Villebrune, where he was born in 1732, was a man of considerable classical learning, and the author of many useful translations into the French language. Of his personal history we are only told, that he was a doctor of medicine, professor of oriental languages in the French college, one of the forty members of the French academy, and keeper of the national library, in which he succeeded Chamfort. He was not much attached to the principles which occasioned the French revolution, and was proscribed by the French directory for having written a pamphlet in which he maintained that France ought to be governed by a single chief. After residing occasionally in several places, he was made professor of natural history at la Cbarente; and when the central school, as it was called, was shut up, he taught mathematics and humanity in the college. The iast ten yearsof his life were spent at Angouleme, where he died Oct. 7, 1809. His character was lively, and his temper sometimes impetuous and unguarded, which made him many enemies in the literary world. He was, however, a man of indefatigable study, and was a master of fourteen languages ancient and modern. His reading was most extensive, but not well digested, and such was his love of variety, that he seldom adhered to any one subject long enough to produce a work in which it was completely discussed. He was, however, a valuable assistant to scholars employed on any arduous undertaking; and among others, is said to have contributed to the two editions of Strabo lately printed at Utrecht and Oxford, by examining manuscripts for the editors. Among his translations are, a valuable one of Athenreus, and the only one France can boast of since that of the abbd Marolles fell into disrepute. He translated also Hippocrates’ s Aphorisms; Epictetus Cebes’s Table; “Silius Italicus,” of whom also he published an edition of the original, in 1781, containing various readings from four Mss. and from Laver’s edition of 1471, never before collated by any editor. Yet in this he is sometimes rash in his conjectures, and pettishly intemperate in noticing his predecessors. Le Fevre’s other translations are, the “Memoirs of Ulloa,” and “Cervantes’s Tales,” from the Spanish “Carli’s American Letters” from the Italian Zimmerman “On Experience,” and on the “Epidemic Dysentery,” &c. from the German “Rosen’s treatise on Infants,” from the Swedish and the works of Armstrong and Underwood on the same subject, from the English. He published some other works relative to the arts, sciences, and politics, the titles of which are not given in our authority; and left complete, or nearly so, a translation of Aretseas, which he undertook at the request of the School of health of Paris.

, or Nicolaus Faber, a very ingenious, learned, and pious man, was born at Paris, June 2, 1544, or according to Perrault, July 4, 1543; and liberally educated by his mother, his father dying in his infancy. During the course of his studies, as he was cutting a pen, a piece of the quill flew into his eye, and gave him such excessive pain, that hastily lifting up his hand to it, he struck it out with the knife. Having finished his application to the languages, he was sent to study the civil law at Tholouse, Padua, and Bologna. He did not come back till he had travelled through Italy: and he resided eighteen months in Rome, about 1571, where he cultivated a friendship with Sigonius, Muretus, and other learned men. He there acquired his taste for the investigation of antiquities, and brought away with him many curiosities. Upon hi$ return to France, he applied himself wholly to letters, and would hear no mention of marriage. His mother and brother dying in 1581, he lived with Peter Pithoeus, with whom he was very intimate; and having no occupation but study, he employed himself in reading the ancients, in correcting them by Mss. of which he had a great number in his own library, and in writing notes upon them. He laboured particularly on Seneca the rhetorician, whom he published in 1587, with a learned preface and notes, an. edition which we do not find mentioned by Dibdin oc Clarke. He applied himself also to studies of a different kind, to the mathematics particularly; in which he succeeded so well, that he discovered immediately the defect in Scaliger’s demonstration of the quadrature of the circle. When Henry the Fourth of France became at length the peaceable possessor of the crown, he appointed Faber preceptor to the prince of Conde. During this important trust, he found time to labour upon some considerable works; and composed that fine preface to the fragments of Hilary, in which he discovered so many important facts relating to the history of Arianism, not known before. After the death of Henry IV. he was chosen, by the queen, preceptor to Louis XIII. He died in 1611, or according to Perrault, Nov. 4, 1612.

Though he laboured intensely all his life, he was one of those learned men who are not ambitious of the character of author, but content with studying for themselves and their friends. He applied himself in his youth to the belles lettres and history, which he never neglected. Civil law, philosophy, and morality, were afterwards his occu^ jnition: and at the latter part of life, he spent his time chiefly among ecclesiastical antiquities. As he kept up a correspondence with all the learned of Europe, when he heard of any person about to publish an author, or to compose a work of his own, he was ever ready to assist him with Mss. and to furnish him with memoirs, but without suffering any mention to be made of his name, though his injunctions upon this point were not always observed. His own works, which were but few, were collected after his death by John le Begue, his friend, and printed at Paris, 1614, in a small volume, 4to. They consist of biblical criticism, questions on morals, and philological pieces in Latin and French.

The praises bestowed on Nicolas le Fevre, by Baillet, and almost all the critics of the time, are of the most exalted kind; an advantage which his very great merits would not perhaps have gained, had they not been enhanced by his modesty. He was admired and loved, but not feared. Lipsius pronounced him a perfect critic, almost the only one capable of correcting and polishing the works of others; and whose learning, judgment, and diligence, knew no other bounds than what his modesty prescribed. Of the same cast are the eulogies upon him, by Baronius, Scaevola Samarthanus, Sirmond, Pithceus, Lipsius, cardinal Perron, Isaac Casaubon, Sealiger, Scioppius, and others.

, or Tanaquil Faber, a very learned man, father of madame Dacier, was born at Caen in Normandy in 1615. His father determined to educate him to learning, at the desire of one of his brothers, who was an ecclesiastic, and who promised to take him into his Jiouse under his own care. He had a genius for music, and early became accomplished in it but his uncle proved too severe a preceptor in languages he therefore studied Latin with a tutor at home, and acquired the knowledge of Greek by his own efforts. The Jesuits at the college of La Fleche were desirous to detain him among them, and his father would have persuaded him to take orders, but he resisted both. Having continued some years in Normandy, he went to Paris; where, by his abilities, learning, and address, he gained the friendship of persons of the highest distinction. M. de Noyers recommended him to cardinal Ue Richelieu, who settled on him a pension of 2000 livres, to inspect all the works printed at the Louvre. The cardinal designed to have made him principal of the college which he was about to erect at Richelieu, and to settle on him a farther stipend: but he died, and Mazarine, who succeeded, not giving the same encouragement to learning, the Louvre press became almost useless, and Faber’s pension was very ill paid. His hopes being thus at an end, he quitted his employment; yet continued some years at Pans, -pursuing his studies, and publishing various works. Some years after he declared himself a protestant, and became a professor in the university of Saumur; which place he accepted, preferably to the professorship of Greek at Nimeguen, to which he was invited at the same time. His great merit and character soon drew to him from all parts of the kingdom, and even from foreign countries, numbers of scholars, some of whom boarded at his house. He had afterwards a contest with the university and consistory of Saumur, on account of having, unguardedly and absurdly, asserted in one of his works, that he could pardon Sappho’s passion for those of her own sex, since it had inspired her with so beautiful an ode upon that subject. Upon this dispute he would have resigned his place, if he could have procured one elsewhere: and at last, in 1672, he was invited upon advantageous terms to the university of Heidelberg, to which he was preparing to remove, when he was seized with a fever, of which he died Sept. 12, 1672. He left a son of his own name, author of a small tract “De futilitate Poetices,” printed 1697 in 12mo, who was a minister in Holland, and afterwards lived in London, then went to Paris, where he embraced the Romish religion; and two daughters, one of whom was the celebrated madam Dacier, and another married to Paul Bauldri, professor at Utrecht. Huet tells, that “he had almost persuaded Faber to reconcile himself to the church of Rome,” from which he had formerly deserted; “and that Faber signified to him his resolution to do so, in a letter written a few months before his death, which prevented him from executing his design.” Voltaire,' if he may be credited, which requires no small degree of caution, says he was a philosopher rather than a Hugonot, and despised the Calvinists though he lived among them.

T. le Fevre was agreeable in his person, andjiis stature above the common standard; but a little stiff in his behaviour. He was good-natured, but somewhat blunt in his conversation. He had a strong aversion to falsehood and loquacity. He was always very elegant in his dress, and so expensive in this article, that he is said to have sent constantly to England for whole boxes of gloves, silk stockings, &c. and to Paris, and even to Rome, for all sorts of essences, perfumes, and powders. He was subject to sudden starts of passion in his family, which, however, were soon over. His books, his children, and his garden, in which he cultivated all kinds of flowers himself, were his ordinary diversions. He ate and slept little.

He published, 1. “Luciani de morte Peregrini libellus, cum notis,” 1653, 4to. He thought this the best of Luclan’s pieces; and had a design to give an edition of all his works, which, however, he never executed, 2. “Diatribe, Flavii Josephi de Jesu Christo testimonium suppositurn esse,” 1655, 8vo. 3. “Luciani Timon,” with a Latin version and notes. 4. “Epistolarum pars prima,” 1659, 4to. “Pars secunda: cui accedunt Aristophanis Concionatrices, Graece & Latine, cum notis,” 1665, 4to. 5. “Journal du Journal, ou, Censure de la Censure;” and afterwards, 6. “Seconde Journaline;” both in 1666, 4to. 7. “Abrege* des Vies des Poetes Grecs,” &c. with “the marriage of Belphegor, and the life of Theseus, from Plutarch,” 1665, in 12mo. 8. “Convivium Xenophontis.” 9. “Platonis Alcibiades primus.” 10. “Plutarchus de Superstitione” all in French translations, 1666; as was the year after, 11. “Aristippi Vita a D. Laertio.” This last was inserted by De Sallengre, in his “Memoirs de Literature,” torn. ii. p. 2. In the same volume of the same work was published, 12. “Methode pour commencer les humanites Grecques et Latines:” translated in English, and published by Phillips, in a book entitled “A compendious way of teaching ancient and modern languages, formerly practised by the learned Tanaquil Faber, in the education of one of his sons, and of his daughter the celebrated madam Dacier. To which are added, some tracts and observations on the same subject by several eminent men, namely, Roger Ascham, Richard Carew, Milton, Locke, &c. With an account of the education of the dauphin, by Bossuet bishop of Meaux,” 1723, 8vo. 13. “Fabulse ex Locmanis Arabico-Latinis versibus redditae,” 1673, 12n; and subjoined, the year after, to the first volume of the second edition of his “Epistolse.” 14. He published notes upon several Greek and Latin authors of antiquity namely, Apollodorus, Longinus, Anacreon, Aristophanes, Ælian, Lucretius, Phyedrus, Virgil, Horace, Terence, Eutropius, Justin, Dionysius Periegetes, aad others.

