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

The time of the death of Froissart has not been decided by his biographers. He relates some events of the year 1400, and by some is thought to have lived considerably beyond that period, but nothing certain can be affirmed. He probably ended his days ii> his own chapter, and was interred in tlje chapel of St. Anne in the coHegiate church. Although he was the author of 30,000 verses, his poetical character is forgotten, and he is now celebrated, and most justly, as a historian. His Chronicle, which is divided into four books, comprehends the period between 1326 and 1400, and relates the events which took place not only hi France, btrt in Flanders, Scotland, and Ireland, with numerous details respecting the papal courts of Rome and Avignon, and collateral particulars of the transactions in the rest of Europe, in Turkey, and even in Africa. His reputation stands high as a faithful and diligent narrator of what he saw and heard. By the French he has been charged with gross partiality towards the English; they bring against him the crime of making Edward, and his son, the Black Prince, the heroes of his history. But it tfannot be denied that they were the heroes of the age in which they flourished, and therefore an impartial historian was obliged to represent them in their true colours, and to make them the teading characters of the day. Mr. Johnes-, to whom the public is indebted for an admirable edition of Froissart’s Chronicles, has successfully vindicated the character of the historian from the charge of partiaFrty: throughout the whole work, he says, there is an evident disposition to give praise to valour on whatever side it was employed. The historian mourns over the death of each valiant knight, exults in the success of every hardy enterprize, and seems carried away almost by his chivalrous feelings, independently of party considerations. Till the publication of Mr. Johnes’s translation, the best edition of the “Chronicles” was that of Lyons in four volumes folio, 1559; and Mr. Johnes has since gratified the public wish by an equally accurate and well illustrated edition of Froissart’s continuator, Monstrelet.

, canon regular of the congregation of St. Genevieve, and chancellor of the university of Paris, was born at Angers in 1614. His father was a notstry of that place. He was first educated under a private ecclesiastic in the neighbourhood of Angers, and is said to have made such rapid progress in these his early studies, that in less than five years he could readily translate into Latin and Greek. On his return to Angers he studied three years in the college of the oratory there, and was afterwards sent to that of La Fleche, where he completed his classical course. In 1630 he took the habit of a canon regular of the abbey of Toussaint, at Augers, and made profession the year following. Having dedicated his philosophical thesis to father Favre, this led to an acquaintance with the latter, by whose orders he came to Paris in 1636, and in 1637 was chosen professor of philosophy in the abbey of iSt. Genevieve. His first course of philosophical lectures being finished in 1639, he was employed to lecture on divinity, which he did with equal reputation, following the principles of St. Thomas, to which he was much attached; but his lectures were not dry and scholastic, but enlivened by references to the fathers, and to ecclesiastical history, a knowledge of which he thought would render them more useful to young students: and besides his regular lectures on theology, he held every week a conference on some subject of morals, or some part of the scriptures. Jansenius having published his “Augustinus,” he read it with attention, and thought he discovered in it the true sentiments of St. Augustine. Some time after, the Jesuits having invited him to be present at the theological theses of the college of Clermont, and having requested him to open the ceremony, he delivered a very learned and eloquent discourse, which was at first well received, but having attacked a proposition concerning predestination, he was suspected of inclining towards innovation. In a conference, however, with two fathers of the congregation, he explained his sentiments in such a manner as to satisfy them. In 1648 he was made chancellor of the university of Paris, although with some opposition from the members of the university, not upon his own account, but that of the fathers of the congregation in general, who had rendered themselves obnoxious to the university by the erection of a number of independent seminaries.

After passing some years in the quiet prosecution of his studies, he encountered some opposition in consequence of the five propositions condemned by the popes Innocent X. and Alexander VII. He was now suspected of favouring the Jansenists, and of asserting that no one could sign the formulary without distinguishing the fact from the right. This induced him to quit his office of regent in 1654, and accept of the conventual priory of Betiay, in the diocese of Angers. Here, however, he did not constantly reside, but preached frequently in some cathedrals, and performed the duties of his office as chancellor of the university, until 1661, when happening to be at Benay, he received an order from the court to remain there until farther orders. This was occasioned by the approbation he had given to a French translation of the Missal of M. Voisin, which at first he did not choose to revoke. It does not appear, however, that while he ventured to express liberal notions, he had the courage to maintain them against the authority of his superiors, for he soon conceded every point, and offered to sign the formulary abovementioned, which he had hitherto refused, and accordingly was permitted to return to Paris in 1662, where the archbishop of Sens bestowed on him the office of priorcur6 of St. Mary Magdalen of Montargis; but this he enjoyed but a very few days, being seized with a disorder which carried him off, April 17, 1662, when only fortyeight years of age. He was a man of extensive reading in ecclesiastical and profane history; and as a preacher was lively and eloquent. He obtained much reputation for his discourses when bestowing the degree of master of arts, which was his province for fifteen years. He was an able linguist, not only in the modern, but ancient, and particularly the Eastern languages. Dupin, who gives him in other respects a very high character, observes, that he never attached himself so closely to any subject as to handle it thoroughly, but was always making discoveries, starting conjectures, and forming new ideas, and giving his subject a turn altogether uncommon.

His works were, 1. “Sumtna totins philosophise e D. Thomae Aquinatis doctrina,” Paris, 1640, fol. 2. “Thomas a Kempis vindicatus per unuin e Canonicis regularibus congregationis Gallicanae,” Paris, 1641, 8vo. The purpose of this is to prove that Thomas a Kempis, and not Gerson, was the author of the celebrated “Imitation,” &c. and it produced a controversy, of which some notice will be taken in our article on that writer. 3. “Ivonis Carnotens-is Episcopi opera,” Paris, I 647, fol. This edition of the works of Ives de Chartres gave some offence to Souchet, whose notes he had adopted; and he was obliged to defend himself in a letter addressed to the bishop of Puy. 4. “Dissertatio philologiea de virginhate honorata, erudita, adornata, fnecunda,” ibid. 1651. 5. “Antitheses Angustini et Calvini,” ibid. 1651, 16mo. In this he gives the parallel passages of St. Augustin and Calvin on the subject of grace. The general of the congregation, thinking it might make some noise in the world, suppressed all the copies except one, from which a friend of Fronteau had a new edition printed. 6. “Kalendarinm Romanum,” taken from an ancient ms. and illustrated by a preface and two dissertations, on festival days, and saints’ days, ibid. 1652, 8vo. 7. “O ratio in obitum Matthoei Mole”,“ibid. 1656, 4to. Mole was keeper of the seals. He published also various epistles and tracts on subjects of ecclesiastical history. His own life was published in 1663, 4to, under the title” Joan. Frontonis Memoria disertis per amicos virosque clarissimos encomiis celebrata."

, a Roman writer, who flourished in the first century, and was in high repute under Vespasian, Titus, Domitian, Nerva, and Trajan, was a man of consular dignity, a great officer who commanded the Roman armies in England, and elsewhere, with success; and he is mentioned in high terms of panegyric by all the writers of his time. He was city-prgetor when Vespasian and Titus were consuls. Nerva made him crfrtitor of the aquasducts, which occasioned him to write his treatise, “De Aquaeductibus Urbis Romse.” He wrote also “Tres libros’ Stratagematum,” or, concerning the stratagems used in war by the most eminent Greek and Roman commanders; and afterwards added a fourth, coritaining examples of those arts and maxims, discoursed of in the former. These two works are still extant, together with a piece “De Re Agraria;” and another, “De Limitibus.” They have been often printed separately, but were all published together in a neat edition at Amsterdam in 1661, with notes by Robertus Keuchenius, who has placed at the end the fragments of several works of Frontinus that are lost. This eminent man died in the year 106, under Trajan, and was succeeded as augur by the younger Pliny, who mentions him with honour. He forbade any monument to be erected to him after his death, declaring, that every man was sure to be remembered without any such testimonial, if he had lived so as to deserve it. His words, as Pliny has preserved them, were these: “Impensa monument! supervacua est memoria nostri durabit, si vita meruimus.”

, known by the name of Fronto Duc.Eus, a learned Jesuit, was the son of a counsellor of Bourdeaux, where he was born in 1558, and made a Jesuit in 1577. He studied with unwearied application the Greek tongue, and became one of the ablest translators and editors of Greek works in his time. He published notes and corrections, both on the text and on the translations of many of the works of the Greek and Latin fathers, particularly St. Clemens Alexandrinus, St. Basil, St. Gregory de Nazianzen, and St. Gregory of Nyssa, Zonaras, Bulsamon, &c. But his principal work is his edition of the works of St. Chrysostom, 6 vols. fol. Paris, 1609 1624, and reprinted there in 1636, and at Francfort in 1698. He was also engaged in controversy, and wrote against Philip du Plessis Mornay. He died at Paris, Dec. 12, 1624. Dupin informs us that he was as much esteemed for his prudence and modesty as for his learning and judgment, that his merit was equally acknowledged by catholics and protestants, and that there was scarcely a learned man in either communion with whom he did not correspond.

, an English poet, was the son of a gentleman, who had been post-master in the reign of queen Anne, and the grandson of sir Philip Frowde,a loyal officer in king Charles I.'s army. He was sent to the university of Oxford, where he had the honour of being distinguished by Addison, who took him under his protection. While be remained there be became the author of several pieces of poetry, some of which, in Latin, were pure and elegant enough to entitle them to a place in the “Muse Anglicanae.” He wrote likewise two tragedies: “The Fall of Saguntum,” dedicated to sir Robert Walpole; and “Philotas,” addressed to the earl of Chesterfield. Neither of these were very successful on the stage, to which they were thought less adapted than to the closet. He died at his lodgings in Cecil-street in the Strand, Dec. 19, 1738; and in the London Daily-Post had the following character given him': “Though the elegance of Mr. Frowde’s writings has recommended him to the general public esteem, the politeness of his genius is the least amiable part of his character; for he esteemed the talents of wit and learning, only as they were conducive to the excitement and practice of honour and humanity. Therefore, with a soul chearful, benevolent, and virtuous, he was in conversation genteelly delightful, in friendship punctually sincere, in death Chnstianly resigned. No man could live more beloved; no private man could die more lamented.”

, an Italian poet, was born November 21, 1692, at Genoa, of a noble family, which ended in him. He was persuaded by his tutors to enter the order of regular clerks of Somasquo; but that confined life was so contrary to his gay temper, and fondness for pleasure, that he obtained leave from the pope to quit the order, and remain a secular priest. Frugoni then settled at Parma, where the different sovereigns procured him all the conveniences of life; but the infant don Philip showed yet greater attention to him than the rest. He gave him the titles of court poet, inspector of the theatres, and secretary of the fine arts. He died at Parma, December 20, 1768. His poems are much esteemed by the Italians, and his songs, in particular, were the delight of his contemporaries. An edition of this author’s works was published at Parma in 1779, in 10 vols. 8vo. They consist of every species of minor poems.

, a Romish saint, is usually called the Apostle of Ethiopia, on account of his having first propagated Christianity in that country, in the fourth century. He was the nephew of one Meropius, a philosopher of Tyre, who being induced to travel to Ethiopia, carried with him his two nephews, Frumentius and Edesius, with whose education he had been entrusted. In the course of their voyage homewards, the vessel touched at a certain port to take in provisions and fresh water, and the whole of the passengers were murdered by the barbarians of the country, except the two children, whom they presented to the king, who resided at Axuma, formerly one of the greatest cities of the East. The king, being charmed with the wit and sprightliness of the two boys, had them carefully educated, and when grown up, made Edesius his cup-bearer, and Frumentius, who was the elder, his treasurer and secretary of state, entrusting him with all the public writings and accounts. Nor were they less highly honoured after the king’s death by the queen, who was regent during her son’s minority. Frumentius had the principal management of affairs, and soon turned his attention to higher objects than the politics of the country. He met with some Roman merchants who traded there, and having by their means discovered some Christians who were in the kingdom, he encouraged them to associate for the purposes of religious worship; and at length erected a church for their use; and certain natives, instructed in the gospel, were converted. On the young king’s accession to the government, Frumentius, though with much reluctance on the part of the king and his mother, obtained leave to return to his own country. Edesius accordingly returned to Tyre; but Frumentius, on his arrival at Alexandria, communicated his adventures to Athanasius the bishop, and informed him of the probability of converting the country to Christianity, if missionaries were sent thither. On mature consideration, Athanasius told him, that none was so fit for the office as himself. He consecrated him therefore first bishop of the Indians, and Frumentius returning to a people who had been acquainted with his integrity and capacity, preached the gospel with much success, and erected many churches, although the emperor Constantius endeavoured to introduce Arianism, and actually ordered that Frumentius should be deposed, and an Arian bishop appointed; but the country was happily out of his reach. Frumentius is supposed to have died about the year 360. The Abyssinians honour him as the apostle of the country of the Axumites, which is the most considerable part of their empire.

, an ingenious artist, was a native of Ireland, where he was born in 1710. He came very early to London, when he practised portrait-painting in oil, crayons, and in miniature. In 1734 he had the honour of painting his royal highness, Frederick prince of Wales, a full length, now in Sadler’s-hall, Cheapside. But his genius was not confined to this art, and it is said that he was the inventor and first manufacturer of porcelain in England, and that he spent fifteen years of his life in bringing this to perfection at a manufactory at Bow, during which, his constitution being impaired by constantly working in furnaces, he retired into Wales, with little hope of recovery. Here, however, his health was perfectly restored, and he returned again to London, and resumed his profession, to which he now added the art of mezzotinto engraving, and had considerable employment and success, both as a painter and engraver, tie died of a decline, brought on by intense application, April 2, 1762.

In the first exhibition in 1760 there was a half-length portrait of the famous singer, Leveridge, which was painted by Frye, and possessed very considerable merit; and in the exhibition of the following year he also had pictures in all the different processes of oil-colours, crayons, and miniature. 'Of his mezzotinto productions, there are six heads as large as life; one of them the portrait of the artist himself; to which may be added two other portraits of their majesties, the same size with the former, but inferior in execution. He had issued proposals in 1760 for twelve heads in the above manner, but we presume his illness and subsequent death prevented his completing more than six; in these, however, he shewed rather more industry than judgment; for no branch of engraving, whether in mezzotinto, or in strokes, can be suited to the display of portraits of such magnitude.

, an eminent German physician and botanist, was born at Wembding, in Bavaria, in 1501. After a classical education at Hailbrun and Erfurt, he went in his nineteenth year to Ingoldstadt, where he pursued the study of the learned languages under Capnius and Ceporinus, two eminent professors, who had embraced the doctrines of the reformation, which they imparted to their pupil. He received the degree of master of arts in 1521, and having also studied medicine, was admitted to his doctor’s degree in 1524. He first practised at Munich, where he married, and had a large family, and in 1526 he removed to Ingoldstadt, and was made professor of medicine; but his religion occasioning some trouble, he settled at Onoltzbach about two years afterwards, under the patronage and protection of George, margrave of Bayreuth. Here he was very successful as a practitioner, and published some treatises on the healing art. In 1533, the management of the university of Ingoldstadt being committed, by William duke of Bavaria, to Leonard Eccius, a celebrated lawyer, acquainted with the merit of Fuchs, he procured his return to his former professorship; but his zeal for the reformed religion was still too prominent not to give offence, especially, we should suppose, to John Eccius (see Eccius), then a professor there, and he returned to Onoltzbach. Two years after, however, he found an honourable asylum in the university of Tubingen, which Ulric, duke of Wirtemberg, had determined to supply with protestant professors, and where he provided Fuchs with an ample salary, and every encouragement. In this place he remained until his death, May 10, 1566. He died in the arms of his wife and children, full of faith and fortitude, having in the course of his illness been observed to experience no relief from his sufferings, but while conversing with his friends on the subjects of religion and a future state, which made him forget every thing else, and he expressed himself with all his usual energy and perspicuity. He was interred, the day after his death, in a burying-ground adjoining to the town, where his first wife had been deposited but little more than three years before.