The character of this critic has been very variously represented. Bochart calls him a man excellently skilled in. the Latin and Greek learning, and of uncommon sagacity and penetration. Tollius tells us, that he was a person of great wit and pleasantry, and wonderfully polished by all the elegance of the. Greek and Roman literature. Guy Patin, in a letter dated at Paris Sept. 21, 1666, gives him the character of an excellent person, and one of the first rank of learned men of that age. Nicholas Heinsius represents him as a man of learning and genius, but somewhat conceited. Morhof says, that he “was very learned, a good philologer, well skilled in the Greek language, of a very fine and enterprizing genius, who from his own imagination made a great many alterations in authors, though destitute of manuscripts; which rashness, however, sometimes succeeded very well with him, who by his own sagacity saw, what others search for with great labour in manuscripts. But he is more than once severely animadverted upon by other writers on account of his presumption; for he frequently corrects at his pleasure corrupt passages, and makes prodigious alterations in writers. Many of his conjectures are contained in his epistles, of which there are two books, in which he explains the passages of the ancients contrary to the opinion of every body; though he is highly to be valued on account of the elegance and acuteness of his genius.” Morhof also applies to him, the line

Huet, bishop of Avranches, assures us that our author was well skilled in the Greek and Roman, and all the ancient learning. Niceron observes, that “his Latin style is fine and delicate, without any points or affectation; every thing is expressed very happily in it. He had likewise a good genius for Greek and Latin poetry; and his verses are worthy of the better ages. His French style has not the graces of his Latin. He knew well enough the rules of our language, but he did not truly understand the true genius and natural propriety of it. As he lived in the Province, that is, almost out of the world, he wrote by study than custom, and he has not always observed the French turn and idiom. Besides, he spoiled his style by a vicious affectation, endeavouring to mix the serious of Balzac with the hutnour and pleasantry of Voiture. Notwithstanding these defects, what he has written in our language will still please; and if his translations have not all the elegance possible, they support themselves by their accuracy, and the learned remarks which accompany them.” Mr. William Baxter, in the dedication of his edition of Anacreon, styles him “futilis Callus,” and affirms that our author in his notes upon that poet every where trifles, and with all his self-conceit and vanity has shewn himself absolutely unfit for that task. In another place he writes thus: ' Nugatur etiam Tanaquillus Faber, ut solet;“and at last he styles him,” Criticaster Callus." Some modern critics have not been much more favourable to his critical talents.

, an eminent French civilian, was born at Semur, the capital of Auxois, Dec. 16, 1583. After studying at Dijon, Orleans, and other places, he was received as an advocate of parliament in 1602, when only nineteen years old, and the same year he went into Germany to attend the celebrated Bongars, who was sent by Henry IV. resident from France, into the empire; but soon left him, to study the law at Heidelberg, where the well-known Codefroy was at that time law-professor. Godefroy paid great attention to Fevret, who was recommended by several persons of quality: he received him into his house, and caused him to hold public disputations, which; he did with great applause. In 1607, Fevret returned to Dijon, where he married Mrs. Anne Brunet of Beaulne, by whom he had nineteen children; fourteen of which they brought up together during eight years. After his wife’s death, which happened in 1637, he very whimsically caused his bed to be made one half narrower, and never would marry again. He gained great reputation at the bar at Dijon; and was chosen counsellor to the three estates of the province. In 1629, Lewis the Thirteenth being come to Dijon in order to punish a popular insurrection, Fevret was chosen to petition the king that he would graciously be pleased to pardon the guilty. He spoke for all the corporations, and made so elegant a discourse, that the king commanded him to print it, and to send it to him at Lyons. His majesty then pardoned the authors of the sedition, and granted to Fevret the place of counsellor in the parliament of Dijon; but not being permitted to employ a deputy, he refused it, because he would not quit his profession of an advocate, and contented himself with the posts of king’s counsellor and secretary to the court, with a pension of 900 livres. He wrote a history of this insurrection, which was published some time after. As he was frequently sent a deputy to the court, he was known to de Morillac, keeper of the seals of France, who honoured him with his friendship. As early as 1626 and 1627, Monsieur, the king’s brother, had chosen him for his counsellor in ordinary in all his affairs; and the prince of Conde had made him intendant of his house, and of his affairs in Burgundy. He was continued in the same post by his son Louis de Bourbon prince of Cond6; and, during the life of these two princes, he was honoured with their favour in a distinguished manner. Frederic Casimir, prince palatine of the Rhine, and his consort Amelia Antwerpia, born princess of Orange, chose him also their counsel and intendant for their affairs in Burgundy. He had an extensive correspondence with all the learned civilians in his time. He died at Dijon, in 1661.

He published in 1645, a small Latin treatise entitled <c De claris Fori Burgundici Oratoribus,“and his” Traité de l'Abus“in 1653, which last celebrated work was written at the solicitation of the second Lewis de Bourbon prince of Conde. He enlarged it afterwards by one half, which occasioned a second edition of it after his death, in 1667. It was reprinted a third time ten years after; but the best edition is that of Lyons, 1736, in two volumes, folio. He made an excellent translation of Pibrac’s (See Faur) Quatrains, in Latin verses, printed at Lyons, 1667, with a commentary under this title,” De officiis vitas humanae, give, in Pibraci Tetrasticha Commentarius." Several authors have mentioned him and his works in a very honourable manner. He had a son Peter, also a man of learning, who died in 1706, and left his fine library to the Jesuits of Dijon, with funds for increasing it. In. 1708, a catalogue of it was published in 4to, with a preface by father Oudin.

, great grandson of the former, was born at Dijon in 1710, and educated to the profession of the law. By distinguishing himself in some great causes, he obtained a pension from the government. He laboured for several years in the publication of a new edition of Le Long’s “Bibliothe*que Historique de la France,” and compiled so much matter as to extend that work from a single volume in folio, to four vast folios, besides a fifth containing indexes, &c. At the time of his death, which happened in 1772, he was a member of the French academy of Belles-lettres, and director of the university of Dijon. He was a man pleasing in society, and of much zeal, both literary and patriotic. He lived to see only two volumes of his edition of Le Long published. The rest were edited by Barbeau de Bruyere.

, a French clergyman of the Jansenist party, was born at Paris in 1616, and studied in the college of the Sorbonne, where he obtained the esteem of persons of all ranks. In 164,5, he was engaged by M. de Bellegarde, archbishop of Sens, to deliver a course of instructions to the candidates for holy orders in his diocese. He obtained some preferment in the church, and composed several useful books, among which was one entitled “A Catechism on Grace 3” which was afterwards reprinted with the title of “Illustrations of certain difficulties respecting Grace.” This work was condemned by a decree of the inquisition at Home, which M. Fouquet, attorneygeneral of the parliament at Paris, would not permit to be promulgated in that city. In 1656, M. Feydeau was one of the seventy-two doctors who were expelled by the faculty of the Sorbonne for refusing to subscribe to the condemnation of M. Arnauld; and on this account he was obliged to relinquish his preferments. After this, for several years, he lived chiefly in retirement, and produced his “Reflections on the History and Harmony of the Gospels,” in 2 vols. 12mo; a work which has gone through several editions. In 1665, he was presented by the bishop of Aleth with a prebend in his diocese, which he resigned in 1668, in order to undertake the cure of Vitri le Francois, in Champagne, which after seven years he was obliged to give up, in consequence of the persecutions with which his party was harassed. He was banished to Bourges, in 1677; and afterwards was sent to Annonai in the Virares, where he died July 24, 1694. He published many works besides those above-mentioned, and left behind him many others that have not yet appeared, particularly memoirs of himself, as far as 1678, and many letters. A long Latin epitaph, engraved on his tomb, which is preserved by Moreri, was written by a religious of the Celestine order.

, was a learned physician of the order of St. Benedict, born in Spain, who died in 1765. By his writings many have thought that he contributed as much towards curing the mental diseases of his compatriots and reforming the vitiated taste of his countrymen, by introducing liberal notions in medicine and philosophy, as the great Michel Cervantes had done those of a preceding age, by his incomparable history of Don Quixote. In the “Teatro Critico, sopra los Errores communes,” which he published in fourteen volumes, are many severe reflections against the ignorance of the monks, the licentiousness of the clergy, ridiculous privileges, abuse ef pilgrimages, exorcisms, pretende-d miracles, &c. &c. by which he made a formidable host of enemies, and would certainly have been also a martyr, had the numerous calls of vengeance been listened to by those in power. The learned part of the nation, however, undertook his defence, and he escaped the grasp of the inquisition; and, notwithstanding the freedom he had taken with the faculty, the medical college at Seville conferred on him the degree of doctor, and honoured him with a seat at their board. M. Bourgoing observes, that Dr. Feyjoo, or Feijoo, was one of those writers who treated this conjectural art in the most rational manner, but he is certainly far from consistent, and sometimes lays down a doctrine which he is obliged afterwards to abandon. A considerable part of tis “Teatro Critico” was translated into French by D'Hermilly, in 12vols. 12mo; and several of his Essays have been published at various times in English, the largest collection of which is entitled “Essays or Discourses, selected from the works of Feyjoo, and translated from the Spanish, by John Brett, esq.” 1780, 4 vols. 8vo. The best are those on subjects gf morals and criticism.

, was a lawyer of Frankfort on the Maine, and syndic of that town, where he died in 1581, at the age of sixty-nine. He was the author of several works, of winch the most famous was his “Virorum qui superiori nostroque steculo eruditione et doctrina illustres atque memorabiles fuerunt, Vitae,” Francfort, 1536, 4to, a work of so great rarity, that some bibliographers have doubted its existence. He afterwards published, 2. “Vitae recentiorum jurisconsultorum,” Padua, 1565, 4to, of which Clement notices a prior edition in 1537. 3. “Onomasticon philosophico-medico synonymum,” 1574. 4. “De Cautelis,” 1577. 5. “Concilium Matrimoniale,” 1580.

, a man of considerable learning, was born about 1589, and becoming a Jesuit, was appointed professor of classics and rhetoric in the college of the Trinity at Lyons. The time of his death is not mentioned. He is known principally for an edition of the whole body of poets, which he corrected and published under the title of “Chorus Poetarum,” Lyons, 1616, adding several pieces of the lower empire, an ample index, and a “Musaeum rhetoricum et poeticum,” which seems to be a collection of the beauties of the poets. He published also, “Arcana studiorum omnium methodus, et bibliotheca scientiarum,” Lyons, 1649, 8vo, reprinted by Fabricius in 1710, with additions; “Favus Patrum,” a collection of the thoughts of the fathers, in 12mo, above 1000 pages, and some other works.

, was an eminent prior, and doctor of the Sorbonne in 1454, and rector of the university of Paris in 1467, who taught rhetoric, philosophy, and divinity, with great reputation. He opposed the plan formed by Louis XI. of arming the scholars, and was entrusted with several commissions of importance. Fichet went to Rome with cardinal Bessarion, who dedicated his orations to him in 1470, and he was well received by pope Sixtus IV. and appointed his chamberlain. We have a work of his on “Rhetoric,” and some “Epistles,” written in very elegant language for that age, printed at the Sorbonne., 1471, 4to, and which has been sold as high as 50l. It was Fichet, who with his friend John de la Pierre, brought Martin Crantz, Ulric Gering, and Michael Friburger, from Germany to the Sorbonne, in order to introduce printing in France; and Fichet’s works above mentioned were among the first they produced.

, a learned Italian, and the reviver of the Platonic philosophy in the West, was born at Florence in 1433, where his father was physician to Cosmo de Medici, and sent his son to pursue that study at the university of Bologna. Marsilius obeyed him with some reluctance, but having made a short trip from Bologna to Florence, his father took him with him on a visit to Cosmo de Medicis, which gave a new turn to his life and studies. Cosmo was so charmed by his appearance and his spirited answers, that from that moment, although Marsilius was at this time merely a youth, he destined him to be the principal of the Platonic school which he was about to form. With this view he brought him to reside with him, superintended his studies, and treated him with so much kindness, that Marsilius regarded him ever after as a second parent. He made such rapid progress in the study of philosophy, that he was only twenty-three years old, when he wrote his four books of the Institutions of Plato. Cosmo and the learned Landino, to whom he shewed the manuscript, highly applauded his labours, but advised him to learn Greek before he should publish them. This he accordingly studied with his usual ardour, and gave the first proof of the progress he had made by translating the hymns of Orpheus into Latin. Reading about the same time in Plato that heaven had bestowed music on man in order to calm his passions, he learned that science also, and amrised himself with chanting the hymns of Orpheus, accompanying himself with a lyre resembling that of the Greeks. H translated afterwards the book on the origin of the world attributed to Mercurius Trismegistus, and having presented these first-fruits of his Greek studies to his patron, Cosmo rewarded him with a grant of some land at Careggi, near Florence, and with a house in the city, and some very magnificent manuscripts of Plato and Plotinus.

Marsilius now undertook the entire translation of Plato, which he completed in five years, and was then in his thirty-fifth year. Cosmo was now dead, but his son Peter who succeeded him, had the same friendship and esteem for our author, and it was by his orders that he published his translation, and lectured on the works of Plato at Florence to an audience composed of the eminent scholars of Europe who were most conversant in ancient philosophy. Lorenzo also extended his patronage to Marsilius, who having taken priest’s orders in his forty-second year (1475), Lorenzo bestowed several henefices on him, which rendered him easy in his circumstances. More he never wished, and when, by Lorenzo’s bounty, he had attained this competency, he made over his patrimony to his relations. His time was now divided between his ecclesiastical duties and his philosophical studies. His life was exemplary, and his temper amiable. He loved retirement, especially at his country-seat, where he enjoyed the conversation of a fevf friends. Although his constitution was weak, and he was frequently a sufferer by disease, his ardour of study never abated. The pleasure he felt in his retirement, his contented disposition, and his respect for the Medici family, made him refuse some great otters made by pope Sixtus IV. and by Matthias Corvinus, king of Hungary. He died at the age of sixty-six in 1499.

As a philosopher, much cannot now be said in favour of Ficinus, and the high encomiums to which he appeared entitled in the fifteenth century, will not all bear the test of modern criticism. His works afford abundant proofs how deeply he was influenced by the reveries of judicial astrology. His principal want was vigour and accuracy of judgment, with which if he had been furnished, he would have avoided the superstitious attachment manifested by him to the “Platonismus Alexandrinus,” than which, Brucker observes, no philosophical reveries could possibly be more ridiculous; and he would have evinced more sagacity in detecting the sophisms of this sect. He was devoid also of the more splendid and exterior graces of a well cultivated understanding; his style is pronounced inelegant, and his language confused. He was a Platonist even in his correspondence, and some of his letters are enigmatical and mysterious. Brucker also accuses him of being of a timid and servile spirit, which would naturally lead him to accommodate his version to the judgment of his patron. He entertained the notion which prevailed among the Christian fathers, that the doctrine of Plato was, in some sort, of divine origin, and might be fairly construed into a perfect agreement with that of divine revelation. From these causes, Ficinus is very far from adhering with strictness to his author’s meaning; in many instances he rather expresses his own cpnceptions than those of Plato, and often gives his interpretation a bias towards the A lexandrian or Christian doctrine, for which he has no sufficient authority in the original. On the whole, Brucker is of opinion, that Ficinus was rather an industrious than a judicious translator, and that his version of Plato should be read with caution. The chief part of his works are contained in the Paris edition of 1641, in 2 vols, folio, amongst which those of most merit are the versions of Plato and Plotinus. Of some of his works there are very early editions, now of great rarity.

, a famous Roman medallist, antiquary, and Cicerone, was born in 1664, at Lugano, and died in 1747. Of his personal history, our authority furnishes no other particulars than that he was a disciple of J. P. Bellori. He was, however, the author of many works on subjects of classical antiquities, written in the Italian language, particularly “divertimenti delle Medaglie antiche,” mentioned by Menckenius, and written about 1694. 2. “Osservazioni sopra l'antichita di Roma descritte nel Diario Italico del Montfaucon,” &c. 1709. 3. “Delia Bolla d‘oro de’ Fanciulli nobili Romani,” &c. 1732. 4. “De' Tali ed altro Strumeriti lusori degli antichi Romani,” 1734. 5, “Le Maschere Sceniche e figure Comiche de' antichi Romani,” 1736. (This is illustrated with engravings from ancient gems, cameos, marbles, and bronzes, upon nearly 100 plates well executed, is replete with erudition on the subject, and is at once curious, amusing, and instructive. It is peculiarly connected with dancing, saltation, comic scenes, and the musical declamation and melody of the ancients.) 6. “Piombi antichi,” 1740: all published at Rome. The two latter were translated into Latin, the first entitled '< De Larvis Scenicis et figuris eomicis antiquorum Romanorum,“1750. The second” De Plumbeis antiquorum numismatibus, tarn sacris quam profanis,“1750, both by Dominicus Cantagallius, whose real name, Winckelrnan seems to say, was Archangelo Contucci. He wrote also, 7.” Le Vestigia e Rarita di Roma antica, richercate et spiegate,“1744; a second book entitled” La Singolarita, di Roma mcKlerna," and some other tracts.

, an English divine, and laborious writer, was born of reputable parents, at Hunmanby near Scarborough in Yorkshire in 1671. In his education he was much encouraged by his uncle the rev. Mr. Fiddes of Brightwell in Oxfordshire, who was as a father to him. After being instructed at a private school at Wickham in that neighbourhood, he was admitted of Corpus Christi, and then of University college, in Oxford; where by his parts and address he gained many friends. He did not, however, continue there; but, after taking a bachelor of arts degree in 1693, returned to his relations, and married, in the same year, Mrs. Jane Anderson, a lady of good family and fortune. In 1694, he was ordained priest by Dr. Sharp, archbishop of York; and not long after, presented to the rectory of Halsham in that county, of about 90l. per annum. Halsham, being situated in a marsh, proved the occasion of much ill health to Fiddes and his family; and he had the misfortune, while there, to be suddenly so deprived of his speech, as never after to be able to utter words very articulately, unless his organs were strengthened with two or three glasses of wine, which, as he was a mun of great temperance, was to him an excess. His diocesan, however, dispensed with his residence upon his benefice for the future; on which he removed to Wickham, and continued there some months. Being no longer able to display his talents in preaching, which before were confessedly great, and having a numerous family, he resolved to devote himself entirely to writing. For this purpose, he went to London in 1712; and, by the favour of dean Swift, was introduced to the earl of Oxford, who received him kindly, and made him one of his chaplains. The dean had a great esteem for Fiddes, and recommended his cause with the warmth and sincerity of a friend. The queen soon after appointed him chaplain to the garrison at Hull, and would probably have provided handsomely for him, had not death prevented her. Losing his patrons upon the change of the ministry in 1714, he lost the above mentioned chaplainship; and the expences of his family i icreasing, as his ability to supply them lessened, he was obliged to apply himself to writing with greater assiduity than ever. Yet he continued in high esteem with contemporary writers, especially those of his own party; and was encouraged by some of the most eminent men of those times. By the generosity of his friend and relation Dr. Radcliffe, the degree of bachelor of divinity was conferred upon him by diploma, Feb. 1, 1713, and in 1718 he was honoured by the university of Oxford with that of doctor, in consideration of his abilities as a writer. He died at the house of his friend Anstis at Putney, in 1725, aged fifty ­four years, leaving behind him a' family consisting of a wife and six children. His eldest daughter was married to the rev. Mr. Barcroft, curate of St. George’s, Hanover-square, who abridged Taylor’s “Ductor Dubitantium.” Dr. Fiddes was buried in Fulham churchyard, "near the remains of bishop Compton, to whom he had been much obliged.

His first publication appears to have been, 1. “A prefatory Epistle concerning some Remarks to be published on Homer’s Iliad: occasioned by the proposals of Mr. Pope towards a new English version of that poem, 17 14,” 12mo. It is addressed to Dr. Swift. It would seem to have been his intention to write a kind of moral commentary upon Homer; but, probably for want of encouragement, this never appeared. The first work by which he distinguished himself in any considerable degree, was, 2. “Theologia Speculativa: or the first part of a body of divinity under that title, wherein are explained, the principles of Natural and Revealed Religion, 1718,” folio. This met with a favourable reception from the public: yet when Stackhouse, a man certainly not of much higher talents, afterwards executed a work of a similar nature, he endeavoured to depreciate the labours of his predecessor. Dr. Fiddes’s second part is entitled “Theologia Practica, wherein are explained the duties of Natural and Revealed Religion;” and was published in 1720, folio. The same year also he published in folio, 3. “Fifty-two practical Discourses on several subjects, six of which were never before printed.” These, as well as his Body of Divinity, were published by a subscription, which was liberally encouraged at Oxford. But the work which gained him the most friends, and most enemies, was, 4. “The Life of Cardinal Wolsey, 1724,” in folio, dedicated to the chancellors, vice-chancellors, doctors, and other members of the two universities; and encouraged by a large subscription. This work was attacked with great severity in “The London Journal,” and the author charged him with being a papist; who repelled this accusation in, 5. “An Answer to Britannicus, compiler of the London Journal, 1725,” in two letters; in the first of which he endeavours to obviate the charge of popery; in the second, to show his impartiality in the life of this cardinal. Dr. Knight, in the “Life of Erasmus,” published a little after our author’s death, attacked him in the severest terms, accusing him of speaking irreverently of Erasmus, “probably,” says he, “because he had by his writings favoured the reformation.” Dr. Fiddes, he says, vilifies the reformation, depreciates the instruments of it, and palliates the absurdities of the Romish church. He declares also that the life was written at the solicitation of bishop Atterbury, on the occasion of the dispute in which he was then engaged with archbishop Wake: and that Atterbury supplied him with materials, suggested matter and method, entertained him at his deanery, procured him subscribers, and “laid the whole plan for forming such a life as might blacken the reformation, cast lighter colours upon popery, and even make way for a popish pretender.” Fiddes, indeed, had given occasion for part of this surmise, by saying that “a very learned prelate generously offered to let me compile the life of cardinal Wolsey in his house.” Suspicion was likewise heightened by the eulogium he made on Atterbury, a little before his deprivation. Though it may be difficult to determine how far this author was at the bottom an enemy to the reformation, yet in his Life of Wolsey, his prejudices in favour of the ancient religion are unquestionably strong, and in these he shared with some contemporaries of no inconsiderable fame. Asa collection of facts, however, the work is highly valuable, and he has the merit (whatever that may be esteemed) of placing the life and character of Wolsey in a more just light than any preceding writer. As the munificent founder of Christ church, he could not avoid a certain reverence for Wolsey, nor, if Atterbury assisted him, can we wonder at that prelate’s disposition to think well of so great a benefactor to learning, who would have proved a still greater benefactor, had he not been sacrificed to the avarice and caprice of his royal master.