Some botanical remarks of Fuchs, relating principally to the Arabian writers, are found in the 2d volume of the “Herbarium” of Brunfelsius. But the work on which his reputation in this study chit-fly rests, is his “Historia Plantarum,” published at Basil in 1542, fol. with numerous wooden cuts. A German edition appeared the following year. In this work he chiefly copies Dioscorides, adding a few remarks of his own, and falling, as Haller observes, into the common error of the writers of his* time, who expected to find in their own cold countries the plants of those more genial climates where the ancients studied botany and medicine. The publication of Fuchs, though nearly on a par with those of other learned men of his time, would probably have been long since forgotten, were it not for the transcendant merit of its wooden cuts, inferior to those of Brunfelsius alone in execution, and far exceeding them in number. They chiefly indeed consist of pharmaceutical plants, which though mere outlines, are justly celebrated for their fidejity and elegance. These original editions are become very rare; but copies and translations of them, various in merit, are common throughout Europe. Amongst the poorest of these is a French duodecimo* printed at Lyons, under the title of Le Benefice Commun, in 1355, for which our author is certainly not responsible, and it is ralher hard in Linnæus to class him, on account of some such spurious editions, under the heads of monstrosi aud rudes in his “Bibliotheca Botanica,” though indeed he there properly stands amongst the usitatissimi with respect to h>s original edition. By some of his writings, especially his “Cornarus furens,” published in 1545, against Cornarus, who had attacked his “Historia Plantarum” in a work entitled “Vulpecula excoriata,” he appears to have been vehement in controversy, but in his general character and deportment he is said to have been dignified and amiable, with a fine manly person, and a clear sonorous voice. His piety y temperance, and indefatigable desire to be useful, were alike exemplary. As a lecturer he was peculiarly admired and followed, especially in his anatomical courses. The famous Vesalius was present at one of his lectures, in which he found himself criticized. He afterwards familiarly addressed the professor, saying, “why do you attack me who never injured you?” “Are you Vesalius” exclaimed Fuchs. “You see him before you,” replied the former. On which great mutual congratulations ensued, and a strict friendship wag formed between these learned men. Fuchs was so famous throughout Europe, that the great Cosmo duke of Tuscany invited him, with the offer of a salary of 600 crowns, to become professor of medicine at Pisa, which he declined. The emperor Charles V. also bore testimony to his merit, by sending him letters with the insignia of nobility, which honour also Fuchs for some time declined. He was indifferent to money, as well as to all other than literary fame. His great ambition was, whenever he undertook in his turn the rectorship of the university, to promote good order, industry, and improvement among the students, whom he governed with paternal assiduity and affection. Two colleges were always under his immediate care, one of them founded by duke Ulrie for students of divinity alone, and more amply endowed by his son and successor.

, a Swiss artist, and a man of considerable learning, was born at Zurich in 1706. After acquiring the elements of painting from a very indifferent artist, he left his country in the eighteenth year of his age, and going to Vienna, associated himself with Sedelmeier. Gran and Meitens were his principal guides, if he could be said to have any other guide than his own genius. He became well known at court, but his love of independence induced him to refuse very advantageous offers. He would not, however, have probably ever left Vienna, had not the prince of Schwarzeuburg persuaded him to go to Kadstadt, where he became the favourite of the court. Among others whose portraits he painted was the margrave of Dourlach, who had a great affection for him, and advised him to go to Ludwigsbourg, which he did with letters of recommendation to the duke of Wirtemberg, who immediately took him into his service. Here he passed his time very agreeably, making occasional excursions to paint the portraits of persons of distinction, until the war of Poland, when the entrance of the French into Germany threw every thing into confusion. The duke his patron at the same time fell sick, and was removed to Stutgard, but on Fuessli’s leaving him to go to Nuremberg, his highness presented him with a gold watch, and requested him to return when the state of public affairs was changed. At Nuremberg he had a strong desire to see the celebrated artist Kupezki, of whose manners he had imbibed an unfavourable impression, but he was agreeably disappointed, and they became friends from their first interview. After remaining six months at Nuremberg, the duke of Wirtemberg died, and there being no immediate prospect of peace, Fuessli returned to his own country, and in 1740 married. Although his wife was a very amiable woman, he used to say that marriage was incompatible with the cultivation of the fine arts: if, however, he felt himself occasionally disturbed by domestic cares, he had the happiness to communicate his art to his three sons, Rodolph, who settled at Vienna; Henry, at present so well known in England; and Caspar, who died in the vigour of life, an entomologist of fidelity, discrimination, and taste.

Fuessli’s talents and reputation procured him the friendship of the greatest artists of his time, and Mengs sent him his treatise “on the beautiful,” which he published with a preface. Winkelmann, especially, lived in great intimacy with him. His taste for poetry also procured him the ao quaintance and correspondence of Keist, Klopstock, Wieland, Bodmer, and Breitinguer, nor was he less respected by many persons of the first distinction in rank, and his house was frequented by all the literati of his time, whom he delighted by his conversation-talents. Nor was he inconsiderable as a patron of the arts. He gave lessons gratis to many young persons, and made collections to assist them in their studies and travels, employing his interest with the great only for the benefit of genius and talents. In 1740 and 1742 he had the misfortune to lose his two friends Kupezki and Rugendas, both whose lives he wrote, and this employment seems to have suggested to him “The Lives of the Artists of Switzerland,” which he wrote with great elegance and critical discrimination. He published also a “Catalogue raisonne” of the best Engravings.“His own collection was uncommonly rich in the finest specimens of that art. Of his paintings, his son appeals to the series of consular portraits, which he painted after his return to Zurich, engraved in mezzotinto by Preisler and others, as a fair test of his style and tasteHe died at Zurich, May 6, 1781. His lives of Rugendas and Kupezki were published at Zurich in 1758; his Swiss Artists in 5 vols. 1769 1779; and his Catalogue of Engravers and their works, in 1770. Besides these he published” Winkelmann’s Letters to his friends in Switzerland,“1778, and Mengs” On Beauty," in 1770.

, an eminent benefactor to literature, was born at Augsburg in 1526, and deserves a place in this work for his affection to learning and learned men. His family was considerable for its antiquity and opulence; and Thuanus informs us, that when Charles V. changed the government of Augsburg, in 1548, he nominated the family of the Fuggers among those who thenceforward were to be raised to the dignity of senators. Yet this illustrious family, as all the genealogical writers of Germany, notice, sprung from a weaver, who, in 1370, was made free of the city of Augsburg. Huldric had been chamberlain to pope Paul III. and afterwards turned protestant. He laid out great sums in purchasing good manuscripts of ancient authors, and getting them printed; and for this purpose he for some time allowed a salary to the famous Henry Stephens. His relations were so incensed at him for the money he expended in this way, that they brought an action against him, in consequence of which he was declared incapable of managing his affairs. Thuanus, and some other writers observe, that this sentence pronounced against Fugger plunged him into a deep melancholy, which accompanied him almost to his grave; but it is asserted in his epitaph, that he was unmoved at the shock, and that he was soon after restored to his estate. He had retired to Heidelberg, where he died in 1584; having bequeathed his library, which was very considerable, to the elector Palatine, with a fund for the maintenance of six scholars.

, an English law-writer, was the son of Thomas Fulbeck, who was mayor of Lincoln at the time of his death in J 566. He was born in the parish of St. Benedict in that city in 1560, entered as a commoner of St. Alban hall, Oxford, in 1577, and was admitted scholar of Corpus Christi college about two years after. In 1581 he took his bachelor’s degree, and the next year became probationer fellow. He then removed to Gloucester-hall (now Worcester college) where he completed the degree of M. A. in 1584. From Oxford he went to Gray’s Inn, London, where he applied with great assiduity to the study of the municipal law. Wood says, he had afterwards the degree of civil law conferred on him, but where he had not been able to discover, nor is the place or time of his death known. From an extract from, bishop Kennet, in the new edition of Wood, it seems not improbable that he took orders. His works are, 1. “Christian Ethics,” Lond. 1587, 8vo. 2. “An historical collection of the continual factions, tumults, and massacres -of the Romans before the peaceable empire of Augustus Caesar,” ibid. 1600, 8vo, 1601, 4to. 3. “A direction or preparative to the study of the Law,” ibid. 1600, 8vo, afterwards published, with a new title-page, as “A parallel or conference of the civil, the canon, and the common law,” ibid. 1618. 4. “The Pandects of the Laws of Nations; or the discourses of the matters in law, wherein the nations of the world do agree,” ibid. 1602, 4to.

, bishop of Chartres, who flourished towards the end of the tenth t and beginning of the eleventh century, is celebrated, in the Tlomish church history, for his learning and piety. Some authors rank him among the chancellors of France, under the reign or‘ king Robert, but he was only chancellor of the church of Chartres, at the same time that he was rector of the school. He had been himself a disciple of the learned Gerbert, who was afterwards pope Sylvester II. in the year 999. Fulbert came from Rome to France, and taught in the schools belonging to the church of Chartres, which were then not only attended by a great concourse of scholars, but by his means contributed greatly to the revival of learning and religioii in France and Germany; and most of the eminent men of his time thought it an honour to be able to say that they had been his scholars. In 1007 he succeeded to the bishopric of Chartres, and the duke William gave him the office of treasurer of St. Hilary of Poitiers, the profits of which Fulbert employed in rebuilding his cathedral church. He was distinguished in his time for attachment to ecclesiasrtical discipline, and apostolic courage; and such was his character and fame, that he was highly esteemed by the princes and sovereigns of his age, by Robert, king of France, Canute, king of England; Richard II. duke of Normandy; William, duke of Aquitaine; and the greater part of the contemporary noblemen and prelates. He continued bishop of Chartres for twenty-one years and six months, and died, according to the abbé Fleuri, in 1029; but others, with more probability, fix that event on April 10, 1028. His works, which were printed, not very correctly, by Charles de Villiers in 1608, consist of letters, sermons, and some lesser pieces in prose and verse. His sermons, Dupin thinks, contain little worthy of notice; but his letters, which amount to 134-, have ever been considered as curious memorials of the history and sentiments of the times. They prove, however, that although Fulbert might contribute much to the propagation of learning, he had not advanced in liberality of sentiment before his contemporaries. There are also two other letters of our prelate in existence, the one in D’Acheri’s “Spicilegium,” and the other in Martenne’s “Thesaurus Anecdotorum,” both illustrative of his sentiments, and the sentiments of his age.

, an ecclesiastical writer, was borti at Telepta, or Tellepte, about the year 468. He was of an illustrious family, the son of Claudius, and grandson of Gordianus, a senator of Carthage. Claudius dying early, left his son, then very young, to the care of his widow Mariana. He was properly educated in the knowledge of the Latin and Greek languages, and made such progress in his studies, that while yet a boy he could repeat all Homer, and spoke Greek with fluency and purity. As soon as he was capable of an employment he was made procurator or receiver of the revenues of his province. But this situation displeased him, because of the rigour he was forced to use in levying taxes; and therefore, notwithstanding the tears and dissuasions of his mother, he left the world, and took the monastic vows under Faustus, a bishop persecuted by the Arian faction, who had founded a monastery in that neighbourhood. The continued persecutions of the Arians soon separated him and Faustus; and not long after, the incursions of the Moors obliged him to retire into the country of Sicca, where he was whipped and imprisoned. Afterwards he resolved to go into Egypt; but in his voyage was dissuaded by Eulalius bishop of Syracuse, because the monks of the East had separated from the catholic church. He consulted also a bishop of Africa, who had retired into Sicily; and this bishop advised him to return to his own country, after he had made a journey to Rome. King Theodoric was in that city when he arrived there, which was in the year 500. After he had visited the sepulchres of the apostles he returned to his own country, where he built a monastery.

Africa was then under the dominion of Thrasitnond king of the Vandals, an Arian, and a cruel enemy to the catholics. He had forbidden to ordain catholic bishops in. the room of those who died: but the bishops of Africa were determined not to obey an order which threatened the extinction of orthodoxy. Fulgentius, under these circumstances, wished to avoid being a bishop; and when elected for the see of Vinta in the year 507, fled and concealed himself, but being soon discovered, was appointed bishop of Ruspae much against his will. On this elevation he did not change either his habit or manner of living, but uspd. the same austerities and abstinence as before. He still loved the monks, and delighted to retire into a monastery as often as the business of his episcopal function allowed him time. Afterwards he had the same fate with about two hundred and twenty catholic bishops of Africa, whom. Thrasimond banished into the island of Sardinia; and though he was not the oldest among them, yet they paid such respect to his learning, as to employ his pen in all the writings produced in the name of their body. So great was his reputation, that Thrasimond had a curiosity to see and hear him; and having sent for him to Carthage, he proposed to him many difficulties, which Fulgentius solved to his satisfaction: but because he confirmed the catholics, and converted many Arians, their bishop at Carthage prayed the king to send, him back to Sardinia. Thrasimond dying about the year 523, his son Hilderic recalled the catholic bishops, of whom Fulgentius was one. He returned, to the great joy of those who were concerned with him, led a most exemplary life, governed his clergy well, and performed all the offices of a good bishop. He died in the year 533, on the first day of the year, being then sixty- five.

His works, as many of them as are extant, consisting of doctrinal treatises and some epistles, have often been, printed; but the last and completest edition is in one volume, 4to, Paris, 1684. Fulgentius did not only follow the dpctrine of St. Austin, but he also imitated his style. His language, indeed, is not quite so pure; but he has not the same play of words as St. Austin. He had a quick and subtle spirit, which easily comprehended whatever he applied himself to learn; and he had a clear and copious way of setting it off; too copious indeed, for he often repeats the same things in different words, and turns the question many different ways. He was deeply versed in the holy scriptures, and as well read in the fathers, particularly St. Austin: but, as he loved thorny and scholastic questions, he sometimes introduced them in the discussion of mysteries.

, a celebrated English divine, and master of Pembroke-hal in Cambridge, wns born in London, and educated in St. John’s college, Cambridge, of which he was chosen fellow in 1564. He was a youth of great parts, and of a very high spirit. When a boy at school, he is said to have betrayed great anger and mortification on losing a literary contest for a silver pen, with the celebrated Edmund Campian, and as the latter was educated at Christ’s hospital, this incident seems to prove that t'ulke was of the same school. Before he became fellow of his college, he complied with the wishes of his father, by studying law at Clirtbrd’s-inn, but on his return to the university, his inclinations became averse to that pursuit, and he was unable to conquer them, although his father refused to support him any longer. Young Fulke, however, trusted to his industry and endowments, and soon became a distinguished scholar in mathematics, languages, and divinity. Having taken orders, his early intimacy with some of the puritan divines induced him t< preach in favour of some of their sentiments respecting the ecclesiastical habits and ceremonies. This occurred about 1565, and brought upon him the censure of the chancellor of the university, which, it is said, proceeded to expulsion. On this he took lodgings in the town of Cambridge, and subsisted for some time by reading lectures. His expulsion, however, if it really took place, which seems doubtful, did not lessen his general reputation, as in 1561) there was an intention to choose him master of St. John’s college, had not archbishop Parker interfered but about the same time he found a patron in the earl of Leicester, who was more indulgent to the puritans, and who received Mr. luilke into his house, as his chaplain. It was now also that he fell under the charge of being concerned in some unlawful marriages, and in such circumstances thought it his duty to resign his fellowship, but being honourably acquitted in an examination before the bishop of Ely, he was immediately re-elected by the college.

In 1571 the earl of Essex presented him to the rectory of Warley, in Essex, and soon after to the rectory of Kedington, in, Suffolk, and about this time he took his doctor’s degree at Cambridge, and was incorporated in the same at Oxford. His degree at Cambridge was in consequence of a mandamus from the earl of Essex, that he might be qualified to accompany the earl of Lincoln, who was then going as ambassador to the court of France. Upon his return he was chosen master of Pembroke hall, and as Wood says in his Fasti, Margaret professor of divinity, but Baker, in a ms note on Wood, says he never held the latter office.