The great encouragement which the life of Wolsey obtained, prompted Fiddes to undertake the lives of sir Thomas More and bishop Fisher: but when he had gone through a great part of this work, he lost his manuscript. He published, 6. “A general treatise of Morality, formed upon the principles of Natural Reason only; with a preface in answer to two essays lately published in the Fable of the Bees, and some incidental remarks upon an Inquiry concerning Virtue, by the right honourable Anthony earl of Shaftesbury,” 1724, 8vo. In his preface, he defends some, opinions of Shaftesbury against the author of the “Search into the Nature of Society;” and afterwards vindicates Dr. Kadcliffe from the aspersions of the same author, on account of his benefactions to the university of Oxford. 7. “A Preparative to the Lord’s Supper.” 8. “A Letter in answer to one from a Freethinker, occasioned by the late duke of Buckingham’s epitaph: wherein certain passages in it that have been thought exceptionable are vindicated, and the doctrine of the soul’s immortality asserted. To which is prefixed, a version of the epitaph, agreeably to the explication given of it in the Answer;” in 1721, 8vo. The epitaph and version, which are here subjoined, will satisfy the reader that Fiddes misunderstood it, without being at the trouble to read his pamphlet:

Frailty and Ignorance attend on human life.

Almighty, and most merciful.

O thou principle of all Beings, and first of

Causes, have compassion on me." Dr. Fiddes was an ingenious, but not a very learned man. He had so happy a memory, that he retained every thinghe read, and never made use of notes in preaching. He was far from being a nervous writer, abounding in matter, but was prolix and tedious, for which it has been offered as an apology that his necessities did not allow him time to contract his thoughts into a narrower compass. It is reasonable to suppose, that he was sincere in his professions concerning the hierarchy; and as reasonable to suppose, that he had no affection for popery. In his Life in the General Dictionary, is a letter from him to a protestant lady, to dissuade her from turning Roman catholic, which sets this question at rest. His misfortunes, in the latter part of his life, were chiefly owing to his strong attachment to a party. His application to his studies was so intense, that he would frequently pass whole nights in writing, which, together with his misfortunes, is supposed not a little to have hastened his death. He was reckoned, upon the whole, a good man, but rather wanting in point of prudence, and by no means a manager of his money.

, a very learned lady, of a family originally of Milan, is supposed to have been born about 1465. She was early instructed in the Greek and Latin languages, elocution, and the Aristotelian philosophy, to which she was partial, and maintained a correspondence with many of the literati of her age. She is said to have been of unblemished morals, great frankness of disposition, and occasional gaiety. Politian considered her as no less> a prodigy among her sex than Picus was among his, and was so struck with her character, that he visited Venice almost solely with a view to converse with her; and persons of all ranks vied in their respect for her, while crowned heads invited her by large offers to visit and settle in their courts. In 1487, Cassandra delivered a public oration before the university of Padua, “pro Alberto Lamberto Canonico Concordiensi,” a philosophical relation of hers, which is still extant. Some suppose her to have been in the practice of delivering public lectures in that university, but this is doubted by her biographer. She had once the honour of addressing a complimentary oration to Bona Fortia, queen of Sarmatia, when visiting Venice, which was delivered in the Bucentauro, sent out with a suitable train to meet and escort her into the Venetian port; on which occasion the queen presented her with a magnificent gold chain; but Cassandra, with that philosophic indifference which she had always evinced for this precious metal, gave it next day into the hands of the doge.

Agreeably to the will of her father, she gave her hand to Jo. Maria Mapellius of Vicenza, a learned physician, in her connexion with whom she experienced various reverses. In 1521 she became a widow. In her ninetieth year she was appointed to preside over a religious society of her own sex at Venice, and died in 1558, or as some say in 1567. She had composed a work “De Scientiarum Ordine,” frequently mentioned in her letters, but it was never published. Thomasinus wrote her life, prefixed to her “Epistolse et Orationes Posthumae,” Padua, 1636, 8vo.

, an eminent English divine, was born Oct. 15, 1561, in the parish of Hempsted in the county of Hertford, of an ancient family of good repute in that county. The estate which came to him from his father and grandfather had been in the family many years before, and it is recorded as somewhat singular that out of his grandfather’s house, there had died but three owners of this estate in 160 years. He received his first education in the free school of Berkhampstead, and was afterwards admitted of Magdalen-hall, Oxford; and such was the character he left behind him, that his chambers and study there were shewn, for a long time after he quitted them. But according to Wood’s account, he was first admitted of Magdalen college in the year 1577, and proceeded A. B. before he went to Magdalen-hall, where he took his master’s degree, and was esteemed the best disputant in the schools. After some time spent in the study of divinity, he read the catechetical lecture in Magdalen-hall, which, though a private lecture, was in his hands rendered so inieresting as to be much frequented by the whole university. Dr. John Reynolds, though greatly his senior, and either then or soon after Margaret professor, and president of Corpus Christi college, was a constant auditor. Field was well skilled in school divinity, and a frequent preacher while he lived in Oxfordshire, and is said to have been very instrumental in preventing the increase of nonconformity in the university. His father had provided a match for him, as being his eldest son; but his not taking orders being made an indispensable requisite, he thought fit to decline the choice, and returned to Oxford and after he had spent seven years there, he became divinity reader in Winchester cathedral.

In 1594 he was chosen divinity reader to the honourable society of Lincoln’s-inn, and soon after presented by Mr. Richard Kingsmill, one of the benchers and surveyor of the court of wards, to the valuable rectory of Burghclear in Hampshire, where Mr. Kingsmill lived, and refused the living of St. Andrew, Holborn, which was afterwards offered to him, preferring a retired life, and passing the greater part of his time at Burghclear to his death. On April 9, 1594, he married Elizabeth, daughter of Mr. Richard Harris, sometime fellow of New college, Oxford, and rector of Hardwicke in Buckinghamshire, with which lady, who had received a very liberal education, he lived happily upwards of twenty years. On Sept. 27, 1598, he was made chaplain in ordinary to queen Elizabeth, after having, on the 23d preceding, preached a kind of probationary sermon before her majesty; and he was soon after made prebendary of Windsor. He was also joined in the special commission with William marquis of Winchester, and Thomas Bilson bishop of Winchester, &c. for ecclesiastical causes within the diocese of Winchester; and in another to exercise all spiritual jurisdiction in the said diocese, with Whitgift archbishop of Canterbury, Charles earl of Nottingham, Thomas bishop of Winchester, and others, by James I. 1603, to whom he was also chaplain in ordinary, and sent to the conference at Hampton court concerning ecclesiastical causes, held Jan. 14, 1603. In 1605, when the king was to be entertained at Oxford with all manner of scholastic exercises, he was sent for out of the country to bear a part in the divinity act. Sir Nathaniel Brent, afterwards warden of Merton, used to say that the disputation between Dr. Field and Dr. Aglionby, before king James, was the best he ever heard in his life, and that it was listened to with great attention and delight by all present. The question was, “An sancti et angeli cognoscant cogitationes cordium”

About 1610 the king bestowed on him the deanery of Gloucester, where he never resided long, but in order to preach four or 6ve times a year to a full auditory who respected and loved him. The greatest part of his time he spent at his parsonage, and the winter at Windsor, where his house in the cloister was the resort of all who were eminent for learning, to enjoy his conversation, and profit by his sentiments on ecclesiastical affairs, and on the parties and sects which divided the Christian world. Dr. Barlow, dean of Wells, and Dr. Crakenthorp were among his correspondents. He rejoiced when any man noted for learning was made prebendary of Windsor; and often visited sir Henry Savile at Eton college, and other eminent persons in that neighbourhood. He often preached before the king, who, the first time he heard him, said, “Is his name Field This is a field for God to dwell in” and Fuller, in the same punning age, calls him “that learned divine,whose memory swelleth like a field which the Lord hath blessed.” In the king’s progress through Hampshire, in 1609, the bishop of Winchester appointed him among those who were to preach before him; and in 1611, the king having a mind to hear the prebendaries of Winchester in their order, the dean wrote to him first, and he preached oftener than any of them, and to crowded audiences. The king, who delighted to discourse with him on points of divinity, proposed to send him into Germany to compose the differences between the Lutherans and Calvinists, but, for whatever reason, this appointment did not take place; and not long before his death, the king would have made him bishop of Salisbury, and gave him a promise of the see of Oxford on a vacancy. Bishop Hall tells us, that about the same time he was to have been made dean of Worcester. On Oct. 27, 1614, he lost his wife, who left him six sons and a daughter. After continuing a widower about two years, he married the only daughter of Dr. John King, prebendary of Windsor and Westminster, widow of Dr. John Spenser, some time president of Corpus Christi college, Oxford, but with her he lived not much above a month. She however bred up his only daughter, and married her to her eldest son, of which match there were three sons and five daughters. Dr. Field had reached the beginning of his fifty-sixth year, when, on Nov. 15, 1616, he died of an apoplexy, or some imposthume breaking inwardly, which suddenly deprived him of all sense and motion. He was buried in the outer chapel of St. George at Windsor, below the choir. Over his grave was laid a black marble slab, with his figure in brass, and under it an inscription on a plate of the same metal, recording the deaths of him and his first wife. His whole life was spent in the instruction of others, both by precept and example. He was a good and faithful pastor, an affectionate husband and parent, a good master and neighbour; charitable to the poor, moderate in his pursuits, never aiming at greatness for himself or his posterity; he left to his eldest son very little more than what descended to him from his ancestors. He had such a memory that he used to retain the substance of every book he read; but his judgment was still greater. Although he was able to penetrate into the most subtle and intricate disputes, he was more intent on composing than increasing controversies. He did not like disputes about the high points of predestination and reprobation, yet appears rather to have inclined to the Calvinistic views of these matters. When he first set about writing his books “Of the Church,” his old acquaintance Dr. Kettle dissuaded him, telling him that when once he was engaged in controversy, he would never live quietly, but be continually troubled with answers and replies. To this he said, “I will so write that they shall have no great mind to answer me;” which proved to be nearly the case, as his main arguments were never refuted. This work was published at London in 1606, folio, in four books, to which he added a fifth in 1610, folio, with an appendix containing a defence of each passage of the former books that were excepted against, or wrested to the maintenance of Romish errors. All these were reprinted at Oxford in 1628, folio. This second edition is charged hy the Scots in their “Canterburian’s Self-conviction,” 1641, folio, with additions made by bishop Laud. The purport and merit of this work has reminded some of the judicious Hooker, between whom and Dr. Field there was a great friendship. Dr. Field published also a sermon on St. Jude, v. 3, 1604, 4to, preached before the king at Windsor; and, a little before his death, had composed great part of a work entitled “A view of the Controversies in Religion, which in these last times have caused the lamentable divisions in the Christian world” but it was never completed, though the preface was written by the author, and is printed at large in the Life of him by his Son, together with some propositions laid down by him on election and reprobation. This Life was published from the original by John Le Neve, author of the “Monumenta Anglicana,” in 1617, 8vo, and from a copy of it interleaved with ms notes by the author, and by bishop Kennet, Mr. Gough, in whose possession it was, drew up a life for the new edition of the Biographia Britannica, which, with a very few omissions, we have here copied. It only remains to be mentioned that Dr. Field was nominated one of the fellows of Chelsea college in 1610, by king James, who, when he heard of his death, expressed his regret, and added, “I should have done more for that man” His son, who wrote his life, was the Rev. Nathaniel Field, rector of Stourton in the county of Wilts. Another son, Giles, lies buried, under a monumental inscription, against the east wall of New college Ante-chapel. He died in 1629, aged twenty-one.