In 1582, Dr. Fulke, with other learned divines, was engaged in a public disputation with certain Roman catholics, in the Tower, and had to contend again with his old school-fellow Campian, but was more successful. He died in the month of August, 1589, and was buried in the chancel of the church at Kedington, where is an inscription to his memory, partly in Latin, and partly in English. He was married, and had a large family, to whom he appears by his will to have been able to bequeath considerable property. To Pembroke-hall he bequeathed a piece of plate, to be called Dr. Fulke’s cup, and used only at commencements and solemn feasts.

His works, chiefly controversial, are, I. “Anti-prognosticon contra predictiones Nostradami,” &c. 1560. 2. “Sermon at Hampton -court,” 1571. 3. “Confutation df a libelle in forme of an apology made by Frocknam,” 1571. 4. “A goodly gallery, or treatise on meteors,” 1571. 5. “Astrologus ludus,” 1571. 6. “Metpomaxia, sive Ludus geometricus,” 1578. 7. “Responsio ad Tho. Stapletoni cavillationes,” 1579. 8. “A retentive against the motives of Richard Bristow; also a discovery of the dangerous rock of the popish church,” 1580. 9. “A defence of the translation of the Holy Scriptures in English,” 1583. 10. “Confutation of Will. Allen’s treatise in defence of the usurped power of the popish priesthood.” feut the work by which he is best known, and is still remembered with high esteem, is his Comment upon the Rheims Testament, printed in 1580, and reprinted in 1601 with this title: “The Text of the New Testament of Jesus Christ, translated out of the vulgar Latin by the Papists of the traiterous Seminarie at Rhemes. With arguments of books, chapters, and annotations, pretending to discover the corruptions of divers translations, and to clear the controversies of these days. Whereunto is added the translation out of the original Greek, commonly used in the Church of England; with a confutation of all such arguments, glosses, and annotations, as containe manifest impietie of Heresie, Treason, and Slander against the Catholike Church of God, and the true teachers thereof, or the translations used in the church of England. The whole worke, perused and enlarged in divers places by the author’s owne hand before his death, with sundry quotations and authorities out of Holy Scriptures, Counsels, Fathers, and History. More amply than in the former Edition.” This work was published again, 1617 and 1633, in folio, as it was before, and proves that in power of argument and criticism, he was one of the ablest divines of his time, and one of the principal opponents of the popish party. One other work has been attributed to him, we know not on what authority, which was published under the name of Mr. Dudley Fenner; entitled “A. brief and plain declaration, containing the desires of all those faithful ministers who seek discipline and reformation of the church of England, which may serve as a just apology against the false accusations and slanders of their adversaries,” 1584. Having never been molested on account of his opinions, unless when at college, there seems no reason why he should now publish them under another name.

, was an English painter of some note in the reign of Charles II. but of his family or masters we have no account, except that he studied many years in France under Perrier, who engraved the antique statues. In his historical compositions he has left little to admire, his colouring being raw and unnatural, and not compensated by disposition or invention, but in portraits his pencil was bold, strong, and masterly. In the latter he was much employed, particularly at Oxford. His own portrait in the gallery there is touched with great force and character. The altar-piece of Magdalen was also by him, but has not been much approved. As an imitation of Michel Angelo, it falls far short of the sublime, although sometimes wild imagination of that great artist; nor is the colouring harmonious. Some of the figures, however, are correctly drawn; and he has at least imitated the temper of Michel Angelo with success, in introducing among the damned, the portrait of an hostler at the Greyhound-inn, near the college, who had offended him. The picture, it is well known, was honoured by Addison in an elegant Latin poem. At Wadham college is an altar-cloth by Fuller in a singular manner, and of merit; which is just brushed over for the lights and shades, and the colours melted in with a hot iron. Soon after the restoration, he was engaged in painting the circumstances of king Charles II.'s escape, which he executed in five large pictures. These were presented to the parliament of Ireland, where they remained for many years in one of the rooms of the parliament house in Dublin. But some time in the last century the house undergoing a thorough repair, these pictures were not replaced, but lay neglected, until they were rescued by the late earl of Clanbrassil, who obtained possession of them, and had them cleaned and removed to his seat at Tullymore park, co. Down, where they were a few years ago. Lord Orford speaks slightingly of these, which he had never seen, and probably with as much justice as of Fuller’s altar-piece at All-souls college, which he never could have seen, for Fuller had no picture there. Fuller died in Bloomsbury-square July 17, 1672, and left a gon, an ingenious but idle man, chiefly employed ia coach -painting, who died young.

, a learned English divine and critic, was born at Southampton in 1557, and educated at the free-school in that town. He did not go directly thence to the university, but was taken into the family of the bishop of Winchester, Dr. Robert Home; where spending some time in study, he was made at length his secretary, and afterwards continued in that office by his successor, Dr. Watson. But Watson dying also in about three years, Fuller returned home, with a resolution to follow his studies. Before he was gettled there, he was invited to be tutor to the sons of a knight in Hampshire, whom he accompanied to St. John’s college, Oxford, in 1584. His pupils leaving him in a little time, he removed himself to Hart- hall, where he took both the degrees in arts, and then retired into the country. He afterwards took order*, and was presented to the rectory of Aldington, or Ailington, near Amesbury, in Wiltshire. He afterwards became a prebendary in the church of Salisbury*, and rector of Bisbop’s-Waltham, in Hampshire. He died in 1622. He was extremely learned in the sacred tongues, and, as Wood quaintly says, “was so happy in pitching upon useful difficulties, tending to the understanding of the Scripture, that he surpassed all the critics of his time.” His “Miscellanea Theologica,” in four books, were published first at Heidelberg, 1612, 8vo, and afterwards at Oxford, in 1616, and at London, in 1617, 4 to. These miscellanies coming into the hands of John Drusius, in Holland, he charged Fuller with plagiarism, and with taking his best notes from him without any acknowledgment. But Fuller, knowing himself guiltless, as having never seen Drusius’s works, published a vindication of himself at Leyden, in 1622, together with two more books of “Miscellanea Sacra,” Leyden and Strasburgh, 1650, 4to. All these miscellanies are printed in the 9th volume of the Critici Sacri,“and dispersed throughout Pool’s” Synopsis Griticorum.“There are some manuscript* of Fuller in the Bodleian library at Oxford, which shew his great skill in Hebrew and in philological learning; as” An Exposition of rabbi Mordecai Nathan’s Hebrew Roots, with notes upon it,“and” A Lexicon," which he intended to have published with the preceding.

, an English historian and divine, was the son of the rev. Thomas Fuller, minister of St. Peter’s, in Aldwincle, in Northamptonshire, and born there in 1608. The chief assistance he had in the rudiments of learning was from his father, under whom he made so extraordinary a progress, that he was sent at twelve years of age to Queen’s-college, in Cambridge; Dr. Davenant, who was his mother’s brother, being then master of it, and soon after bishop of Salisbury. He took his degrees in arts, that of A. B. in 1624-5, and that of A. M. in 1628, and would have been fellow of the college; but there being already a Northamptonshire man a fellow, he was prohibited by the statutes from being chosen, and although he might have obtained a dispensation, he preferred removing to Sidney-college, in the same university. He had not been long there, before he was chosen minister of St. Bennet’s, in the town of Cambridge, and soon became a very popular preacher. In 1631, he obtained a fellowship in Sidney-college, and at the same time a prebend in the church of Salisbury. This year also he issued his first publication, a work of the poetical kind, now but little known, entitled “David’s Hainous Sin, Heartie Repentances, and Heavie Punishment,” in a thin 8vx>.

He was soon after ordained priest, and presented to the rectory of Broad Windsor, in Dorsetshire; in 1635 he came again to Cambridge, and took his degree of B. D. after which, returning to Broad Windsor, he married about 1638, and had one son, but lost his wife about 1641. During his retirement at this rectory, he began to complete several works he had planned at Cambridge; but growing weary of a country parish, and uneasy at the unsettled state of public affairs, he removed to London; and distinguished himself so much in the pulpits there, that he was invited by the master and brotherhood of the Savoy to be their lecturer. In 1640, he published his “History f the Holy War;” it was printed at Cambridge, in folio, and was so favourably received, that a third edition appeared in 1647. On April 13, 1640, a parliament was called, and then also a convocation began at Westminster, in Henry VII.'s chapel, having licence granted to make new canons for the better government of the church; of this convocation he was a member, and has amply detailed its proceedings in his “Church History,” During the commencement of the rebellion, and when the king left London in 1641, to raise an army, Mr. Fuller continued at the Savoy, to the great satisfaction of his people, and the neighbouring nobility and gentry, labouring all the while in private and in public to serve the king. To this end, on. the anniversary of his inauguration, March 27, 1642, he preached at Westminster-abbey, on this text, 2 Sam. xix. 30: “Yea, let him take all, so that my lord the king return in peace;” which being printed, gave great offence to those who were engaged in the opposition, and brought the preacher into no small danger. He soon found that he must expect to be silenced and ejected, as others had been; yet desisted not, till he either was, or thought himself unsettled. This appears from what he says in the preface to his “Holy State,” which was printed in folio that same year at Cambridge. This is a collection of characters, moral essays and lives, ancient, foreign, and domestic. The second edition of 1648, contains “Andronicus, or the unfortunate politician,” originally printed by itself in 1646, 12mo.

In 1643, refusing to take an oath to the parliament, unless with such reserves as they would not admit, he was obliged in April of that year to convey himself to the king at Oxford, who received him gladly. As his majesty had heard of his extraordinary abilities in the pulpit, he was now desirous of knowing them personally; and accordingly Fuller preached before him at St. Mary’s church. His fortune upon this occasion was very singular. He had before preached and published a sermon in London, upon “the new-moulding church-reformation,” which caused him to be censured as too hot a royalist and now, from his sermon at Oxford, he was thought to be too lukewarm which can only be ascribed to his moderation, which he would sincerely have inculcated in each party, as the only means of reconciling both. During his stay here, he resided in Lincoln college, but was not long after sequestered, and lost all his books and manuscripts. This loss, the heaviest he could sustain, was made up to him partly by Henry lord Beauchamp, and partly by Lionel Cranfield, earl of Middlesex, wiio gave him the remains of his father’s library. That, however, he might not lie under the suspicion of want of zeal or courage in the royal cause, be determined to join the army; and therefore, being well recommended to sir Ralph Hopton, in 1643, he was admitted by him in quality of chaplain. For this employ-, ment he was quite at liberty, being deprived of all other preferment. And now, attending the army from place to place, he constantly exercised his duty as chaplain; yet found proper intervals for his beloved studies, which he employed chiefly in making historical collections, and especially in gathering materials for his “Worthies of England,” which he did, not only by an extensive correspondence, but by personal inquiries in every place which the army had occasion to pass through.

After the battle at Cheriton-Down, March 29, 1644, lord Hopton drew on his army to Basing-house, and Fuller, being left there by him, animated the garrison to so vigorous a defence of that place, that sir William Waller was obliged to raise the siege with considerable loss. But the, war hastening to an end, and part of the king’s army being driven into Cornwall, under lord Hopton, Fuller, with the leave of that nobleman, took refuge at Exeter, where he resumed his studies, and preached constantly to the citizens. During his residence here he was appointed chaplain to the infant princess Henrietta Maria, who was born at Exeter in June 1643; and the king soon after gave him a patent for his presentation to the living of Dorchester in Dorsetshire. He continued his attendance on the princess till the surrender of Exeter to the parliament, in April 1646; but did not accept the living, because he determined to remove to London at the expiration of the war. He relates, in his * Worthies,“an extraordinary circumstance which happened during the siege of Exeter” When the city of Exeter, he says, was besieged by the parliament forces, so that only the south side thereof towards the sea was open to it, incredible numbers of larks were found in that open quarter, for multitude like quailg in the wilderness; though, blessed be God, unlike them in the cause and effect; as not desired with man’s destruction, nor sent with God’s anger, as appeared by their safe digestion into wholesome nourishment. Hereof I was an, eye and mouth-witness. I will save my credit in not conjecturing any number; knowing that herein, though I should stoop beneath the truth, I should mount above belief. They were as fat as plentiful; so that being sold for two-pence a dozen and under, the poor who could have no cheaper, and the rich no better meat, used to make pottage of them, boiling them down therein. Several causes were assigned hereof, &c. but the cause of causes was the Divine Providence; thereby providing a feast for many poor people, who otherwise had been pinched for provision.“While here, as every where else, he was much courted on account of his instructive and pleasant conversation, by persons of high rank, some of whom made him very liberal offers; but whether from a love of study, or a spirit of independence, he was always reluctant in accepting any otters that might seem to confine him to any one family, or patron. It was at Exeter, where he is said to have written his” Good Thoughts in Bad Times,“and where the book was published in 1645, as what he calls” the first fruits of Exeter press.“At length the garrison being forced to surrender, he came to London, and met but a coid reception among his former parishioners, and found his lecturer’s place filled by another. However, it was not Ions: before he was chosen lecturer at St. Clement’s near Lombard-street and shortly after removed to St. Bride’s, in Fleet-street. In 1647 he published, in 4to,” A Sermon of Assurance, fourteen years agoe preached at Cambridge, since in other places now, by the importunity of his friends, exposed to public view.“He dedicated it to sir John Danvers, who had been a royalist, was then an Oliverian, and next year one of the king’s judges; and in the dedication he says, that” it had been the pleasure of the present authority to make him mute; forbidding him till further order the exercise of his public preaching.“Notwithstanding his being thus silenced, he was, about 1648, presented to the rectory of Waltham, in Essex, by the earl of Carlisle, whose chaplain he was just before made. He spent that and the following year betwixt London and Waltham, employing some engravers to adorn his copious prospect or view of the Holy Land, as from mount Pisgah; therefore called his” Pi*gah-sijht of Palestine and the confines thereof, with the history of the Old and New Testament acted thereon,“which he published in 1650. It is an handsome folio, embellished with a frontispiece and many other copper- plates, and divided into five books. As for his” Worthies of England,“on which he had been labouring so long, the death of the king for a time disheartened him from the continuance of that work:” For what shall I write,“says he,” of the Worthies of England, when this horrid act will bring such an infamy upon the whole nation as will ever cloud an4 darken all its former, and suppress its future rising glories?“He was, therefore, busy till the year last mentioned, in preparing that book and others; and the next year he rather employed himself in publishing some particular lives of religious reformers, martyrs, confessors, bishops, doctors, and other learned divines, foreign and domestic, than in augmenting his said book of” English Worthies“in general. To this collection, which was executed by several hands, as he tells us in the preface, he gave the title of” Abel Redivivus,“and published it in 4to, 1651. In the two or three following years he printed several sermons and tracts upon religious subjects. About 1654 he married a sister of the viscount Baltinglasse; and the next year she brought him a son, who, as well as the other before-mentioned, survived his father. In 1655, notwithstanding Cromwell’s prohibition of all persons from, preaching, or teaching school, who had been adherents to the late king, he continued preaching, and exerting his charitable disposition towards those ministers who were ejected by the usurping powers, and not only relieved such from what he could spare out of his own slender estate, but procured many contributions for them from his auditories. Nor was his charity confined to the clergy; and among the laity whom he befriended, there is an instance upon record of a captain of the army who was quite destitute, and whom he entirely maintained until he died. In 1656 he published in folio,” The Church History of Britain, from the birth of Jesus Christ to the year 1648;“to which are subjoined,” The History of the University of Cambridge since the conquest,“and” The History of Waltham Abbey in Essex, founded by king Harold.“His Church History was animadverted upon by Dr. Hey 1 in in his” Examen Historicum;" and this drew from our author a reply: after which they had no further controversy, but were very well reconciled *. About this time he was invited, accord ing to his biographer, to another living in Essex, in which he continued his ministerial labours until his settlement at London. George, lord Berkeley, one of his noble patrons, having in 1658 made him his chaplain, he took leave of Essex, and was presented by his lordship to the rectory of Cranford in Middlesex. It is said also that lord Berkeley took him over to the Hague, and introduced him to Charles if. It is certain, however, that a short time hefore the restoration, Fuller was re-admitted to his lecture in the Savoy, and on that event restored to his prebend of Salisbury. He was chosen chaplain extraordinary to the king; created doctor of divinity at Cambridge by a mandamus, dated August 2, 1660; and, had he lived a twelvemonth longer, would probably have been raised to a bishopric. But upon his return from Salisbury in August 1661 he was attacked by a fever, of which he died the 15th of that month. His funeral was attended by at least two hundred of his brethren; and a sermon was preached by Dr. Hardy, dean of Rochester, in which a great and noble character was given of him. H was buried in his church at Cranford, on the north wall of the chancel of which is his monument, with the following inscription:

In 1662 was published in folio, with an engraving of him prefixed, his “History of the Worthies of England.” This work, part of which was printed before the author died, seems not so finished as it would probably have beeu if he had lived to see it completely published: yet it certainly did not deserve the heavy censures of Nicolson. Whatever errors may be found in it, as errors undoubtedly may be found in all works of that nature, the characters or memorials there assembled of so many great men, will always make it a book necessary to be consulted.

Besides the works already mentioned in the course of this memoir, Fuller was the author of several others of a smaller nature; as, l.“Good Thoughts in bad times.” 2. “Good Thoughts in worse times.” These two pieces printed separately, the former in 1645, the latter in 1647, were published together in 1652, and have very recently been reprinted by the rev. Mr. Hinton, of Oxford. He afterwards published, in 1660, 3. “Mixt Contemplations in better times.” 4. “The Triple Reconciler; stating three controversies, viz. whether ministers have an exclusive power of barring communicants from the sacrament; whether any person unordained may lawfully preach; and whether the Lord’s Prayer ought not to be used by all Christians, 1654,” 8vo. 5. “The speech of birds, also of flowers, partly moral, partly mystical, 1660,” 8vo. A work entitled “T. Fuller’s Triana; or three-fold Romanza of Mariana, Paduana, and Sabina,” 1662, 12mo, is attributed to him in some catalogues. He published also a great many sermons, separately and in volumes.

Dr. Fuller was in his person tall and well-made, but no way inclining to corpulency; his complexion was florid; and his hair of a light colour and curling. He was a kind husband to both his wives, a tender father to both his children, a good- friend and neighbour, and a well-behaved civilized person in every respect. He was a most agreeable companion, having a great deal of wit, which he could not suppress in his most serious- compositions, but it suited the age he lived in, and however introduced, wasalways made subservient to some good purpose. Ah his Jacetite, however, must not be referred to the age of James I. and Charles. Fuller has left enough to convince us that he would have been admitted a legitimate wit in any age. He had all the rich imagery of bishop Hall, but with more familiarity and less elegance. 1

It was sufficiently known how steady he was in the interests of the church of England, against the innovations of the presbyterians and independents; but his zeal against these was mixed with greater compassion than it was towards the papists: and this raised him up many adversaries, who charged him with puritanism. He used to call the controversies concerning episcopacy, and the newfangled arguments against the church of England, “insects of a day;” and carefully avoided polemical disputes, being altogether of sir Henry Wotton’s opinion, “disputandi pruritus, ecclesise scabies.” The fact was, that he loved pious and good men of all denominations, and it is this candour which has given a value to his works superior to those of his opponents. For the many errors which occur in his histories, it is surely easy to find an apology in this single circumstance, that the whole of them were compiled and published within about twenty years, during which he was obliged to remove from place to place in quest of literary leisure, and freedom from the cruel severities of the times. His “Church History* 1 is the most incorrect of all his works, and Strype has pointed out a great many errors in the transcription of historical documents, to which perhaps Fuller had not the easiest access. His” Worthies" was a posthumous publication, by his Son, and although less perfect than he could have made it, had his life been spared a few years longer, with the opportunities which the return of peace might have afforded, yet it contains many interesting memorials; and he was the second (see Samuel Clarke) who published what may be called English biography. This work has for many years been rising in price and- estimation, and the public has lately been gratified by a new edition, in 2 vols. 4to, edited by Mr. Nichols, with many improvements and additions, from the communications of his literary friends.

, an English physician, but perhaps better known for a very useful work on morals, was born June 24, 1654, and was educated at Queen’s college, Cambridge, where he took his degrees in medicine, that of M. B. in 1676, and that of M. D. in 1681. He does not appear to have been a member of the college of physicians of London, but settled at Sevenoak in Kent, where he was greatly esteemed. He was a great benefactor to the poor, and a zealous assertor of their rights, having, not long before his death, prosecuted the managers of a considerable charity given to the inhabitants of that town by sir William Senoke (a foundling of the place, and in 1418 lord mayor of London) and obliged them to produce their accounts in chancery, and to be subject for the future to an annual election. Here Dr. Fuller died, Sept. 17, 1734. The moral work which he published was entitled “Introductio ad prudentiam; or directions, counsels and cautions, tending to prudent management of affairs of common life,” 1727, 12mo, compiled for the use of his son. To this he added, what may be reckoned a second volume, with the title of “Introductio, &c.; or the art of right thinking, assisted and improved by such notions as men of sense and experience have left us in their writings, in order to eradicate error, and plant knowledge,” 1731-2, 12mo. His medical works were, 1. “Pharmacopreia extemporanea,” 1702 and 1714, 8vo. 2. “Pharmacopoeia Bateana,” 1718, 12mo. 3.“Pharmacopoeia Domestica,” 1723, 8vo, 4.“Of eruptive fevers, measles, and small-pox,” 1730, 4to. There is another work entitled “Medici na Gymnastica,” which has been sometimes attributed to him, but was written by a Francis Fuller, M. A. of St. John’s college, Cambridge, and published in 1704.

, so called from the trade of a fuller, which he exercised in his monastic state, intruded himself into the see of Antioch, in the fifth century, and after having been several times deposed and condemned on account of the bitterness of his opposition to the council of Chalcedon, was at last fixed in it, in the year 482, by the authority of the emperor Zeno, and the favour of Acacius, bishop of Constantinople, Among the innovations which he introduced to excite discord in the church, was an alteration in the famous hymn which the Greeks called Tris-agion. After the words “O God most holy, &c.” he ordered the following phrase to be added in the eastern churches, “who has suffered for us upon the cross.” His design in this was to raise a new sect, and also to fix more deeply in the minds of the people, the doctrine of one nature in Christ, to which he was zealously attached. His adversaries, and especially Fcelix, the Roman pontiff, interpreted this addition in a quite different manner, and charged him with maintaining, that all the three persons of the Godhead were crucified and hence his followers were called Theopaschites. To put an end to the controversy, the emperor Zeno published in the year 482 the “Henoticon,” or decree of onion, which was designed to reconcile the parties, and Fullo signed it; but the effects of the contest disturbed the church for a long time after his death, which happened in the year 486.

, an English antiquary, was the son of a tradesman at Penshurst, in Kent, where he was born in Nov. 1632, and his early capacity being known to the celebrated Dr. Hammond, who was minister of that place, he took him with him to Oxford during the usurpation. There he procured him the place of chorister in Magdalen college, and at the same time had him educated at the school belonging to that college. In 1647 he became a candidate for a scholarship in Corpus Christi college, and succeeded by his skill in classical learning. The next year he was ejected by the parliamentary visitors, along with his early patron, Dr. Hammond, to whom, however, he faithfully adhered, and was serviceable to him as an amanuensis. Dr. Hammond afterwards procured him a tutor’s place in a family, where he remained until the restoration, and then resuming his scholarship at college, was created M. A. and obtained a fellowship. He was, several years after, presented by his college to the rectory of Meysey Hampton, near Fairford, in Gloucestershire, on which he resided during his life, employing his time that was not occupied in professional duties, in the study pf history and antiquities, particularly what regarded his own country. He died June 28, 1688, according to Wood, but Atkins mentions his successor, Dr. Beale, with (he date 1697. Wood informs us that Mr. Fulmau made large collections of history, but published little. We have, however, of his, 1. “Academiae Oxoniensis Notitia,” Oxford, 1665, 4to, reprinted at London in 1675, with additions and corrections from Wood’s Latin history, the sheets of which he communicated to Mr. Fulman as they came from the press. 2. “Appendix to the Life of Edmund Stunton, D. D. wherein some passages are further cleared, which were not fully held forth by the former authors,” Lond. 1673. This is a censure of some particulars in Mayow’s Life of Dr. Stanton. 3. “Corrections and Observations on the first part of Burnet’s History of the Reformation,” not a distinct publication, but communicated by the author to Burnet, who published them at the end of his second volume, and, according to Wood, not completely. Fulman also collected what are called the “Works of Charles I.” but happening to be taken ill about the intended time of publication (1662), the bookseller employed Dr. Periuchief as editor. It contains, however, Fulman’s notes. Many of his ms collections are in the library of Corpus Christi college. He will occur to be noticed hereafter as editor of Dr. Hammond’s works.

, an accomplished scholar and Latin poet, was born at Verona, and not at Venice, as Foscarini asserts. He studied Greek and Latin with astonishing progress, under Romulus Amaseus, and the extensive learning he afterwards acquired made him known and respected by all the eminent scholars of his time. On the death pf one of his particular friends, John Matthew Giberti, bishop of Verona, which happened in 1544, he composed a funeral oration, which is said to have been very eloquent, but which he was not able to deliver without such continual interruption from the tears and sobs of his audience, as prevented its being heard with any other effect. At this time he enjoyed a canonry at Venice, which he kept all his life. Navagero and Valerio, the two successive bishops of Verona, and both cardinals, had the highest esteem for Fumani; by the interest of the former he was appointed secretary to the council of Trent. He died advanced in age in 1587. He published “D. Basilii Moralia, et Ascetica,” translated by him, Leyden, 1540, fol. but is best known by his Latin poems, the chief of which is a system of logic, in Latin verse, on which, notwithstanding the unpromising nature of the attempt, Tiraboschi bestows very high praises. This curious work remained in manuscript until 1739, when it was published in the Padua edition of the works of Fracastorius, 2 vols. 4to. There are other poems by Fumani in the same collection, both in Greek and Latin, and some in Italian; but in the latter he is not thought so successful.

, a native of Marpurg, and a celebrated critic in the Latin language, was born in 1693. He was educated at the university of Rintlen in Westphalia, and was a writer of several philological tracts in Latin. But the most celebrated part of his works consists of several treatises which he published successively on the history of the Latin language, beginning with its original formation, and pursuing it through the several ages, from youth to extreme old age. His treatises “De Origine Latinae Linguae,” and “De Pueritia Latins Linguae,” were published in 1720. He died in 1778.

, a celebrated Lutheran divine, was born in 1518, at Werdeti, near Nuremberg. He adopted the doctrine of Osiander, whose daughter he married, and particularly became a strenuous advocate for Osiander 1 s opinions on the subject of justification. He was a minister in Prussia, and wrote a “Chronology,” from Adam to 1560, published at separate times, but completely at Wittemberg, 1570, fol. with various other tracts. At length being convicted of giving Albert, duke of Prussia, to whom he was chaplain, advice disadvantageous to Poland, he was condemned, with some others, as a disturber of the public peace, and beheaded at Konigsberg, October 28, 1566. He is said to have composed the following distich a little before his execution

, an ingenious and learned lawyer, was born at Paris in 1620; and, after a liberal education, became eminent in the civil and canon law. He was first an advocate in the parliament; and afterwards, taking orders, was presented to the abbey of Chalivoy, and the priory of Chuines. Many works of literature recommended him to the public; but he is chiefly known and valued for his “Universal Dictionary of the French Tongue,” in which he explains the terms of art in all sciences. He died in 1688. He was of the French academy, but, though a very useful member, was excluded in 1685, on the accusation of having composed his dictionary, by taking advantage of that of the academy, which was then going on. He justified himself by statements, in which he was very severe against the academy; but wished, a little before his death, to be re-admitted; and he offered to give any satisfaction, which could reasonably be expected from a man, who owned he had been carried too far by the heat of disputation. His dictionary was not printed till after his death, in 2 vols. fol. Basnage de Beauval published an edition at Amsterdam, 1725, 4 vols., fol. This dictionary was the foundation of that known by the name of Trevoux, the last edition of which is, Paris, 1771, 8 vols. fol. His other works are: “Facta,” and. other pieces, against his brother academicians. “Relation des Troubles arrives au Ro‘iaume d’Eloquence;” a tolerably good critical allegory. “Le Roman Bourgeois,” 12mo or 8vo; a book esteemed in its time. Five “Satires” in verse, 12mo, which are not valued. “Paraboles Evangeliques,” inverse, 1672, 12mo. There is also a “Furetieriana,” in which there are some amusing anecdotes.

, an Italian cardinal and antiquary, the descendant of a noble family of Bergamo, was born there in 1685, He studied at Milan and Pavja, and made considerable progress in the knowledge of the civil and canon law. He went afterwards to Rome, where he held several ecclesiastical preferments, and in each was admired as much for his integrity as knowledge. Benedict XIV. who well knew his merit, was yet averse to raising him to the purple, on account of some disputes between them which took place in 1750. Yet it is said that Furietti might have received this high honour at that time, if he would have parted with his two superb centaurs, of Egyptian marble, which he found in 1736 among the ruins of the ancient town of Adrian in Tivoli, and which the pope very much wanted to place in the museum Capitolinum. Furietti, however, did not ehuse to give them up, and assigned as a reason: “I can, if I please, be honoured with the purple, but I know the court of Rome, and I do not wish to be called cardinal Centaur /” In 1759, however, Clement XIII. a year after his accession to the papal dignity, sent the cardinal’s hat to him, which he did not long enjoy, dying in 1764.

Furietti collected and published at Rome the works of the celebrated Caspar Barziza of Bergamo, and of his son Guiniforte, most of which were never before printed, in a handsome 4to vol. 1723, with a learned preface and life. He published, likewise, at Bergamo in 1752, a fine edition of the poems of Fontana; but what obtained him most reputation among scholars and antiquaries, was his treatise on the Mosaic art of painting, entitled “De Musivis, vel pictoriae Mosaicse artis origine, progressu, &c.” Home, 1752, 4to. In this he describes a rare specimen of Mosaic which he discovered in 1737 in the ruins of Adrian, and which, according to him, is mentioned by Pliny, as being the work of the celebrated artist Sosius. This exquisite specimen, with the centaurs belonging to Furietti, was purchased after his death by pope Clement XIII. for 14,000 Roman crowns, and deposited in the museum.

, called Bibaculus, perhaps from his excessive drinking, an ancient Latin poet, was born at Cremona about the year of Rome 650, or 100 before Christ. He wrote annals, of which Macrobius has preserved some fragments. They are inserted in Maittaire’s “Corpus Poetarum. >r Quintilian says, that he wrote iambics also irt a very satirical strain, and therefore is censured by Cremutius Cordus, in Tacitus, as a slandering and abusive writer. Horace is thought to have ridiculed the false sublime of his taste; yet, according to Macrobius, Virgil is said to have imitated him in many places. But some are of opinion that the” Annals" may be attributed to Furius Antias, or Anthius, a contemporary poet, whose fragments are likewise in Maittaire’s collection.

, surnamed Cceriolanus, was a native of Valentia in Spain, and flourished in the sixteenth century. He studied at Paris under Talaeus, Tiirnebus, and Ramus, and afterwards came to lx>uvain, where he published a treatise “On Rhetoric,” and another in which he asserted that the scriptures ought to be translated into the vulgar tongue. It was entitled “Bononia,” sive de libris sacris in vernaculam linguam convertendis, &c.“Basil, 1556, 8vo. It was written, however, upon too liberal principles for the council of Trent, and was accordingly inserted in their” Index Expurgatorius.“It otherwise would have brought him into trouble if he had not found a protector in the emperor Charles V. who was informed of his learning, piety, and candour. This monarch sent him. into the Netherlands, and placed him with his son Philip, who made him his historian. Furius remained with this prince during his life, and having accompanied him to the states of Arragon, died at Valladolid in 1592. He appears to have employed his utmost endeavours in order to pacify the troubles in the Netherlands. He wrote another work” Del Conseio y Gonseiero," which was much esteemed, and twice translated into Latin, 1618 and 1663, 8vo.