, beyond all comparison the first novel-writer of this country, was born at Sharpham Park in Somersetshire, April 22, 1707. His father, Edmund Fielding, esq. was the third son of John Fielding, D. D. canon of Salisbury, who was the fifth son of George earl of Desmond, and brother to William third earl of Denbigh, nephew to Basil the second earl, and grandson to William, who was first raised to the peerage. Edmund Fielding served under the duke of Maryborough, and towards the close of king George the First’s reign, or the accession of George II. was promoted to the rank of a lieutenant-general. His mother was daughter to the first judge Gould, and aunt to sir Henry Gould, lately one of the judges of the common pleas. This lady, besides Henry, who seems to have been the eldest, had four daughters, and another son named Edmund, who was an officer in the sea-service. Afterwards, in consequence of his father’s second marriage, Fielding had six half-brothers, George, James, Charles, John, William, and Basil. Of these nothing memorable is recorded, except of John, who will be the subject of a subsequent article as will also Sarah, the sister of Henry Fielding. His father died in 1740. Henry Fielding received the first rudiments of his education at home, under the care of the rev. Mr. Oliver, for whom he seems to have had no great regard, as he is said to have designed a portrait of him in the very humorous yet unfavourable character of parson Tralliber, in his “Joseph Andrews.” From this situation he was removed to Eton school, where he had an opportunity of cultivating a very early intimacy and friendship with several young men who afterwards became conspicuous personages in the kingdom, such as lord Lyttelton, Mr. Fox, Mr. Pitt, sir Charles Hanbury Williams, &c. who ever through life retained a warm regard for him. But these were not the only advantages he reaped at that great seminary of education; for, by an assiduous application to study, and the possession of strong and peculiar talents, he became, before he left that school, uncommonly versed in Greek authors, and a master of the Latin classics. Thus accomplished, at about eighteen years of age he left Eton, and went to Leyden, where he studied under the most celebrated civilians for about two years, when, the remittances from England not coming so regularly as at first, he was obliged to return to London.

General Fielding’s family being very greatly increased by his second marriage, it became impossible for him to make such appointments for this his eldest son as he could have wished; his allowance was therefore either very ill paid or entirely neglected. This unhappy situation soon produced all the ill consequences which could arise from poverty and dissipation. Possessed of a strong constitution, a lively imagination, and a disposition naturally but little formed for Œconomy, Henry Fielding found himself his own master, in a place where the temptations to every expensive pleasure are numerous, and the means of gratifying them easily attainable. From this unfortunately pleasing situation sprang the source of every misfortune or uneasiness that Fielding afterwards felt through life. He very soon found that his finances were by no means proportioned to the brisk career of dissipation into which he had launched; yet, as disagreeable impressions never continued long upon his mind, but only rouzed him to struggle through his difficulties with the greater spirit, he flattered himself that he should find resources in his wit and invention, and acccordingly commenced writer for the stage in 1727, at which time he had not more than attained the completion of his twentieth year. His first dramatic attempt was a piece called “Love in several Masques,” which, though it immediatetysucceeded the long and crowded run of the “Provoked Husband,” met with a favourable reception, as did likewise his second play, “The Temple Beau,” which came out in the following year. He did not, however, meet with equal success in all his dramatic works, for he has even printed, in the title-page of one of his farces, “as it was damned at the theatre-royal Drury-lane;” and he himself informs us, in the general preface to his miscellanies, that for the “Wedding-Day,” though acted six nights, his profits from the house did not exceed fifty pounds. Nor did a much better fate attend some of his earlier productions, so that, though it was his lot always to write from necessity, he would, probably, notwithstanding his writings, have laboured continually under that necessity, had not the severity of the public, and the malice of his enemies, met with a noble alleviation from the patronage of several persons of distinguished rank and character, particularly the late dukes of Richmond and Roxburgh, John duke of Argyle, the first lord Lyttelton, &c. the last-named of which noblemen, not only by his friendship softened the rigour of our author’s misfortunes while he lived, but also by his generous ardour has vindicated his character, and done justice to his memory, after death.

About six or seven years after Fielding had begun to write for the stage, he fell in love with and married miss Craddock, a young lady from Salisbury, possessed of a very great share of beauty, and a fortune of about 1500l. and about the same time his father dying, an estate at East Stour, in Dorsetshire, of somewhat better than 200l, per annum, came into his possession.With this fortune, which, had it been conducted with prudence and ceconomy, might have secured to him a state of independence for life, and, assisted by the productions of a genius unincumbered with anxieties and perplexity, might have even afforded him an affluent income, he determined to retire to his country seat. For his wife’s sake, whom he loved with the greatest ardour, he had also formed the resolution of bidding adieu to all the follies and intemperances to which he had addicted himself in his short but very rapid career of a town life, and of living in domestic regularity.

But here one folly only took place of another, and family pride now brought on him all the inconveniences in one place, that youthful dissipation and libertinism had done in another. Fond of shew and magnificence, he encumbered himself with a large retinue or servants; and led by natural disposition to enjoy society and convivial mirth, he threw open his gates for hospitality, and suffered his whole patrimony to be devoured up by hounds, horses, and entertainments. Thus, in less than three years, he dissipated his whole property; and from the mere passion of beingesteemed a man of great fortune, reduced himself to the unpleasant situation of having no fortune at all. He had thus, at the age of thirty, undermined his own supports, and had now no dependence but on his abilities. Not discouraged, however, he determined to exert his talents vigorously, applied himself closely to the study of the law, and, after the customary time of probation at the Temple, was called to the bar, and made no inconsiderable figure in Westminster-hall.

To the practice of the law Fielding now adhered with great assiduity, both in the courts in London, and on the circuits, as long as his health permitted, and it is probable would have risen to a considerable degree of eminence in it, had not the intemperances of his early life put a check, by their consequences, to the progress of his success. Though but a young man, he began now to be molested with such violent attacks from the gout as rendered it impossible for him to give such constant attendance at the bar as the laboriousness of that profession requires. Under these united severities of pain and want; he pursued his researches with an eagerness peculiar to him; and, as a proof of the degree of eminence to which he might have risen, he left two ms volumes, in folio, on the crown law, to which branch he had most assiduously applied. It gives us an idea of the great force and vigour of his mind, if we consider him pursuing so arduous a study under the exigencies of family distress, with a wife and children, whom he tenderly loved, looking up to him for subsistence, with a body torn by the acutest pains, and a mind distracted by a thousand avocations, yet obliged, for immediate supply, to produce almost extempore, a play, a farce, a pamphlet, or a newspaper. A large number of fugitive political tracts, which had their value when the incidents were actually passing on the great scene of business, came from his pen. The periodical paper, called “The Champion,” owed its chief support to his abilities. A poetical epistle to the right honourable sir Robert Walpole, written in 1730, shews at once his acquaintance with distress, and the firmness of mind with which he supported it. Such other works as were produced before his genius was come to its full growth were, “An Essay on Conversation” “An Essay on the knowledge and characters of Men” “A Journey from this World to the next” “The History of Jonathan Wild the Great;” &c. The two last mentioned are satires of a peculiar texture, and entirely original.

But his genius is seen in full and vigorous exertion, first in “Joseph Andrews,” and more completely in his “Tom Jones;” which are too well known, and too justly admired, to leave any room for expatiating on their merits. Soon after the publication of “Joseph Andrews,” his last comedy was exhibited on the stage, entitled “The Wedding-Day,” which was attended with but an indifferent share of success. The repeated shocks of illness more and more disqualified him from pursuing the law: from business, therefore, he derived little or no supplies, and his prospect grew every day more gloomy and melancholy. To these discouraging circumstances, if we add the infirmity of his wife, and the agonies he felt on her account, the measure of his affliction may be considered as nearly full. That fortitude of mind, with which he met all the other calamities of life, deserted him on this most trying occasion; and her death, which happened about this time, brought on such a vehemence of grief, that his friends began to think him in danger of losing his reason. At length, when the first emotions of sorrow were abated, philosophy administered her aid, his resolution returned, and he began again to struggle with his fortune. He engaged in two periodical papers successively, with a laudable and spirited design of rendering service to his country. The first of these was called “The True Patriot,” which was undertaken during the rebellion of 1745. Precarious, however, as such means of subsistence unavoidably must be, it was scarcely possible he should be thus enabled to recover his shattered fortunes, and was therefore at length obliged to accept of the office of an acting magistrate in the commission of the peace for the county of Middlesex, in which station he continued till near the time of his death. This office, however, seldom fails of being hateful to the populace, and of course is liable to many infamous and unjust imputations, particularly that of venality; a charge which the ill-natured world, not unacquainted with Fielding’s want of œconomy, and passion for expence, were but too ready to cast upon him. From this charge Mr. Murphy, in the life of this author, prefixed to the first edition of his works, has taken great pains to exculpate him; as likewise has Fielding himself, in his “Voyage to Lisbon,” which may, with some degree of propriety, be considered as the last words of a dying man. Amidst all the laborious duties of his office, his invention could not lie still, but he found leisure to amuse himself, and afterwards the world, with “The History of Tom Jones.” His “Amelia” was entirely planned and executed while he was distracted by a multiplicity of avocations which surround a public magistrate; and his constitution, now greatly impaired and enfeebled, was labouring under severer attacks of the gout than he had before felt; yet the activity of his mind was not to be subdued. At length, however, his whole frame was so entirely shattered by continual inroads of complicated disorders, and the incessant fatigue of business in his office, that, by the advice of his physicians, as a last effort to preserve life, and support a broken constitution, he set out for Lisbon. Even in this distressful condition, his imagination still continued making the strongest efforts to display itself; and the last gleams of his wit and humour sparkled in the “Journal” he left behind him of his “Voyage” to that place > which was published in 1755, at London, in 12mo. In 17 54-, about two months after his arrival at Lisbon, he died Oct. 8, in his forty -eighth year. His works have been published in several sizes, witli “An Essay on the Life and Genius of the Author, by Arthur Murphy, esq.”