, a learned dissenting clergyman, was born at Totness in Devonshire in Dec. 1726, and was educated in the free-school of that town at the same time with Dr. Kennicott, who was a few years his senior, and between them a friendship commenced which continued through life. From Totness Dr. Furneaux came to London for academical studies among the dissenters, which he completed in 1749. He was soon after ordained, and chosen assistant to the rev. Henry Read, at the meetinghouse in St. Thomas’s, Southwark, and joint Sunday evening lecturer at Salters’-hall meeting. In 1753 he succeeded the rev, Moses Lowman, as pastor of the congregation at Clapham, which he raised to one of the most opulent and considerable among the protestant dissenters. He remained their favourite preacher, and highly esteemed by all classes, for upwards of twenty-three years, bat was deprived of his usefulness in 1777, by the loss of his mental powers, under which deplorable malady (which was hereditary) he continued to the day of his death, Nov. 23, 1783. His flock and friends raised a liberal subscription to support him during his illness, to which, from sentiments of personal respect, as well as from the principle of benevolence, the late lord Mansfield, chief justice of the king’s bench, generously contributed. Dr. Furneaux (which title he had received from some northern university) united to strong judgment a very tenacious iriemory; of which he gave a remarkable proof, when the cause of the dissenters against the corporation of London, on the exemption they claimed from serving the office of sheriff, was heard in the' house of lords. He was then present, and carried away, and committed to paper, by the strength of his memory, without notes, the very able speech of lord Mansfield, with so much accuracy, that his lordship, when the copy was submitted to his examination, could discover but two or three trivial errors in it. This circumstance introduced him to the acquaintance of that great man, who conceived a high regard for him. Dr. Furneaux published but little, except a few- occasional sermons the most considerable of his works was that entitled “Letters to the hon. Mr. Justice Blackstone, concerning his exposition of the act of toleration, and some positions relative to religious liberty, in his Commentaries on the Laws of England,” 1770, 8vo. This is said to have induced the learned commentator to alter some positions in the subsequent edition of his valu^­able work. To the second edition of Dr. Furneaux’s “Letters” was added the before-mentioned speech of lord Mansfield. In 1773 he published also “An Essay on Toleration,” with a view to an application made by dissenting ministers to parliament for relief in the matter of subscription, which, although unsuccessful then, was afterwards granted.

, an eminent prelate, the descendant of a noble family in Westphalia, was born at Bilstein in 1626. He studied at Cologne, where he contracted an intimate friendship with Chigi, who was then nuncio, and afterwards pope. During the cardinalate of Chigi, he invited f urstemberg to reside with him, whom he raised to the bishopric of Paderborn in 1661, when he himself was seated in the papal chair, under the title of Alexander VII. The high reputation of the bishop attracted the notice of Vat) Galer:, who appointed him his, coadjutor, and whom he succeeded in 1678, when he. was declared by the pope apostolical vicar of all the north of Kurope. He was. a zealous catholic, and anxious for the conversion of those who were not already within the pale of the church; but at the same time he did not neglect the cultivation of the belles lettres, eitper by his own efforts or those of many learned men whom he patronized. He died in 1683, As an author he collected a number of Mss. and monuments of antiquity, and gave to the world valuable work relative to those subjects, entitled “Momimenta Paderbornensia.” He al*o printed at Rome a. collection of Latin poems, entitled “Septem Virorutn. illusirium Poemata.” In this work there were many poems of his own, written witU much purity. A magnificent edition of these poems was published in the same year in which he died, at the Louvre, at the expence of the king of France.

, an eminent physician, was born at Herforden, in Westphalia, in the month of May, 1688. He began the study of medicine at the age of eighteen, and attended with diligence the schools of Wittemberg, Jena, and Halle, and became a licentiate in medicine in the last-mentioned university. About 1709 he returned to Herforden, and immediately obtained a considerable share of practice; but having conceived the design of visiting the Low Countries, he commenced his journey in 1711, in order to hear those great masters of his art, who at that time flourished so numerously in the cities of Amsterdam, Leyden, Utrecht, the Hague, Delft, and Doit. Having profited much by their instructions, whether in the chair, in hospitals, or in private communication, he returned to his native place at the end of a year, and recommenced the practice of his profession with the same ardour as when he quitted Halle, but with more knowledge and greater resources. Nevertheless he again interrupted his practice by another journey in 1716. He tnarried in 1717, with the intention of settling at Herforden; but became a professor in 1720, at Rintlen, where he died April 7, 1756. He left several works: the first of these was frequently re-printed, and bears the title of “Desiderata Medica.” It includes also “Desiderata Anatomico-Physiologica Desiderata circa morbos et eorum sig na Quae desiderantur in Praxi Medica Desiderata Chirurgica.” 2. “De Fatis Medicorum, Oratio Inauguralis,” 1720. 3. “De morbis Jurisconsultorum Epistola,” 1721. 4. “De Dysenteria alba in puerpera Dissertatio,” 1723. 5. “Programmata nonnulla, tempore Magistrates Academici impressa,” 1724 and 1725.

, a goldsmith of Mentz, was one of the three artists considered as the inventors of printing, the two others being Guttemberg and Scheeffer. It is not, however, certain, that he did more than supply money to Guttemberg, who had made attempts with moveable metal types at Strasburg, before he removed to Mentz, in 1444. But it has been strongly argued, that Laurence Koster, at Harlaem, had first conceived the art of cutting wooden blocks for this purpose in 1430, which he immediately improved, by substituting separate wooden types. Schaetfer undoubtedly invented the method of casting the metal types, in 1452. The first printed book with a date, is said to have been a Psalter, published at Mentz in 1457; the next, perhaps, is “Durandi Rationale divinorum Officiorum,” by Fust and Schaeffer in 1459. The “Catholicon” followed in 1460. There are, however, some books without dates, which are supposed to be still older. Fust was at Paris in 1466, and it is imagined that he died there of the plague, which then raged in that capital.

, a native of Paris, where he was. born in 1672, devoted himself early to poetry, and wrote for the French and Italian theatres, the royal musical academy, and the comic opera. He obtained the privilege of conducting the “Mercury,” jointly with M. de Bruere, ul 174-4, and died at Paris, September 19, 1752, leaving a considerable number of theatrical pieces, which have not been collected. His comedy of one act, entitled “Mom us Fabuliste,” and his operas of “Les Ages,” “Les Amours dcs Dieux,” << J^es Indes Galantes,“and” Le Carnavai du Parnasse," are particularly admired. He wrote much' for the Italian theatre and comic opera; but La Harpe, who has lately dictated in French criticism, speaks with, great contempt of his talents.

, an Italian artist, born at Florence in 1652, was successively the pupil of Subtermans and Vincenzo Dandini, and studied under Giro Ferri at Rome, and after the best colourists at Venice. He was a ready and correct designer. His colour, though sometimes languid, is generally true, juicy, and well united in the flesh-tints. The greatest flaw of his style lies in the choice, the hues, and the execution of his draperies. He excels in “pretty” subjects; his Gambols of Genii and Children in the palace Pitti, and elsewhere, are little inferior to those of Baciccio. His greatest and most famed work in fresco, is the vast cupola of Cestello, which was not wholly terminated. His altar-pieces are unequal: the best is that of S. Filippo in the church of the fathers Dell' Oratorio. In easel-pictures he holds his place even in princely galleries. He died in 1726, in consequence of a tall from the scaffold on which he was painting the cupola Of Cestello.

, one of those scholars who promoted the revival of literature, was a native of Verona, and a professor of Greek at Rome in the sixteenth century, but we have no dated particulars of his life. It is said he was eminent for his knowledge of the learned languages, and of philosophy and mathematics, and had even studied theology. He translated from Greek into Latin, the Commentaries of Theodoret bishop of Cyarus, on Daniel and Ezekiel, which translation was printed at Rome, 1563, fol. and was afterwards adopted by father Sirmond in his edition of Theodoret. He translated also the history of Scylitzes Curopalates, printed in 1570, along with the original, which is thought to be more complete than the Paris edition of 1648. About 1543 he published the first Latin translation of Sophocles, with scholia. Maflfei says that he also translated Zozimus, and the Hebrew Psalms, and translated into Greek the Gregorian Kalendar, with Santi’s tables, and an introductory epistle in Greek by himself. This was published at Home in 1583.

, an eminent royal architect of France, built the palace at Choisy, and undertook the royal bridge at Paris, but died in 1686, before he had completed this work, which was finished by his son James and Frere Romain. James was born at Paris 1667, became a pupil of the celebrated Mansart, and acquired so great a reputation as to be appointed overseer- general of buildings, gardens, arts and manufactures first architect and engineer of bridges and banks through the kingdom, and knight of St. Michael. He planned the common sewer, and many public buildings, among which are the hotel de Ville, and the presidial court of Paris, &c. He died in that city 1742, leaving a son, first architect to the king, who long supported the reputation of his ancestors, and died in 1782.

, a learned Maronite, who died in 1648, was professor of oriental languages at Rome, from whence he was invited to Paris, to assist in M. le Jay’s Polyglott, and carried with him some Syriac and Arabic bibles, which he had transcribed with his own hand from ms copies at Rome; these bibles were first printed in Jay’s Polyglott, with vowel points, and a Latin version and afterwards in the English Polyglott. Gabriel Sionita translated also the Arabian Geography, entitled “Geographia Nubiensis,” 1619, 4to, and some other works. He had some disagreement with M. le Jay, who sent to Rome for Abraham Ecchellensis to supply his place.

, of the order of the clerks minor, was born at Rome in 1726, and boasted of being the descendant of Nicolas Gabrini, better known by the name Rienzi. Having been appointed Greek professor at Pesaro, he acquired great reputation for his critical knowledge of that language. He afterwards was invited to be philosophy professor at Rome, and had a cure of souls which he held for twenty-seven years, with the character of an excellent pastor. After other preferments in the ecclesiastical order to which he belonged, he was at last made general, and while in this station was frequently consulted by congregations, bishops, and popes, who had a very high esteem for his judgment. He died very advanced, on Nov. 16, 1807. Besides some tracts published in. defence of his ancestor Rienzi, he published “A Dissertation on the 20th proposition of the first book of Euclid,” Pesaro, 1752, 8vo, which went through several editions, and many dissertations, memoirs, and letters in the literary journals, on the origin of mountains, petrifactions, and other objects of natural history; medals, obelisks, inscriptions, and classical and ecclesiastical antiquities. He left also some valuable manuscripts on similar subjects.

, a French poet, well known by his satirical pieces against Bossuet, Rousseau, La Motte, and others, was the son of a merchant, and born at Lyons in 1667. He became a father of the Oratory; obtained the poetical prize at the French academy in 1717; and died in his priory of Baillon Nov. 15, 1725. Among his works are, “Le Poete sans fard,” a satirical piece, which cost him some months of imprisonment; a French translation of “Anacreon,” with notes, which was the best of his works; “L' Anti-Rousseau,” an attack against J. Baptiste Rousseau, the poet; “L'Homere venge,” against La Motte. Gacon also attacked La Motte, and turned him into ridicule, in a small piece entitled “Les Fables de M. de la Motte, traduites en vers Francois, par P. S. F. au Caffe* du Mont Parnasse, &c.” This poet’s natural propensity to satire and criticism, led him to attack alt sorts of writers, and involved him in all the literary quarrels of his times. The French academy acted with great impartiality, when they adjudged him the prize; for he had written in some shape or other against almost all the members of that illustrious body; and on this account it was, that he was not suffered to make his speech of thanks, as is usual on such occasions, the prize having been remitted to him by the hands of the abbé de Choisy. “Gacon,” says Voltaire, “is placed bj father Niceron in the catalogue of illustrious men, though he has been famous only for bad satires. Such authors cannot be cited but as examples to be detested.” In fact, though he wrote with care, his style was heavy and diffuse in prose, and low in verse.

, one of the astrological impostors of the seventeenth century, was born at Wheatly near Oxford, Dec. 31, 1627. His father, William, was a farmer of that place, and his mother was a daughter of sir John Curzon of Waterperry, knt. Our conjuror was first put apprentice to Thomas Nicols, a taylor, in Oxford, but leaving his master in 1644, he went up to London, and became a pupil of the noted William Lilly, under whom be profited so far as to be soon enabled “to set up the trade of almanack-making and fortune-telling for himself.” His pen was employed for many years on nativities, almanacks, and prodigies. There is, we believe, a complete collection of his printed works in the new catalogue of the British Museum, and vre hope we shall be excused for not transcribing the list. Dodd, who has given an account of him, as a Roman catholic, says that some of his almanacks, reflecting upon the management of state affairs during the time of Oates’s plot, brought him into trouble. While other astrologers were content to exercise their art for the benefit of their own country only, Gadbury extended his to a remote part of the globe, as, in 1674, he published his “West India, or Jamaica Almanack” for that year. He collected and published the works of his friend sir George Wharton in 1683, 8vo. His -old master Lilly, who quarrelled with him, and against whom he wrote a book called “Anti-Merlinus Anglicus,” says he was a “monster of ingratitude,” and “a graceless fellow;” which is true, if, according to his account, he had two wives living at one time, and one of them two husbands. Lilly adds, that be went to sea with intention for Barbadoes, but died by the way in his voyage. When this happened we are not told. Lilly died in 16S1, and according to Wood, Gadbury was living in 1690. “The Black Life of John Gadbury” was written and published by Partridge in 1693, which might be about the time of his death, but his name, as was usual, appeared long after this in an almanack, similar to that published in his life-time. There was another astrologer, a Job Gadbury, who was taught his art by John, and probably succeeded him in the almanack, and who died in 1715.

, an English physician, who lived in the early part of the fourteenth century, of very extensive and lucrative practice, was the first Englishman who was employed as a physician at court, being appointed to that office by Edward II.: before his time the king’s physicians had been exclusively foreigners. The ignorance, superstition, and low quackery, which appear throughout his practice; are painted with much life and humour by Dr. Freind. He came forward as an universal genius, was a philosopher, philologist, and poet, and undertook every thing that lay within the circle of physic and surgery, was skilled in manual operations, very expert in bone-setting, and a great oculist. He also acquaints us with his great skill in physiognomy; and designed to write a treatise of chiromancy. He was a great dealer in secrets, and some he had which were the most secret of secrets, and did miracles. But his chief strength lay in receipts, and without giving himself much trouble in forming a judgment respecting the nature of the case, he seemed to think that, if he could muster up a good number of these, he should be able to encounter any distemper. He seems to have neglected no stratagems, by which he might surprise and impose on the credulity of mankind, and to have been very artful in laying baits for the delicate, the ladies, and the rich. When he was employed in attending the king’s son, in the small-pox, in order to shew his skill in inflammatory distempers, he, with a proper formality, and a countenance of much importance, ordered the patient to be wrapped up in scarlet, and every thing about the bed to be of the same colour. This, he says, made him re-, cover without so much as leaving one mark in his face; and he commends it for an excellent mode of curing. Nevertheless this man was praised by Leland, Ovaringius, and others, as a profound philosopher, a skilful physician, and the brightest man of his age.

Although devoted to the practice of his profession, he was prebendary of St. Paul’s, in the stall of Ealdland. It seems probable from this and other instances, that the procurement of a sinecure place in the church was a method in which the great sometimes paid the services of their physicians. Of his “Rosa Anglica” there are two editions, one in fol. Venice, 1502, and the other in 4to. Aug. Vind. 2 vols. 1595.