Fielding’s genius excelled most in those strong, lively, and natural paintings of the characters of mankind, and the movements of the human heart, which constitute the basis of his novels; yet, as comedy bears the closest affinity to this kind of writing, his dramatic pieces, every one of which is comic, are far from being contemptible. His farces and ballad pieces, more especially, have a sprightImess of manner, and a furcibleness of character, by which it is impossible not to be agreeably entertained; and in itiose which he has in any degree borrowed from Moliere, or;.ny other writer, he has done great honour and justice t>j Irs original, by the manner in which he has treated the subject. Having married a second time, he left a wife and four children, who were educated under the care of their uncle, with the aid of a very generous donation given annually by Ralph Allen, esq. the celebrated man of Bath. One of his sons is still living, a barrister of considerable reputation. This second wife died at Canterbury, in May 1802, at a very advanced age. Fielding’s frame was naturally very robust, and his height rather above six feet. It was thought that no picture was taken of him while he lived, and it is certain that the portrait prefixed to his Works was a sketch executed by his friend Ho r garth, from memory. We find, however, in Mr. Nichols’s new edition of the Life of Bowyer, a beautiful engraving from a miniature in the possession of his grand-daughter, Mrs. Sophia Fielding. His character as a man, may in great measure be deduced from the incidents of his life, but cannot perhaps be delineated better than by his biographer Mr. Murphy, with whose words this article may properly be closed.

“It will be an humane and generous office to set down to the account of slander and defamation, a great part of that abuse which was discharged against him by his enemies in his life-time; deducing, however, from the whole, this useful lesson, that quick and warm passions should be early controuled, and that dissipation and extravagant pleasures are the most dangerous palliations that can be found for disappointments and vexations in the first stages of life.” We have seen,“adds he,” how Mr. Fielding very soon squandered away his small patrimony, which, with oeconomy, might have procured him independence; we have seen how he ruined, into the bargain, a constitution, which in its original texture seemed formed to last much longer. When illness and indigence were once let in upon him, he no longer remained the master of his own actions; and that nice delicacy of conduct which alone constitutes and preserves a character, was occasionally obliged to give way. When he was not under the immediate urgency of want, those who were intimate with him are ready to aver, that he had a mind greatly superior to any thing mean or little; when his finances were exhausted, he was not the most elegant in his choice of the means to redress himself, and he would instantly exhibit a farce or a puppet -shew, in the Haymarket theatre, which was wholly inconsistent with the profession he had embarked in. But his intimates are witness how much his pride suffered wben he was forced into measures of this kind no man having a juster sense of propriety, or more honourable ideas of the employment of an author and a scholar." Many years after the death of Fielding, the French consul at Lisbon, le Chev. de Meyrionnet, wrote an elegant epitaph for him, and proposed to have erected a monument; but the English factory, stimulated by this generosity in a foreigner, took the matter into their own hands.

Many of the most eminent critics of the age have treated on Mr. Fielding’s genius, as may appear from our references, and while they concur in censuring his occasional indelicacies, are yet unanimous in assigning him the very first rank of genius. “Tom Jones, and” Amelia,“are his best performances, and the most perfect perhaps of their kind in the world. With respect to the former, Dr. Beattie has well observed,” that since the days of Homer, the world has not seen a more artful epic fable. The characters and adventures are wonderfully diversified, yet the circumstances are all so natural, and rise so easily from one another, and co-operate with so much regularity in bringing on, even while they seem to retard, the catastrophe, that the curiosity of the reader is kept always awake, and instead of flagging, grows more and more impatient as the story advances, till at last it becomes downright anxiety. And when we get to the end, and look back on the whole contrivance, we are amazed to find that of so many incidents there should be so few superfluous; that in such a variety of fiction there should be so great probability; and that so complex a tale should be so perspicuously conducted, and with perfect unity of design.“The same author justly remarks that the novel, or” comic romance, since the time of Fielding, seems to have been declining apace, from simplicity and nature, into improbability and affectation.“Fie has, indeed, not only had no equal, no successful rival; but among the many hundreds who have attempted the same species of writing, there is not one who reminds us of Fielding. The cause of his superiority is to be sought in his wit and humour, of which he had a more inexhaustible fund, as well as more knowledge of mankind, than any person of modern times. Lord Lytteiton, after mentioning several particulars of Pope, Swift, and other wits of that age, when reminded of Fielding, said,” Henry Fielding had more wit and humour than all the persons we have been speaking of put together.“And many parts of his writings, particularly of his tc Amelia,” shew that he could excel, when he chose, in the pathetic. The world, after so many years, yet concurs in these sentiments of Fielding’s excellence; and his works are as fully established in popularity, as those of the greatest geniuses of our nation, and the demand for them continues as great.

There are not so many anecdotes preserved concerning Fielding as might perhaps have been expected, considering the eccentricity of his disposition, and his talents for conversation. But when he died, the passion for collecting the memorabilia of literary men was little felt. In the Gent. Mag. for 1786, however, we have an anecdote which is too characteristic to be omitted. Some parochial taxes for Fielding’s house in Beaufort Buildings being unpaid, and for which demands had been made again and again, he was at length told by the collector, who had an esteem for him, that no longer procrastination could be admitted. In this dilemma he had recourse to Jacob Tonson, the bookseller, and mortgaging the future sheets of some work he had in hand, received the sum he wanted, about ten or twelve guineas. When he was near his own house, he met with an old college chum, whom he had not seen for many years, and Fielding finding that he had been unfortunate in life, immediately gave him up the whole money that he had obtained from Mr. Tonson. Returning home in the full enjoyment of his benevolent disposition and conduct, he was told that the collector had called twice for the taxes. Fielding’s reply was laconic, but memorable: “Friendship has called for the money, and had it; let the collector call again.” The reader will be glad to hear that a second application to Jacob Tonson enabled him to satisfy the parish demands. Another anecdote affords one of those happy turns of wit which do not often occur. Being once in company with the earl of Denbigh, and it being noticed that Fielding was of the Denbigh family, the earl asked the reason why they spelt their name? differently; the earl’s family spelling it with the e first, (Feilding), and Mr. Henry Fielding with the i first, (Fielding) “I cannot tell, my lord,” said our author, “except it be that my branch of the family were the first that knew how to spell”

, third sister of the preceding, was born in 1714, lived unmarried, and died at Bath, where she had long resided, in April 1768. She made some figure among the literary ladies of her age, and possessed a well cultivated mind. Soon after the appearance of her brother’s “Joseph Andrews,” she published a novel in 2 vols. 12mo, entitled “The Adventures of David Simple, in search of a faithful friend,” which had a considerable share of popularity, and is not yet forgotten. In 1752 she produced a third volume, which did not excite so much attention. Her next production, which appeared in 1753, was “The Cry, a new Dramatic Fable,” 3 vols. but this, although far from being destitute of merit, was not well adapted to the taste of romance-readers. Her last performance was “Xenophon’s Memoirs of Socrates, with the Defence of Socrates before his Judges,” translated from the original Greek, 1762, 8vo. In this translation, which is executed with fidelity and elegance, she was favoured with some valuable notes by the learned Mr. Harris, of Salisbury, who also probably contributed to the correctness of the translation. The other works of this lady, less known, were, “Familiar letters between the characters in David Simple,” 2 vols.; “The Governess, or Little Female Academy” “The Lives of Cleopatra and Octavia;” “The History of the Countess of Delwyn,” 2 vols. and “The Hjstory of Ophelia,” 2 vols. Dr. John Hoadly, who was her particular friend, erected a monument to her memory, with a handsome compliment to her virtues and talents.

, was half brother, as abovementioned, to Henry Fielding, and his successor in the office of justice for Westminster, in which, though blind from his youth, he acted with great sagacity and activity for many years. He received the honour of knighthood for his services in October, 1761, and died at Brompton in September 1780. He published at various times, the following works: 1. “An account of the Origin and Effects of a Police, set on foot by his grace the duke of Newcastle, in the year 1753, upon a Plan presented to his grace by the late Henry Fielding, esq. To which is added, a Plan for preserving those deserted Girls in this Town who become Prostitutes from Necessity. 1768.” This was a small tract in 8vo. 2. “Extracts from such of the Penal Laws as particularly relate to the Peace and good Order of the Metropolis,” 1761, 8vo; a larger publication. 3. “The Universal Mentor; containing, Essays on the most important Subjects in Life; composed of Observations, Sentiments, and Examples of Virtue, selected from the approved Ethic Writers, Biographers, and Historians, both ancient and modern,” 1762, 12mo. This appears to have been the discharge of his common-place book. 4. “A Charge to the Grand Jury of Westminster,” 1763, 4to, stated to have been published at the unanimous request of the magistrates and jury, when he was chairman o_f the quarter sessions. 5. “Another Charge to the Grand Jury on a similar occasion,” 1766, 4to. 6. “A brief Description of the Cities of London and Westminster, &c. To which are added, some Cautions against the Tricks of Sharpers,” &c. 1777, 12tno. Nothing in this appears to have proceeded from sir John, except the “Cautions,” and the use of his name was perhaps a bookseller’s trick. It is most to the honour of sir John Fielding’s memory, that he was a distinguished promoter of the Magdalen hospital, the Asylum, and the Marine Society.

, lord Say and Sele, a person of literary merit, but not so well known on that account as for the part he bore in the Grand Rebellion, was born at Brpughton in Oxfordshire, in 1582, being the eldest son of sir Richard Fiennes, to whom James I. had restored and confirmed the dignity of baron Say and Sele: and, after being properly instructed at Winchester school, was sent in 1596 to New-college in Oxford, of which, by virtue of his relationship to the founder, he was made fellow. After he had spent some years in study, he travelled into foreign countries, and then returned home with the reputation of a wise and prudent man. When the war was carried on in the Palatinate, he contributed largely to it, according to his estate, which was highly pleasing to king James; but, indulging his neighbours by leaving it to themselves to pay what they thought fit, he was, on notice given to his majesty, committed to custody in June 1622. He was, however, soon released; and, in July 1624, advanced from a baron to be viscount Say and Scle. At this time, says Wood, he stood up for the privileges of Magna Charta; but, after the rebellion broke out, treated it with the utmost contempt: and when the long-parliament began in 3640, he shewed himself so active that, as Wood says, he and Hampden and Pym, with one or two more, were esteemed parliament-drivers, or swayers of all the parliaments in which they sat. In order to reconcile him to tne court, he had the place of mastership of the court of wards given him in May 1641 but this availed nothing; for, when arms were taken up, he acted openly against the king. Feb. 1642, his majesty published two proclamations, commanding all the officers of the court of wards to. attend him at Oxford; but lord Say refusing, was outlawed, and attainted of treason. He was the last 'who held the office of master of this court, which was abolished in 1646 by the parliament, on which occasion 10,000l. was granted to him, with a part of the earl of Worcester’s estate, as a compensation. In 1648 he opposed any personal treaty with his majesty, yet the same year was one of the parliament-commissioners in the Isle of Wight, when they treated with the king about peace: at which time he is said to have urged against the king this passage out of Hooker’s “Ecclesiastical Polity,” that “though the king was singulis major, yet he was universis minor” that is, greater than any individual, yet less than the whole community. After the king’s death, he joined with the Independents, as he had done before with the Presbyterians; and became intimate with Oliver, who made him one of his house of lords. “After the restoration of Charles II. when he had acted,” says Wood, “as a grand rebel for his own ends almost twenty years, he was rewarded forsooth with the honourable offices of lord privy seal, and lord chamberlain of the household; while others, that had suffered in estate and body, and had been reduced to a bit of bread for his majesty’s cause, had then little or nothing given to relieve them; for which they were to thank a hungry and great officer, who, to fill his own coffers, was the occasion of the utter ruin of many.” Wood relates also, with some surprise, that this noble person, after he had spent eighty years mostly in an unquiet and discontented condition, had been a grand promoter of the rebellion, and had in some respect been accessary to the mupdler of Chailes I. died quietly in his bed, April 14, 1662, and was buried with his ancestors at Broughton. On the restoration he was certainly made lord privy seal, but nut, as Wood says, chamberlain of the household. Whitlock says, that “he was a person of great parts, wisdom, and integrity:” and Clarendon, though of a contrary, party, does not deny him to have had these qualities, but only supposes them to have been wrongly directed, and greatly corrupted. He calls him, “a man of a close and reserved nature, of great parts, and of the highest ambition; but whose ambition would not be satisfied with offices and preferments, without some condescensions and alterations in ecclesiastical matters. He had for many years been the oracle of those who were puritans in the worst sense, and had steered all their counsels and designs. He was a notorious enemy to the church, and to most of the eminent churchmen, with some of whom he had particular contests. He had always opposed and contradicted all acts of state, and all taxes and impositions, which were not exactly legal, &c. In a word, he had very great authority with all the discontented party throughout the kingdom, and a good reputation with many who were not discontented; who believed him to be a wise man, and of a very useful temper in an age of licence, and one who would still adhere to the law.” But from a comparison of every authority, a recent writer observes, that he appears to have been far from a virtuous or amiable man; he was poor, proud, and discontented, and seems to have opposed the court, partly at least with the view of extorting preferment from thence. He had the most chimerical notions of civil liberty, and upon the defeat of those projects in which he had so great a share, retired with indignation to the isle of Lundy, on the Devonshire coast, where he continued a voluntary prisoner until the protector’s death.

Besides several speeches in parliament, he published, 1. “The Scots design discovered; relating their dangerous attempts lately practised against the English nation, with the sad consequence of the same. Wherein divers matters of public concernment are disclosed; and the book called, Truths Manifest, is made apparent to be Lies Manifest, 1653,” 4to. 2. “Folly and Madness made manifest; or, some things written to shew, how contrary to the word of God, and practice of the Saints in the Old and New Testament, the doctrines and practices of the Quakers are,” 1659, 4to. 3. “The Quakers Reply manifested to be railing: or, a pursuance of those by the light of the Scriptures, who through their dark imaginations would evade the Truth,” 1659, 4to. It seems, the Quakers were pretty numerous in his neighbonrhood of Broughton; and he either was, or pretended to be, much troubled with them. These tracts are so >carce and little known at this time, as to have escaped Mr. Park’s researches, who informs us that he was not able to discover any of them, in the copious collection of printed tracts, either in the British Museum, or the Bridgewater library.

, second son of lord Say just mentioned, was born at Broughton in Oxfordshire in 1608; and, like his father, after a proper education at Winchester school, was admitted of New College in Oxford, and also made fellow in right of kinship to the founder. After passing some years there, he travelled to Geneva, and among the Cantons of Switzerland, where he increased that disaffection to the church which he had been too much taught in his infancy. From his travels he returned through Scotland, at the time when the Rebellion was beginning; and, in 1640, was elected to sit in parliament for Banbury, when it was quickly discovered, that he was ready to join in all his father’s intemperate measures. Afterwards he became colonel of horse under the earl of Essex, and was made governor of Bristol, when first taken for the use of the parliament; but, surrendering it too easily to prince Rupert, in July 1643, he was tried by a council of war, and sentenced to lose his head. The onl) witnesses against him on this occasion were the celebrated Clement Walker, and Pry line. He had afterwards, by the interest of his father, a pardon granted him for life, but he could not continue any longer in the army; and the shame of it affected him so much, that he went for some time abroad, “retaining still,” says Clarendon, “the same full disaffection to the government of the church and state, and only grieved that he had a less capacity left to do hurt to either.” When the Presbyterians were turned out of parliament, he became an independent, took the engagement, was intimate with Cromwell; and when Cromwell declared himself Protector, was made one of his privy-council, lord privy-seal in 1655, and a member of his house of lords. Though he had sufficiently shewn his aversion to monarchical government, yet when he saw what Oliver aimed at, he became extremely fond of it, and in 1660, he published a book with this title, “Monarchy asserted to be the best, most ancient, and legal form of government, in a conference held at Whitehall with Oliver Lord Protector, and Committee of Parliament, &c. in April 1657.” He published also several speeches and pamphlets, some of which were a defence of his own conduct at Bristol. Walker informs us that he was the author of a historical tract called “Anglia Rediviva,” published under the name of Sprigge. After the restoration, he retired to Newton Tony, near Salisbury in Wiltshire, where he had an estate that came to him by his second wife; and here continued much neglected, and in. great obscurity, until his death, Dec. 16, 1669. Clarendon has spoken of his abilities in very high terms. “Colonel Fiennes,” says he, “besides the credit and reputation of his father, had a very good stock of estimation in the house of commons upon his own score for truly he had very good parts of learning and nature, and was privy to, and a great manager in, the most secret designs from the beginning; and if he had not incumbered himself with command in the army, to which men thought his nature not so well disposed, he had sure been second to none in those councils, after Mr. Hampden’s death.”

, a physician of eminence, was born at Antwerp, March 28, 1567. His father, who was a physician at Antwerp, and who died at Dort in 1585, was the author of a treatise entitled “Commentarius de flatibus humanum corpus infestantibus,” Antwerp, 1582. His son, Thomas, studied medicine at Leyden, and afterwards at Bologna, which he visited in 1590. On his return to his native country his talents were soon made known, and in 1593 he was invited to Louvaine, in order to fill one of the vacant professorships of medicine in that university, in which he took the degree of doctor about the end of that year. After seven years of residence, he was appointed physician to Maximilian, duke and afterwards elector of Bavaria; but this he resigned at the end of one year, and returned to Louvaine, where the archduke Albert immediately increased his salary to a thousand ducats, in order to secure his services, and here he remained until his death, March 15, 1631, at the college of Breughel, of which he had been for a long time president. Besides being an able Greek and mathematical scholar, he was regarded as an intelligent and able physician; and had fewequals among his contemporaries in natural history and surgery. His works, which contributed greatly to advance his reputation, were, 1. “De Cauteriis libri quinque,” Louvaine, 1598. 2. “Libri Chirurgici XII., de praecipuis Artis Chirurgicre controversiis,” Francfort, 1602, which passed through many editions. 3. “De viribus Imaginationis Tractatus,” Louvaine, 1608. 4. “De Cometa anni 1618,” Antwerp, 1619, against opinions of Copernicus respecting the motion of the earth. 5. “De vi formatrice foetus liber, in quo ostenditur animam rationalem infundi tertia die,” ibid. 1620. This work was attacked with considerable success, by Louis du Gardin, a professor of Douay, and Fienus replied in, 6. “De formatrice foetus adversus Ludovicum du Gardin, &c.” Louvaine, 1624. His opinion was also impugned by Santa Cruz, the physician of Philip IV. which produced, 7. “Pro sua de anijnatione fcetds tertia die opinione Apologia, adversus Antonium Ponce Santa Cruz, Regis Hispaniarmn Medicum Cubicularem, &c.” Louvaine, 1629. 8. “Semiotice, sive de signis medicis Tractatus,” Leyden, 1664.

, a learned Swede, a professor of history, and an antiquary at Upsal, published in 1656, a work of much research, entitled “De Statuis illustrinm Romanorum,” 8vo, which he dedicated to Charles Gustavus king of Sweden. He had passed some months at Rome in his youth, and this work was partly the result of his studies and observations there. He died in 1676. We have no farther particulars of his life, and he is but slightly mentioned in biographical collections.

, a celebrated Italian political writer, the descendant of a very illustrious but decayed family at Naples, was born there Aug. 18, 1752. His parents had very early destined him for the military profession, but the attachment he showed to the acquisition of literary knowledge, induced them to suffer him to pursue his own course of study. His application to general literature became then intense, and before he was twenty years of age, he was not only an accomplished Greek and Latin scholar, but had made himself intimately acquainted with mathematics, ancient history, and the laws of nature and nations as administered in every country. He had also begun at this time to write two works, the one on public and private education, and the other on the duties of princes, as founded on nature and social order, and although he did not complete his design in either, yet he incorporated many of the sentiments advanced in his great work on legislation. He afterwards studied law, more in compliance with the will of his friends, who considered the bar as the introduction to public honour and preferment, than from his own inclination; and the case of an arbitrary decision occurring, he published an excellent work on the subject, entitled “Riflessioni Politiche sull' ultima legge Sovrana, che riguarda ramministrazione della giustizia,” Naples, 1774, 8vo. This excited the more attention, as the author was at this time only in his twenty-second year, and a youth averse to the pleasures and amusements of his age, and intent only on the most profound researches into the principles of law and justice. Nor were these studies much interrupted by his obtaining in 1777 a place at court, that of gentleman of the bedchamber, with the title of an officer of the marines, which appears to have been usually conferred on gentlemen who were near the person of the monarch. In 1780 he published the first two volumes of his celebrated work on Legislation, “Scienza della Legislatione,” at Naples the third and fourth appeared in 1783 the fifth, sixth, and seventh in 1785; and the eighth, after his death, in 1789. This was reprinted at Naples, Venice, Florence, Milan, &c. and translated into French, German, and Spanish. The encomiums bestowed on it were general throughout Europe, and although some of his sentiments were opposed with considerable violence, and some of them are perhaps more beautiful in theory than in practice, a common case with speculators who take upon them to legislate for the whole world; yet it has been said with justice, that he brought to his great task qualifications in which both legislators and authors, who have made great exertions on the same subject, have been lamentably deficient, knowledge, temper, and moderation; and if assent is withheld from any proposition, or conviction does not attend every argument, the sentiment of esteem and respect for an enlightened, industrious, and virtuous man, labouring for the benefit of his fellow-creatures, and seeking their good by temperate and rational means, is never for a moment suspended. This valuable writer had not quite completed his plan, when his labours were ended by a premature death, in the spring of 1788, when he was only in his thirty-sixth year. He was universally lamented by his countrymen at large; and the king, who a little before his death had called him to the administration of the finances, testified his high regard for so useful a servant, by providing for his children, by a wife whom he had married in 1783. His biographer applies to him, with the change of name, what Tacitus says of Agricola, “Quidquid ex Filangierio amavimus, quidquid mirati sumus, manet mansurumque est in animis hominum, in aeternitate temporum, famarerum.” In 1806, sir Richard Clayton published an excellent translation of Filangieri in 2 vols. 8vo, as far as relates to political and Œconomical laws, and omitting what is said on criminal legislation, which the translator conceived was not wanted in this country, where the distribution of public justice is scarcely susceptible of amendment.