, an eminent botanist, was born at Calw, in the duchy of Wirtemberg, March 12, 1732. His father, physician to the duke of Wirtemberg, and his mother, both died in his early youth. He was at first destined by his surviving relations for the church, and when he disliked that, the law. was recommended; but at length, from an early bias towards the study of natural history, he resorted to physic, as most congenial to his disposition, and removed to the university of Gottingen, in the 19th year of his age. Here the lectures of Halier and others instructed him in anatomy, physiology, and botany, but he studied these rather for his own information and amusement, than as a means of advancement in the practice of physic. After this he undertook a tour through Italy, France, and England, in the pursuit of knowledge in botany. On his return he took the degree of M. D. and published an inaugural dissertation on the urinary secretion, after which he devoted two years to the study of mathematics, optics, and mechanics, constructing with his own hands a telescope, as well as a common and solar microscope. In the summer of 1759 he attended a course of botanical lectures at Leyden, under the celebrated Adrian Van Royen. He had for some time acquired the use of the pencil, in which he eminently excelled, and which subsequently proved of the greatest use to him in enabling him to draw the beautiful and accurate figures of the books he published. Having bestowed great attention upon the obscurer tribes of marine animals and plants, particularly with a view to the mode of propagation of the latter, as well as of, other cryptogamic vegetables, he revisited England, and spent some time here, as well in scrutinizing the productions of our extensive and varied coasts, as in conversing with those able naturalists Ellis, Collinson, Baker, and others, who were assiduously engaged in similar pursuits. He communicated a paper to the royal society on the polype called Urtica marina, and the Actinia of Linnseus, comprehending descriptions and figures of several species, which is printed in the 52d volume of the Philosophical Transactions; and he prepared several essays on the anatomy of fishes, and other obscure matters of animal and vegetable physiology, part of which only has hitherto been made public. Soon afterwards Dr. Gsertner became a member of the royal society of London, and of the imperial academy of sciences at Petersburg. In 1768, he was instituted professor of botany and natural history at Petersburg, and about a year afterwards he began to plan and prepare materials for the great work on which his eminent reputation rests, the object of which was the illustration of fruits and seeds for the purposes above-mentioned. His situation at Petersburg, however, seems not to have suited either his health or disposition. After having performed a journey into the Ukraine, in which he collected many new or obscure plants, he resigned his professorship at the end of two years, steadily refusing the pension ordinarily attached to it, and retired in the autumn of 17 70 -to his native town, where he married. At the end of eight years he found it necessary, for the perfection of his intended work, to re-visit some of the seats of science in which he had formerly studied, in order to re-examine several botanical collections, and to converse again with persons devoted to similar inquiries with his own. Above all, he was anxious to profit by the discoveries of the distinguished voyagers Banks and Solander, who received him with open arms on his arrival at London, in 1778, and, with the liberality which ever distinguished their characters, freely laid before him all their acquisitions, and assisted him with their own observations and discoveries. A new genus was dedicated to Gaertner by his illustrious friends in their manuscripts; but this being his own sphenoclea, has been superseded by another and a finer plant. He visited Thunberg in his return through Amsterdam, that distinguished botanist and traveller being then lately arrived from Japan; nor were the acquisitions of Gartner less considerable from this quarter. He further enriched himself from the treasures at Leyden, laid open to him by his old friend Van lloyen; and arrived at home laden with spoils destined to enrich his intended publication. Here, however, his labours and his darling pursuits were interrupted by a severe disorder in his eyes, which for many months threatened total blindness; nor was it till after an intermission of four or five years that he was able to resume his studies.

, a learned Rabbinical writer, was the son of Dr. Gaffarell, by Lucrece de Bermond, his wife; and was born at Mannes, in Provence, about 1601. He was educated at the university of Apt, in that county, where he prosecuted his studies with indefatigable industry; and applying himself particularly to the Hebrew language and Rabbinical learning, was wonderfully pleased with the mysterious doctrines of the Cabala, and commenced author in their defence at the age of twenty-two. He printed a 4to volume at Paris in 1623, under_the title of “The secret mysteries of the divine Cabala, defended against the trifling objections of the Sophists,” or “Abdita divinae Cabalae mysteria,” &c. The following year he published a paraphrase upon that beautiful ode the 137th Psalm, “By the waters of Babylon we sat down and wept, when we remembered thee, O Sion>” -&c. He began early to be inflamed with an ardent desire of travelling for his improvement in literature, in which his curiosity was boundless.

This disposition, added to his uncommon talents, did not escape the notice of cardinal Richelieu, who appointed him his library-keeper, and sent him into Italy to collect the best books printed or ms. that could be found. This employment extremely well suited Gaffarell’s taste, both as it gave him an opportunity of furnishing his own library with some curious pieces in oriental and other languages, and of making inquiries into that branch of literature which was his chief delight. With this view, while he was at Home, he went with some others to visit Campanella, the famous pretender to magic; his design in this visit was to procure satisfaction about a passage in that author’s took, “De sensu rerum et magiu.” Campanella was then in the inquisition, where he had been cruelly used, in order to force him to confess the crimes laid to his charge. At their entrance into his chamber he begged they would have a little patience, till he had finished a small note which he was writing to cardinal Magaloti. As soon as they were seated, they observed him to make certain wry faces, which being supposed to proceed from pain, he was asked if he felt no pain; to which, smiling, he answered, No! and guessing the cause of the question, he said he was fancying himself to be cardinal Magaloti, as he had heard him described. This was the very thing Gaffarell wanted; and convinced him, that in order to discover another person’s thoughts, it was not sufficient, as he had before understood Campanella, barely to fancy yourself to be like the person, but you must actually assume his very physiognomy. This anecdote will afford the reader a sufficient idea of the value of the discoveries of Campanella and GafTarell.

In 1629, he published “Rabbi Flea, de fine mundi, Latine versus, cum notis,” Paris, 8vo, i. e. “A Latin version of Rabbi Elea’s treatise concerning the end of the world, with notes;” and the same year came out his “Curiositez Inouez, c. Unheard-of Cariosities concerning the talismanic sculpture of the Persians -, the horoscope of the Patriarchs, and the reading of the stars.” This curious piece went through three editions in the space of six months. In it the author undertakes to shew that talismans, or constellated figures, had the virtue to make a man rich and fortunate, to free a house and even a whole country from certain insects and venomous creatures; and from all the injuries of the air. He started many other bold assertions concerning the force of magic; and having also made some reflections upon his own country, and mentioned the decalogue according to the order of the Old Testament, and the protestant doctrine, he was censured by the Sorbonne, and therefore retracted these and Some other things advanced as errors submitting his faith; in all points to the doctrine of the catholic and apostolic church. In 1633 he was at Venice, where, among other things, he took an exact measure of the vessels brought from Cyprus and Constantinople, that were deposited in the treasury of St. Mark, at the request of the learned Peiresc, with whom he had been long acquainted, and who had a great esteem for him. During his abode in this city, he was invited to live with M. de la Thuillerie, the French ambassador, as a companion. He accepted the invitation, but was not content with the fruitless office of merely diverting the ambassador’s leisure hours by his learned conrersation. He aimed to make himself of more importance, and to do this friend some real service. He resolved therefore to acquaint himself with politics, and in that view wrote to his friend Gabriel Naude“, to send him a list of the authors upon political subjects; and this request it was, that gave birth to Naude’s t( Bibliographia Politica.” Gaffarell at this time was doctor of divinity and canon law, prothonotary of the apostolic see, and commendatory prior of St. Giles’s. After his return home, he was employed by his patron cardinal Richelieu, in his project for bringing back all the protestants to the Roman church, which he calls are-union of religions; and to that end was authorized to preach in Dauphin6 against the doctrine of purgatory. To the same purpose he also published a piece upon the pacification of Christians.

In the latter part of his life he was employed in writing a history of the subterranean world; containing an account of the caves, grottos, mines, vaults, and catacombs, which he had met with in thirty years’ travel; and the work was, so nearly finished, that the plates were engraven, and it was just ready to go to the press, when he died at Sigonce, of which place he was then abbot, in his eightieth year, 1681; being also dean of canon law in the university of Paris, prior of le Revest de Brousse, in the diocese of Sisteron, and commandant of St. Omeil. His works shew him to have been a man of prodigious reading, and uncommon subtilty of genius; but he unfortunately had also a superstitious credulity, as appears from the following passage in his “Unheard-of Curiosities.” Treating of omens, he cites Camerarius, affirming that some people have an apprehension and knowledge of the death of their friends and kindred, either before or after they are dead x by a certain strange and unusual restlessness within themselves, though they are a thousand leagues off. To support this idle notion, he tells us that his mother Lucrcce de Bermond, when she was living, had some such sign always given her; for none of her children ver died, but a little before she dreamt either of hair, eggs, or teeth mingled with earth; this sign, says he, was infallible. “I myself, when I had heard her say she had any such dream, observed the event always to follow.” His '< Curiosities" was translated by Chi I mead into English, Lond. 1650, 8vo.

, an eminent musical writer, a native of Lodi, born Jan. 14, 1451, of obscure parents, was first intended for priest’s orders, but after studying music for two years under John Goodenach, a carmelite, he manifested so much genius for that science, that it was thought expedient to make it his profession. After learning the rudiments of music at Lodi, he went to Mantua, where he was patronized by the marquis Lodovico Gonzago; and where, during two years, he pursued his studies with unwearied assiduity night and day, and acquired great reputation, both in the speculative and practical part of his profession. From this city he went to Verona, where he read public lectures on music for two years more, and published several works; after which he removed to Genoa, whither he was invited by the doge Prospero; there he entered into priest’s orders. From Genoa he was invited to Milan by the duke and duchess Galeazzo, but they being soon after expelled that city, he returned to Naples, where Philip of Bologna, professor- royal, received him as his colleague; and he became so eminent in the theory of music, that he was thought superior to many celebrated and learned musicians, his contemporaries, with whom he now conversed and disputed. He there published his profound <“Treatise on the Theory of Harmony,” 1480 which was afterwards enlarged and re- published at Milan, 1492; but the plague raging in Naples, and that kingdom being likewise much incommoded by a war with the Turks, he retreated to Otranto, whence, after a short residence, he returned to Lodi, where he was protected and favoured by Pallavicino, the bishop, and opened a public school, in which, during three years, he formed many excellent scholars. He was offered great encouragement at Bergamo, if he would settle there; but the war being over, and the duke of Milan, his old patron, restored, he preferred the residence of that city to any others It was here that he composed and polished most of his works; that he was caressed by the first persons of his time for rank and learning; and that he read lectures by public authority to crowded audiences, for which he had a faculty granted him by the archbishop and chief magistrates of the city in 1483, which exalted him far above all his contemporaries; and how much he improved the science by his instructions, his lectures, and his writings, was testified by the approbation of the whole city; to which may be added the many disciples he formed, and the almost infinite number of volumes he wrote, among which several will live as long as music and the Latin tongue are understood. He likewise first collected, revised, commented, and translated into Latin the ancient Greek writers on music, Bacchius senior, Aristides, Quintilianus, Ptolemy’s Harmonics, and Manuel Briennius. The works which he published are, 1. “Theoricum Opus Harmonicae Disciplinse,” mentioned above, Neapolis, 1480, Milan, 1492. This was the first book on the subject of music that issued from the press after the invention of printing, if we except the “ Deftnitiones Term. Musicae,” of John Tinctor. 2. “Practica Musicse utriusque Cantus,” Milan, 1496; Brescia, 1497, 1502; and Venice, 1512. 3. “Angelicum ac Divinum Opus Musicae Materna Lingua Scrip.” Milan, 1508. 4. “De Harmonica Musicor. Instrumentorum,” Milan, 1518. This work, we are told by Pantaleoue Melegulo, his countryman and biographer, was written when Gaffurius was forty years of age; and though the subject is dark and difficult, it was absolutely necessary for understanding the ancient authors. With these abilities, however, Gaft'urius did not escape the superstitions of his time. He was not only addicted to astrology, but taught that art at Padua, in 1522. He was then seventy-one years of age, and is supposed to have died soon after, although Dr. Burney fixes his death two years before.

, an English clergyman and traveller, was descended from Robert Gage of Haling, in Surrey, third son of sir John Gage, of Firle, in Sussex, who died in 1557. He was the son of John Gage, of Haling, and his brother was sir Henry Gage, governor of Oxford, who was killed in battle at Culham-bridge,' Jan. 11, 1644. Of his early history we are only told that he studied in Spain, and became a Dominican monk. From thence he departed with a design to go to the Philippine islands, as a missionary, in 1625; but on his arrival at Mexico, he heard so bad an account of those islands, and became so delighted with New Spain, that he abandoned his original design, and contented him with a less dangerous mission. At length, being tired of this mode of life, and his request to return to England and preach the gospel among his countrymen being refused, he effected his escape, and arrived in London in 1637, after an absence of twentyfour years, in which he had quite lost the use of his native language. On examining into his domestic affairs, he found himself unnoticed in his father’s will, forgotten by some of his relations, and with difficulty acknowledged by others. After a little time, not being satisfied with respect to some religious doubts which had entered his mind while abroad, and disgusted with the great power of the papists, he resolved to take another journey to Italy, to “try what better satisfaction he could find for his conscience at Rome in that religion.” At Loretto his conversion from popery was fixed by proving the fallacy of the miracles attributed to the picture of our Lady there; on which he immediately returned home once more, and preached his recantation sermon at St. Paul’s, by order of the bishop of London. He continued above a year in. London, and when he saw that papists were entertained at Oxford and other parts of the kingdom attached to the royal cause, he adopted that of the parliament, and received a living from them, probably that of Deal, in Kent, in the register of which church is an entry of the burials of Mary daughter, and Mary the wife of “Thomas Gage, parson of Deale, March 21, 1652;” and in the title of his work he is styled “Preacher of the word of God at Deal.” We have not been able to discover when he died. His work is entitled “A new Survey of the West-Indies; or the English American his Travail by sea and land, containing a journal of 3300 miles within the main land of America. Wherein is set forth his voyage from Spain to St. John de Ulhua; and from thence to Xalappa, to Flaxcalla, the city of Angels, and forward to Mexico, &c. &c. &c.” The second edition, Lond. 1655, thin folio, with maps. The first edition, which we have not seen, bears date 1648. Mr. Southey, who has quoted much from this work in the notes on his poem of “Madoc,” says that Gage’s account of Mexico is copied verbatim from Nicholas’s “Conqueast of West-India,” which itself is a translation from Gomara. There is an Amsterdam edition of Gage, 1695, 2 vols. 12mo, in French, made by command of the French minister Colbert, by mons. de Beaulieu Hues O'Neil, which, however, was first published in 1676, at Paris. There are some retrenchments in this edition. Gage appears to be a faithful and accurate relator, but often credulous and superstitious. His recantation sermon was published at London, 1642, 4to; and in 165L he published “A duel between a Jesuite and a Dominican, begun at Paris, fought at Madrid, and ended at London,” 4to.

, a Latin poet of considerable note in the sixteenth century, was educated at Westminsterschool, from which he was elected to Oxford, in 1574, and took afterwards his degrees in arts at Christ-church, but in a few years preferring the study of the law, he took the degrees in that faculty also, in 1589. About this time his reputation had recommended him to Dr. Martin Heton, bishop of Ely, by whose interest, most probably, he was made chancellor of that diocese. Wood professes that he knows no more of him, unless that he was living in 1610; but by the assistance of the Ely registers, we are enabled to pursue him a little farther. By them it appears that in 1601, being then LL. D. he acted as surrogate to Dr. Swale, vicar-general of Ely, and in 1608 he was delegate and commissary to archbishop Bancroft, in the diocese of Ely; and in 1609 he was custos of the spiritualities in the vacancy of the see. In the years 1613, 1616, and 161S, he was, vicar-general and official principal to Lancelot Andrews, bishop of Ely; and in 1619 he acted as deputy for the archdeacon of Canterbury, at the installation of bishop Felton, in the cathedral of Ely. When he died we have not been able to discover.

Wood says, “he was an excellent poet, especially in the Latin tongue, and reputed the best comedian (i.e. dramatic writer) of his time.” He had a controversy with Dr. John Rainolds, on the lawfulness of stage-plays, which appears to have been carried on in manuscript letters, until Raiuolds published his “Overthrow of Stage-plays,” containing his answer to Gager and a rejoinder. He had a more singular controversy with Mr. Heale, of Exeter-college, in consequence of his (Gager’s) asserting at the Oxford Act in 1608, “That it was lawful for husbands to beat their wives.” This Mr. Heale answered in “An Apology for Women,*' &c. Oxon. 1609, 4to. In the” Exequiae D. Philippi Sidnxi,“Gager has a copy of verses in honour of that celebrated character, who, when living, had a great respect for his learning and virtues. His Latin plays are, 1.” Meleager,“a tragedy. 2.” Rivales,“a comedy; and 3.” Ulysses redux," a tragedy. These were all acted, and we are told, with great applause, in Christ church hall. The first only was printed in 1592, 4to, and occasioned the controversy between the author and Dr. Rainolds. Gager’s letter in defence of this and his other plays, is in the library of University-college.