, was a native of Paris, who taught ethics, and afterwards philosophy, at the college de la Marche, and was rector of the university in 1.586. He took his doctor’s degree, April 9, 1590, and became curate of St. John en Greve. Filesac, who was eminent among his contemporaries for his firmness, learning, and piety, died at Paris, senior of the Sorbonne, and dean of the faculty of theology, May 27, 1638, leaving several very learned works, the principal of which are, “A Treatise on the sacred Authority of Bishops,” in Latin, Paris, 1606, 8vo another “on Lent;” a treatise on the “Origin of Parishes” treatises on “Auricular Confession;” on “Idolatry,” and on “the Origin of the ancient Statutes of the Faculty of Paris.” They are united under the title of “Opera Pieraque,” Paris, 1621, 3 vols. 4to, but he has on the whole too much in the form of compilations from other authors to entitle him to the credit of an original writer.

, a celebrated Italian poet, was born December 30, 1642, of a noble family at Florence. He studied philosophy, law, and divinity five years at Pisa, and took a doctor of law’s degree there. He then returned to Florence, where, after several years spent in his closet, with no other employment than poetry and the belles-lettres, the grand duke appointed him senator. He died September 27, 1707, aged sixty-five. Filicaia was member or the academies della Crusca, and degli Arcadi. His poems are much admired for their delicacy and noble sentiments. They have been published together by Scipio Filicaia, his son, under the title of “Poesie Toscane di Vincenzo da Filicaia,” &c. 1707, fol. the same with the Latin prose, Venice, 1747, 3 vols. 12mo.

, of Ferrara, an artist born in 1532, was nicknamed Gratella by his countrymen, because he was the first who introduced the method of squaring large pictures, in order to reduce them with exactness to smaller proportions, which the Italians call graticolare, a method which he had learned from Michel Angelo, whose scholar he was at Rome, though unknown to Vasari, at least not mentioned in his life. He was the son of Camillo Filippi, who died in 1574, an artist of uncertain school, but who painted in a neat and limpid manner and if we may judge from a half-figure of S. Paul, in an Annunziata of his in S. Maria in Vado, not without some aim at the style of Michel Angelo. From him therefore Bastiano probably derived that ardent desire for it which made him secretly leave his father’s house, and journey to Rome, where he became one of the most indefatigable copyists and dearest pupils of Buonarotti. What powers he acquired is evident from the “Universal Judgment,” which he painted in three years, in the hoir of the metropolitan a work nearer to Michel Angelothau what can be produced by the whole Florentine school. It possesses grandeur of design with great variety of imagery, well disposed groupes, and repose for the eye. It appears incredible that in a subject pre-occupied by Buonarotti, Filippi should have been able to appear so novel and so grand. He imitated the genius, but disdained to transcribe the figures of his model. He too, like Dante and Michel Angelo, made use of that opportunity to gratify his affections or animosities, by placing his friends among the elect, and his enemies with*the rejected. In that hapless host he painted the faithless mistress who had renounced his nuptials, and drew among the blessed another whom he had married in her place, casting a look of insult on her rival. At present it is not easy to decide on the propriety or intemperance of Barui Taldi and other Ferrarese writers, who prefer this painting to that of the Sistina, for decorum and colour, because it has been long retouched; and already made Barotti, in his description of Ferrarese pictures, lament " that the figures which formerly appeared living flesh, now seem to be of wood. 7 ' Of Filippi’s powers, however, as a colourist, other proofs exist at Ferrara in many an untouched picture: they appear to advantage, though his flesh-tints are too adust and bronzed, end his colours too often united into a misty mass.

In the nudities of those pictures, especially -in those of the colossal figure of S. Cristophano, Filippi adopted the line of Michel Angelo; in the draped figures he followed other models, as is evident in the Circumcision on an altar of the Duomo, which resembles more the style of his father than his own. Want of patience in invention and practice made him often repeat himself; such are his Nunziatas, re-produced at least seven times on the same idea. The worst is, that if the Last Judgment, the large altar-piece of S. Catherine in her church, and a few other public works be excepted, he^more or less hurried on the rest; content to leave in each some master trait, and less solicitous to obtain the praise of diligence than of power from posterity. What he painted for galleries is not much, but conducted with more care: without recurring to what may be seen at Ferrara, the Baptism, of Christ in the house Acqua at Osimo, and some of his copies from Michel Angelo at Rome, are of that number. In his earliest time he painted grotesques, a branch which he afterwards left entirely to his younger brother Cesare Filippi, who was as eminent in the ornamental style, as weak in large figures and history. He died in 1602.

, son of sir Edward Filmer, of East Sutton, in Kent, by Elizabeth his wife, daughter of Richard Argall, esq. was born in the end of the sixteenth, century, and educated in Trinity-college, in Cambridge, of which he was matriculated July 5, 1604. His works are, 1 “The Anarchy of a limited and mixed Monarchy,” 1646, which was an answer to Hunton’s “Treatise on Monarchy,” printed in 1C43. Sir Robert’s work was reprinted in 1652 and 1679, 8vo. 2. “Patriarcha,” in which he endeavours to prove, that all government was monarchical at first, and that all legal titles to govern are originally derived from the heads of families, or from such upon whom their right was transferred, either by cession or failure of the line. He also wrote, “The Freeholders’ Grand Inquest, &c.” On the trial of the celebrated Sidney, it was made a charge that they found in his possession a manuscript answer to Filmer’s “Patriarcha,” but this was afterwards more completely answered by Locke, in his “Two Treatises on Government,” published in 1689 Filnrer died in 1647.

, in French Finé, professor of mathematics in the Royal college at Paris, was the son of a physician, and born at Briungon, in Dauphine, in 1494. He went young to Paris, where his friends procured him a place in the college of Navarre. He there applied himself to polite literature and philosophy; yet devoted himself more particularly to mathematics, for which he had a strong natural inclination, and made a considerable progress, though without the assistance of a master. He acquired likewise much skill in mechanics; and having both a genius to invent instruments, and a skilful hand to make them, he gained high reputation by the specimens he gave of his ingenuity. He first made hinaself known by correcting and publishing Siliceus’s “Arithmetic,” and the “Margareta Philosopiiica.” He afterwards read private lectures in mathematics, and then taught that science publicly in the college of Gervais; by which he became so famous, that he was recommended to Francis I. as the fittest person to teach mathematics in the new college which that prince had founded at Paris. He omitted nothing to support the glory of his profession; and though he instructed his scholars with great assiduity, yet he found time to publish a great many books upon almost every part of the mathematics. A remarkable proof of his skill in mechanics is exhibited in the clock which he invented in 1553, and of which there is a description in the Journal of Amsterdam for March 29, 1694. Yet his genius, his labours, his inventions, and the esteem which an infinite number of persons shewed him, could not secure him from that fate which so often befalls men of letters. He was obliged to struggle all his life with poverty; and, when he died, left a wite and six children, and many debts. His children, however, found patrons, who for their father’s sake assisted his family. He died in 1555, aged sixty-one. Like all the other mathematicians and astronomers of those times, he was greatly addicted to astrology; and had the misfortune to be a long time imprisoned, because he had foretold some things which were not acceptable to the court of France. He was one of those who vainly boasted of having found out the quadrature of the circle. His works were collected in 3 vols. folio, in 1535, 1542, and 1556, and there is an Italian edition in 4to, Venice, 1587.

, first earl of Nottingham, and lord high chancellor of England, the son of sir Heneage Finch, knt. recorder of London, was born Dec. 21 or 23, 1621, in the county of Kent. He was educated at Westminsterschool, and became a gentleman commoner of Christ church in Oxford, 1635. After he had prosecuted his studies there for two or three years, he removed to the Inner Temple, where, by diligence and good parts, he became remarkable for his knowledge of the municipal laws, was successively barrister, bencher, treasurer, reader, &c. Charles II. on his restoration, made him solicitor general, and advanced him to the dignity of a baronet. He was reader of the Inner Temple the next year, and chose for his subject the statute of 39 Eliz. concerning the payment and recovery of the debts of the crown, at that time very seasonable and necessary, and which he treated with great strength of reason, and depth of law. Uncommon honours were paid to him on this occasion, the reading and entertainment lasting from the 4th to the 17th of August. At the first day’s entertainment were several of the nobility of the kingdom, and privy counsellors, with divers others of his friends at the second, were the lord mayor, aldermen, and principal citizens of London at the third, which was two days after the former, was the whole college of physicians, who all came in their caps and gowns; at the fourth, all the judges, advocates, doctors of the civil law, and all the society of Doctors’ Commons at the fifth, the archbishops, bishops, and chief of the clergy and at the last, which was on August 15, his majesty king Charles II. did him the honour (never before granted by any of his royal progenitors) to accept of an invitation to dine with him in the great hall of the Inner Temple.

As solicitor-general, he took an active part in the trials of the regicides, and in April 1661, by the strong recommendation of lord Clarendon, he was chosen a member of parliament for the university of Oxford; but, says Wood, “he he did us no good, when we wanted his assistance for taking off the tribute belonging to hearths.” In 1665, after the parliament then sitting at Oxford had been prorogued, he was in full convocation created doctor of civil law; and, the creation being over, the vice-chancellor, in t^ie presence of several parliament-men, stood up and spoke to the public orator to do his office, who said, among other things, “That the university wished they had more colleges to entertain the parliament men, and more chambers, but by no means more chimnies;” at which sir Heneage was observed to change countenance, and draw a little back. When the disgrace of lord Clarendon drew on, in 1667, and he was impeached in parliament for some supposed high crimes, sir Heneage, not forgetting his old friend, appeared vigorously in his defence. In 1670, the king appointed him attorney general; and, about three years after, lord keeper. Soon after he was advanced to the degree of a baron, by the title of Lord Finch of Daventry, in the county of Northampton, and upon the surrender of the great seal to his majesty, Dec. 19, 1675, he received it immediately back again, with the title of Lord High Chancellor of England.

The conduct of lord chancellor Finch in the disposal of church livings merits particular approbation. Attached to the interests of the church of England, he had considered the necessity of inquiring into the characters of those who might he candidates for benefices in the disposal of the seal. But the many avocations of his high office prevented his personal attention to this point; he therefore addressed his chaplain (Dr. Sharp, afterwards archbishop of York) to this effect: “The greatest difficulty, I apprehend, in the execution of my office, is the patronage of ecclesiastical preferments. God is my witness that I would not knowingly prefer an unworthy person; but as my course of life and studies has lain another way, I cannot think myself so good a* judge of the merits of such suitors as you are; I therefore charge it upon your conscience, as you will answer it to Almighty God, that upon every such occasion, you make the best inquiry, and give me the best advice you can, that I may never bestow any favour upon an undeserving, man; which if you neglect to do, the guilt will be entirely yours, and I shall deliver my own soul.” This trust, so solemnly committed to his care, Dr. Sharp (says his recent biographer Mr.Todd) faithfully discharged; and his advice was no less faithfully followed by his patron, as long as he continued in office. By so conscientious a disposal of church-preferment in the dissolute reign of Charles II. the cause of religion must have been eminently advanced.