, an eminent orientalist, was a native of Paris, where he was educated; and, applying himself to study the eastern languages, became a great master in the Hebrew and Arabic. He was trained up in the Roman Catholic religion, and taking orders, was made a canon regular of the abbey of St. Genevieve, but becoming dissatisfied with his religion, and marrying after he had left his convent, he was upon that account obliged to quit his native country, came to England, and embraced the faith and doctrine of that church in the beginning of the eighteenth century. He was well received here, and met with many friends, who gave him handsome encouragement, particularly archbishop Sharp, and the lord chancellor' Macclesfield, to which last he dedicated his edition of Abulfeda. He had a master of arts degree conferred upon him at Cambridge; and going thence to Oxford, for the sake of prosecuting his studies in the Bodleian library, he was admitted to the same degree in that university, where he supported himself by teaching Hebrew. He had previously been made chaplain to Dr. William Lloyd, bishop of Worcester, whom he accompanied to Oxford.

In 1717 he was appointed to read the Arabic lecture at' Oxford, in the absence of the professor Wallis. In 1718 appeared his “Vindiciae Kircherianae, seu defensio concordantiarum Graecarum Conradi Kircheri, adversus Abr. Trommii animadversiones;” and in 1723, he published Abulfeda’s “Life of Mohammed,” in Arabic, with a Latin translation and notes, at Oxford, in folio. He also prepared for the press the same Arabic author’s Geography, and printed proposals for a subscription, but the attempt proved abortive, for want of encouragement. Eighteen sheets were printed, and the remainder, which was imperfect, was purchased of his widow by Dr. Hunt. It is said that he wrote a life of Mahommed, in French, published at Amsterdam, in 1730, in vols. 12mo. But this wa.s probably a translation of the former life, Gagnier had before this inserted Graves’s Latin translation of AbulfedaY description of Arabia, together with the original, in the third volume of Hudson’s “Geographiae veteris scriptores Grseci minores,” in 1712, 8vo, and had translated from the Arabic, Rhases on the Small-pox, at the request of Dr. Mead. He died March 2, 1740. By his wife he left a son, Thomas, or as in the Oxford graduates, John Gagnier, who was educated at Wadham-college, Oxford, and commenced M. A. July 2, 1743. Entering into holy orders, he was preferred by bishop Clavering to the rectory of Marsh-Gibbon, in Buckinghamshire, and afterwards obtained that of Stranton, near Hartlepool, in the. bishopric of Durham, where he was living in 1766, but the historian of Durham having concluded his list of vicars with Mr. Gagnier at the year of his induction, in 1745, we are not able to ascertain the time of his death. Preceding accounts of his father mention his being chosen Arabic professor in room of Dr. Wallis, which never was the case. Dr. Hunt was successor to Wallis.

, a French historian, wa born at Colines, near Amiens; and Guicciardini, as Vossius observes, is mistaken in fixing his birth elsewhere. He had his education at Paris, where he took a doctor of laws degree; and the reputation of his abilities and learning became so great, that it advanced him to the favour of Charles VIII. and Louis XII. by whom he was employed in several embassies to England, Germany, and Italy. He was keeper of the royal library, and general of the order of the Trinitarians. He died in 1501, certainly not young; but we are not able to ascertain his age. He was the author of several works; the principal of which is, a History in eleven books, “De gestis Francorutn,” in folio, from 1200 to 1500. He has been accused of great partiality to his country; and Paul Jovius says, that he has not been very exact in relating the affairs of Italy. Erasmus, however, had a great value for him, as may be seen from one of his letters. Gaguin also translated the Chronicle of abp. Turpin, wrote a bad Roman History, and Epistles and Poems, some of which last are very indelicate.

, a very extraordinary character, of great talents, and great vices, was a Roman catholic, of a good Family in Ireland. He was a very considerable Latin scholar, and editor of Brindley’s beautiful edition of the Classics. He translated Pope’s “Essay on Criticism” into Latin verse, and after his confinement in Newgate, to which he was sent for filing gold, he translated into the same language the “Temple. of Fame,” and the “Messiah,” which he dedicated to the duke of Newcastle, in hopes of a pardon; he also wrote verses in English on prince George (our present sovereign), and on Mr. Adams, the recorder, which were published in the ordinary’s account; with a poetical address to the duchess of Queensbury, by one Conner, who was then in prison for the same Crime. Gahagan was executed at Tyburn, Feb. 1749.

, a French divine of the sixteenth century, was educated at Paris, where in 1526 he had taken the degree of bachelor, and held the appointment of attorney for the French nation in the university. He was afterwards lecturer in theology at the college of Navarre, and rector of the university. In 1531 he took his degree of D. D. and was chancellor of the university from 1546 till his death, in 1549. Gaigny was deeply read in the ancient languages, and highly esteemed as a Latin poet, and his sovereign Francis I. frequently consulted him on subjects of literature, and made him his first almoner. He was author of many works on subjects of theology, the most important of which are “Commentaries” upon the different books of the New Testament, hi which he explains the literal sense by a kind of paraphrase. Dupin says, “his notes will be found of admirable use to those who desire to read the text of the New Testament, and to comprehend the sense of it without stopping at any difficult places, and without having recourse to larger commentaries. His Scholia on the four evangelists, and on the Acts of the Apostles, are inserted in the” Biblia Magrra" of father John de la Haye.

, bishop of Apt from 1673 to 1695, in which year he died, is chiefly memorable for having first projected a great and universal “Historical Dictionary,” in the execution of which work he employed and patronized Moreri, who was his almoner. Towards the perfecting of this undertaking, he had researches made in all the principal libraries of Europe, but particularly in the Vatican. Moreri, in dedicating his firsi edition to his patron, pays him the highest encomiums, which he is said to have -very thoroughly deserved, by his love for the arts, and still more by his virtues.

, an elegant French historian, member of the old French academy, of that of inscriptions and belles-lettres, and of the third class of the institute, was born at Ostel, near Soissons, March 20, 1728. On his education or early pursuits, the only work in which we find any notice of him is totally silent, and we are obliged for the present to content ourselves with a list of his works, all of which, however, have been eminently successful in France, and procured to the author an extensive reputation and many literary honours, he wrote, 1. “Rhetorique Franchise, a l'usage des jeunes demoiselles,” Paris, 1746, 12mo, which has gone through six editions. 2. “Poetique Françoise,” ibid. 1749, 2 vols. 3. “Parallele des quatre Electre, de Sophocle, d'Euripide, de Crebillon, et de Voltaire,” ibid. 1750, vo. 4. * Melanges litteraires en prose et en vers,“ibid. 1757, 12mo. 5.” Histoire de Marie de Bourgogne,“ibid. 1757, 12mo. 6.” Histoire de Francois I.“1769, 7 vols. 12mo; of this there have been several editions, and it is not without reason thought to be Gaillard’s principal work; but Voltaire is of opinion that he softens certain obnoxious parts of Francis’s conduct rather too much, but in general his sentiments are highly liberal, and more free from the prejudices of his country and his religion than could have been expected. Indeed, it may be questioned whether he was much attached to the latter. 7.” Histoire des rivalités de la France et de l'Angleterre,“1771—1802, 11 vols. 12mo, a work in which the author, not altogether unsuccessfully, struggles to be impartial. 8.” Histoire de Charlemagne,“4 vols. 12mo. Gibbon, our historian, who availed himself much of this history, says that” it is laboured with industry and elegance.“9.” Observations sur l'Histoire de France de Messieurs Velly, Villaret, et Gamier,“1807, 4 vols. 12mo, a posthumous work. Besides these he was the author of various eloges, discourses, poems, odes, epistles, &c. which were honoured with academical prizes; and several learned papers in the memoirs of the academy of inscriptions. He wrote also in the” Journal des Savans“from 1752 to 1792, and in the” Mercure“from 1780 to 1789, and in the new Encyclopedic he wrote three fourths of the historical articles. His last performance, which bore no mark of age, or decay of faculties, was an” Eloge historique" on M. de Malesherbes, with whom he had been so long intimate, that perhaps no man. was more fit to appreciate his character. This writer, the last of the old school of French literati, died at St. Firmin, near Chantilly, in 1806.

, an admirable English artist, was born in 1727, at Sudbury, in Suffolk, where his father was a clothier. He very early discovered a propensity to painting. Nature was his teacher, and the woods of Suffolk his academy, where he would pass in solitude his mornings, in making a sketch of an antiquated tree, a marshy brook, a few cattle, a shepherd and his flock, or any other accidental objects that were presented. From delineation he got to colouring; and after painting several landscapes from the age of ten to twelve, he quitted Sudbury, and came to London. Here he received his first instructions from Gravelot, and was then placed under the tuition of Mr. Hayman, with whom he staid but a short time. After quitting this master, he for a short time resided in Hatton-garden, and practised painting of portraits of a small size, and also pursued his favourite subject, landscape. During this residence in London, he married a young lady, who possessed an annuity of 200l.; and then retired to Ipswich, and from thence to Bath, where he settled about 1758. He now began painting portraits at the low price of five guineas, for a threequarter canvas, and was soon so successful as to be encouraged to raise his price to eight guineas. In 1761, for the first time, he sent some of his works to the exhibition in London. In 1774, he quitted Bath, and settled in London in a part of the duke of Schomberg’s house in Pail-Mall. In this situation, possessed of ample fame, and in the acquisition of a plentiful fortune, he was disturbed by a complaint in his neck, which was not much noticed upon the first attack, nor was it apprehended to be more than a swelling in the glands of the throat, which it was expected would subside in a short time, but it was soon discovered to be a cancer, which baffled the skill of the first medical professors. Finding the danger of his situation, he settled his affairs, and composed himself to meet the fatal moment, and expired Aug. 2, 1788. He was buried, according to his own request, in Kew Churchyard.

Mr. Gainsborough was a man of great generosity. If he selected for the exercise of his pencil, an infant from a cottage, all the tenants of the humble roof generally participated in the profits of the picture; and some of them iVequently found in his habitation a permanent abode. His liberality was not confined to this alone: needy relatives and unfortunate friends were further iucumbrances on a spirit that could not deny; and. owing to this generosity of temper, that affluence was not left to his family which so much merit might promise, and such real worth deserve. There were other traits in his personal character less amiable. He was very capricious in his manners, and rather fickle and unsteady in his social connections. This was sufficiently evinced by his general conduct towards the royal academy, and by his whimsical behaviour to sir Joshua Reynolds. Soon after he settled in London, sir Joshua thought himself bound in civility to pay him a visit. Gainsborough, however, took not the least notice of him for several years, but at length called upon him, and requested him to sit for his picture. Sir Joshua complied, and sat once, but being soon after taken ill, was obliged to so to Bath for his health. On his return to London. perfectly restored, he sent Gainsborough word that he was returned; Gainsborough only replied, that he was glad to hear that sir Joshua Reynolds was well, but never afterwards desired him to sit, nor had any other intercourse with him, until he himself was dying, when he sent to request to see sir Joshua, and thanked him for the very liberal and favourable manner in which he had always spoken of his works. Sir Joshua had indeed proved his opinion of his talents, by paying an hundred guineas for his exquisite picture of the “Girl attending pigs,” for which Gainsborough asked but sixty.

When the royal academy was founded, Gainsborough was chosen among the first members, but being then resident at Bath, he was too far distant to be employed in the business of the institution. When he came to London, his conduct was so far disrespectful to the members of that body, that he never complied with their invitations, whether official or convivial. In 1784, he sent to the exhibition a whole-length portrait, which he ordered to be placed almost as low as the floor; but as this would have been a violation of the bye-laws of the academy, the gentlemen of the council ventured to remonstrate with him upon the impropriety of such a disposition. Gainsborough returned for answer, that if they did not chuse to hang the picture as he wished, they might send it, which they did immediately. He soon after made an exhibition of his works at his own house, which did not, however, afford trhe expected gratification; and after this circumstance, he never again exhibited.

Among his amusements, music was almost as much his favourite as painting. This passion led him to cultivate the intimacy of all the great musical professors of his time, (one of whom, Fischer, married his daughter), and they, by their abilities, obtained an ascendancy over him, greater than was perhaps consistent with strict prudence. Of his powers in the science, no better description can be given, than that by Mr. Jackson of Exeter, in his “Four Ages,” to which entertaining miscellany we may refer our readers. Some have spoken highly of Gainsborough’s musical performance. Mr. Jackson says, that though possessed of ear, taste, and genius, he never had application enough to learn his notes. He scorned to take the first step; the second was of course out of his reach; and the summit became unattainable.

However trifling in these amusements, he was steady and manly in the prosecution of excellence in his art, though not without some degree of that caprice peculiar to his character. After his death many opinions were published in the literary journals of his merit. From these we shall select the following, chiefly from, sir JoshuaHeyHolds’s lectures, which appears to approach nearest to the sobriety of just criticism.

His style of execution, as well as choice of subjects, was original, although considerably resembling that of Watteau, more particularly in his landscapes. His pictures are generally wrought in a loose and slight manner, with great freedom of hand, and using very little colour, with a great body of vehicle; which gives to his works great lightness and looseness of effect; properties extremely valuable in a picture, and too easily lost in the endeavour to give more strict and positive resemblance of substance. Sir Joshua Reynolds in his fourteenth lecture says of this hatching manner of Gainsborough, that his portraits were often little more than what generally attends a dead colour as to finishing or determining the form of the features; but, “as he was always attentive to the general effect, or whole together, 1 have often imagined (says he) that this unfinished manner contributed even to that striking resemblance for which his portraits are so remarkable. At the same time it must be acknowledged that there is one evil attending this mode; that if the portrait were seen previously to any knowledge of the original, different persons would form different ideas; and all would be disappointed at not finding the original correspond with their own conceptions, under the great latitude which indistinctness gives to the imagination, to assume almost what character or form it pleases.”

In the same lecture, which principally treats of the acquirements of Gainsborough, and which was delivered at the royal academy soon after his death, by its truly exalted president, it is said of him, “that if ever this nation should produce genius sufficient to acquire to us the honourable distinction of an English school, the name of Gainsborough will be transmitted to posterity in the history of the art among the first of that rising name.” " Whether he most excelled in portraits, landscapes, or fancy pictures, it is difficult to determine: whether his portraits were most admirable fAr exact truth of resemblance, or his landscapes for a portrait-like representation of nature, such as we see in the works of Rubens, Rysdael, or others of these schooJsi In his fancy pictures, when he had fixed upon his object of imitation, whether it was the mean and vulgar form of a wood-cutter, or a child of an interesting character, as he tlid not attempt to raise the one, so neither did he lose any of the natural grace and elegance of the other; such a grace and such an elegance as are more frequently found in cottages than in courts. This excellence was his own, the result cJ his particular observation and taste. For this he was certainly not indebted to any school; for his grace was not academical, or antique, but selected by himself from the great school of nature; where there are yet a thousand modes of grace unselected, but which lie open in the multiplied scenes and figures of life, to be brought out by skilful and faithful observers.

Nothing could have enabled Gainsborough to reach so elevated a point in the art of painting without the most ardent love for it. Indeed his whole mind appears to have been devoted to it, even to his dying day; and then his principal regret seemed to be, that he was leaving his art, when, as he said, “he saw his deficiencies, and had endeavoured to remedy them in his last works.” Various circumstances in his life exhibited him as referring every thing to it. “He was continually remarking to those who happened to be about him, whatever peculiarity of countenance, whatever accidental combination of figures, or happy effects of light and shadow occurred in prospects, in the sky, in walking the streets, or in company. If in his walks he found a character that he liked, and whose attendance was to be obtained,- he ordered him to his blouse and from the fields he brought into his paintingroom stumps of trees, weeds, and animals of various kinds; and designed them not from memory, but immediately from the objects. He even framed a kind of model of landscapes on his table composed of broken stones, dried herbs, and pieces of looking-glass; which he magnified, and improved into rocks, trees, and water: all which exhibit the solicitude and extreme activity that he had about every thing relative to his art; that he wished to have his objects embodied as it were, and distinctly before him, neglecting nothing that contributed to keep his faculties alive; and deriving hints from every sort of combination.” He was also in the constant habit of painting by night, a practicevery advantageous and improving to an artist, for, by this means he may acquire a new and a higher perception of what is great and beautiful in nature. His practice in the progress of his pictures was to paint on the whole together; wherein he differed from some, who finish each part separately, and by that means are frequently liable to produce inharmonious combinations of forms and features.

Gainsborough was one of the few artists of eminence this country has produced who never was indebted to foreign travel for his improvement and advancement in painting. Some use, indeed, he appears to have made of foreign productions; and he did not neglect to improve himself in the language of the art, the art of imitation, but aided his progress by closely observing and imitating some of the masters of the Flemish school; who are undoubtedly the greatest in that particular and necessary branch of it. He frequently made copies of Hubens, Teniers, and Vandyke, which it would be no disgrace to the most accurate connoisseurs to mistake for original pictures at first sight. What he thus learned, he did not, however, servilely use, but applied it to imitate nature in a manner entirely his own.

The subjects he chose for representation were generally rery simple, to which his own excellent taste knew how to give expression and value. In his landscapes a rising mound and a few figures seated upon, or near it; with a cow or some sheep grazing, and a slight marking of disstance, sufficed for the objects; their charm was the purity of tone in the colour; the freedom and clearness of thfc touch; together with an agreeable combination of the forms; and with these simple materials, which appear so easy as to be within every one’s grasp, but which constantly elude the designer who is not gifted with his feeling and taste, does he always produce a pleasing picture. In his fancy pictures the same taste prevailed. A collage girl; a shepherd’s boy; a woodman; with very slight materials in the back-ground, were treated by him with so much character, yet so much elegance, that they never fail to delight.

In the spring following Gainsborough’s death, an exhibition was made at his house in Pall Mall, of his pictures and drawings. Of the former there were fifty-six; of the latter one hundred and forty-eight; with several pictures of the Flemish and other masters, which he had collected during his life-time. They were announced for sale, and their prices marked in the catalogue, and several were sold. Some time after, the whole remaining collection was sold by auction, and brought good prices. Among his attempts were the portraits of Garrick and Foote, but he did not succeed according to his wish, which he used to excuse by saying that “they had every body’s faces but their own,” a very pertinent remark, as applied to the portraits of dramatic personages.

Mr. Edwards mentions three etchings by the hand of Gainsborough. The first is small, and was done as a decoration to the first “Treatise on Perspective,” which was published by his friend Mr. Kirby; but it is curious to observe, that what little of perspective is introduced, is totally false; but from the date of that work Gainsborough must have been at that time very young. The second is an oak tree, with gypsies sitting under it boiling their kettle; the size 11 J inches by 17. Both these were finished by the graver, though not improved, by Mr. Wood. The third, a more extensive view, represents a man ploughing on the side of a rising ground, upon which there is a windmill; the sea terminates the distance. This he called the Suffolk Plough. It is extremely scarce, for he spoiled the plate by impatiently attempting to apply the aquafortis, before his friend, Mr. Grignion, could assist him, as was agreed. Its size 16 inches by 14. He also attempted two or three small plates in aqua tinta, but was not very successful with them, as he knew little of the process.

, or Galateus Liciensis, an eminent Italian writer, whose proper name was Ferrari, isgenerally known by that of Galateo, from his native place, Galatina, in Otranto, where he was born in 1444. His father dying in his infancy, he was taken in to the protection of his grandfather, who had him educuted at Nardo. He afterwards studied medicine, which, after taking his degrees at Ferrara, he practised at Naples with great reputation, and was appointed physician to the king, in consequence of the recommendation of Sannazarius and Pontanus. The air of Naples, however, not agreeing with him, he removed to Gailipoli, near Galatina, where he resumed his practice. He died Nov. 12, 1517. He was not only eminent as a physician, but his natural and moral philosophy is said to have risen beyond the level of the age in which he lived. He is also said to have indicated the possibility of the navigation to the East by the Cape of Good Hope, in his treatise “De situ Elementorum,” published in 1501, but written some years prior to that period. He also illustrated the topography of his native country with accurate maps and descriptions; and was reputed a poet of considerable merit. His works are, besides what we have mentioned, 1. “De situ lapygiae,” Basil, 1558, but the best edition is that of 1727, with the notes of Tasneri, and some lesser pieces by Galateo. 2. “A Description of Gailipoli.” 3. “Successi dell‘ armata Turchescanella citta d’Otranto dell' anno 1480,” 4to, 1480. He had accompanied the son of the king of Naples on this expedition. He published also some poems in Latin and Italian.

, a learned divine, and an eminent preacher among the baptists, was born May 26, 1680, at London. His father was a citizen of good repute; and observing the natural turn of his son to be from his infancy grave and composed, he resolved to breed him for the ministry. He spared no cost jn his education, and the boy’s diligence was such, that, both in school and out of school, heapplied attentively to his learning, and became not only master of the Latin and Greek, but of the Hebrew language, at the age of seventeen; when he was sent to Ley den, to finish what he had so happily begun. Soon after his arrival there he received the news of his mother’s death, and, being sensible that this would hasten his return home, he made it a spur to his industry; and so surprisingiwas.his progress in academical learning, that he was thought. -worthy of the degrees of master of arts and doctor of philosophy in his nineteenth year, and accordingly received those honours in 1699, having performed the usual exercises with universal applause . This extraordinary testimony of his son’s merit could not fail to be very acceptable to the father; and the rector of the university communicated it, in a strong letter of commendation. Upon this occasion our author published his “Thesis,” and dedicated it to his father and his two uncles, sir John and sir Joseph Wolf; and a aioble attestation of his merit was subjoined by Adrian Ileland in a Latin panegyric.

This was about 1703; and Wall’s defence of Infant Baptism coming out in less than two years after, proved an occasion for Gale to^exert his talents in controversy. Soon after the publication of that book, he undertook to answer it, and pursued the subject in several letters written in 1705 and 1706; which were handed about in manuscript several years, till he consented to make them public in 171 J, under the title of “Reflections on Mr. Wall’s History of Infant Baptism.” The extraordinary merit of this piece raised him to the first place amoirg the baptists; yet he did not think fit to take upon himself the preacher’s office immediately. He was five and thirty years of age before he began to preach constantly and statedly J; when he was chosen one of the ministers of the baptist congregation in Paul’s alley, near Barbican. As he was zealous to maintain and propagate those notions which he thought authorized by primitive antiquity, he became chairman to a society for promoting what they called primitive Christianity; from July 3, 1715, to Feb. the 10th following. This society met every week, at Mr. Winston’s house in Cross-street, Hatton-garden, which they named the “Primitive Library.” But though Dr. Gale testified a strong desire to extinguish all disputes among Christians, he was by no means willing to give up his own peculiar opinions. Hence it was that when Mr. Wall consented to hold a conference with him upon the subject of infant baptism, the dispute ended, as usual, without any good issue; and Wall was so far from being satisfied with the arguments of his antagonist, that he drew up an answer to the Reflections, and published it under the title of “A Defence of the History of Infant Baptism,” in 1719. This book, as well as the History, was so much approved by the university of Oxford, that Wall was honoured with the degree of D. D. upon the occasion. Dr. Gale’s Reflections were not without considerable advocates; and it is supposed, that he meditated an answer to Dr. Wall’s reply, but a premature death prevented the execution of tins and several designs which he had formed, for the promotion of Oriental learning and his own notions of scriptural knowledge, as he was seized with a fever, Dec. 1721, of which, after an illness of about three weeks, he died, in his forty-second year.

In his person, Dr. Gale was rather taller than the conru mon size, and of an open pleasant countenance; in his temper, of an easy and affable behaviour, serious without any tincture of moroseness. In his manners and morals, chearful without levity, having a most perfect command over his passions. He was greatly esteemed by, and lived in friendship with, Bradford bishop of Rochester, Hoadly bishop of Bangor, and the lord chancellor King. After his death a collection of his sermons were printed by subscription; the second edition whereof was published 1726, in 4 vols. 8vo, to which is prefixed an account of his life. It appears from some passages in his funeral sermon, that he was married, and had a family, left in great want. A contribution, however, was raised, which enabled his widow to set up a coffee-house in Finch-lane for the maintenance of her children. What became of them afterwards we are not told. Of Dr. Gale’s principal performance it may be said, that, as Wall’s “History of Infant Baptism” is the best vindication of this doctrine, so the answer of Gale is the best defence of the baptists; which, as the subject had been handled by very great men before, is all ample commendation of both parties.

, a learned divine among the nonconformists, was born in 1628, at King’s-Teignton in Devonshire, where his father, Dr. Theophilus Gale, was then vicar, with which he likewise held a prebend in the church of Exeter. Being descended of a very good family in the West of England, his education was begun under a private preceptor, in his father’s house, and he was then sent to a school in the neighbourhood, where he made a great proficiency in classical learning, and was removed to Oxford in 1647. He was entered a commoner in Magdalen college, a little after that city, with the university, had been surrendered to the parliament; and their visitors in the general reformation (as they called it) of the university, had put Dr. Wilkinson into the presidentship of Magdalen college, who took particular notice of young Gale, and procured him to be appointed a demy of his college in 1648. But the current of kindness to him was far from stopping here; he was recommended to the degree of bachelor of arts Dec. 1649, by the commissioners, long before the time appointed for taking that degree by the statutes of the university, viz. four years after admission. Of this departure from the usual term of granting a degree they were so sensible, that care was taken by them to have a particular reason set forth, for conferring it so early upon him; expressing, that he was fully ripe for that honour, both in respect of his age. and the excellence of his abilities. It was probably owing to the countenance of the same patrons that he was chosen fellow of his college in 1650, in preference to many of his seniors, who were set aside to make room for him. It is acknowledged, however, that he deserved those distinctions. He took the degree of M. A. June 18, 1652, and being encouraged to take pupils, soon became an eminent tutor, and had, among other pupils, Ezekiel Hopkins, afterwards bishop of Raphoe, in Ireland.

In the mean time he continued to prosecute his own studies with vigour; and choosing divinity for his profession, applied himself particularly to that study. On reading Grotius, on the “Truth of the Christian Religion,” he began to think it possible to make it appear, that the wisest of the pagan philosophers borrowed their more sublime contemplations, as well natural and moral, as divine, from the Scriptures; and that, how different soever they might be in their appearance, not only their theology, but their philosophy and philology, were derived from the sacred oracles. Upon this principle he undertook the arduous work, which from this time became the principal object of his theological researches for many years. He did not, however, neglect the duties of the priesthood, an 1 his discourses from the pulpit were conspicuous proofs of his distinguished piety and learning. He was invited to Winchester, and became a stated preacher there in 1657; in this station he continued for some years, generally admired and esteemed, both for his excellent sermons and his exemplary life and conversation. But, being bred up in puritanical principles, he was unalterably devoted to them; so that upon the re-establishment of the church by Charles II. he could not prevail with himself to comply with the act of uniformity in 1661, and, rather than violate his conscience, chose to suffer all the penalties of the law.

Thus excluded from the public service of his function, and deprived of his fellowship at Oxford, he found friends among his own party, and was taken into the family of Philip lord Wharton, in quality of tutor to his two sons. The state of the universities at home being now very discordant to the principles of lord Wharton, he sent his sons, with their tutor, in 1662, to Caen, in Normandy, a seminary which flourished at that time under the direction of the most distinguished professors of the reformed religion in France; among whom was the celebrated Bochart. With this learned divine and several other persons of distinguished erudition Gale became acquainted, and by this intercourse, as well as by travel, greatly improved himself without neglecting his charge.

In 1665 he returned to England with his pupils, and attending them home to their father’s seat at Quainton, in 7>uckinghamshire, continued in the family till 1666 when, bring released from this employ, he set out thence for London, and was struck on the road with the dreadful sight of the city in flames. The first shock being over, he recollected his own papers, his greatest treasure, which, when he left England, he had committed to the care of a particular friend in London. He soon learnt that the house of this friend was burnt, and gave up his papers as lost, and with them all hopes of completing his great work. They had, however, by a fortunate accident, been preserved, and the “Court of the Gentiles” was destined to receive its completion. At this period he became assistant to Mr. John Rowe, his countryman, who had then a private congregation in Holborn; and continued in that station till the death of his principal, Oct. 12, 1677, when. Mr. Gale was chosen to succeed him, together with Mr. Samuel Lee, his assistant.

In the mean time the publication of his “Court of the Gentiles” had- proceeded gradually, in consequence of the great care he took to complete and digest his collections, and to make the work in all respects a masterly production. The first part was published at Oxford in 1669, and, being received with great applause, was followed by the other three, the last of which came out in 1677, the year when he succeeded Mr. Rowe. But this work, large 'and laborious as it was, did not prove sufficient to employ his spare hours: he wrote also, within the same period, several other works; namely, 2. “The true Idea of Jansenism,” 1669, 4to; with a large preface by Dr. John Owen. 3. “Theophilus, or a Discourse of the Saints’ amity with God in Christ,” 1671, 8vo. 4. “The Anatomy of Infidelity, &c.”' 1672, 8vo. 5. “A Discourse of Christ’s coming, &c.” 1673, 8vo. 6. “Idea Theologiae tarn contemplative quam activoe, ad formam S. S. delineata,” 1673, 12mo. 7. “A Sermon, entitled, Wherein the Love of the World is inconsistent with the Love of God,” 1674; printed also in the supplement to the morning exercise at Cripplegate. 8. “Philosophia generalis in duas partes disterminata, &c.” 1676, 8vo. 9., “A Summary of the two Covenants,” prefixed to a piece published by him, entitled “A Discourse of the two Covenants,” written by William Strong, sometime preacher at the Abbey church at Westminster. “The Life and death of Thomas Tregosse, minister of the gospel at Milar and Mabe in Cbrnwal, with his Character,” was also written by him, and published in 1671, though he seems to have concealed the circumstance as much as possible. Such were the fruits of our author’s studies; for the sake of prosecuting which, with the privacy requisite, he chose Newington for his retreat; where he instructed a few young persons under his own roof. But he was frequently visited hy persons of distinction, and some of a different opinion from him in religious matters, out of a desire to testify their esteem for unaffected piety and extensive learning. In 1678 he published proposals for printing by subscription, “Lexicon Grreci Testamenti Etymologicon, Synonymum, sive Glossarium Homonymum.” This, as the title imports, was intended by him for a lexicon and concordance together: he finished it as far as the letter Iota, and the most considerable words were also placed under other letters. But he was prevented from carrying it further by his death; which happened in March that year, when he was not quite fifty. As to his character, besides what has been already mentioned, he was a most zealous non-conformist, stedfast in those opinions, and warm in the defence of them. His zeal this way extended itself beyond the grave; he wished, he resolved, to perpetuate them as far as he was able. In that spirit he bequeathed all his estate to young students of his own principles, and appointed trustees to manage it for their support. He bequeathed also his well-chosen library toward promoting useful learning in New England, where those principles universally prevailed. But, notwithstanding this warm concern for supporting and propagating his own communion, he was not without charity for those who differed from him, whom he would labour to convince, but not to compel; being as much an enemy to sedition as he was to persecution. Hence we find even Wood giving him all his just commendations without those abatements and restrictions which are usual in his characters. It was allowed also, that, in hit “Court of the Gentiles,” and other works, he shewed extensive learning, and considerable abilities.

In this work, partly, as we have already noticed, but chiefly in his “Philosophia generalis,” he was induced, says Brucker, to become a zealous advocate for Platonism through a violent antipathy to the Cartesian system, which he thought unfriendly to morals, and contradictory to the doctrine of revelation. He undertook to trace back philosophy to its origin, and maintained, that there was a wonderful agreement between the ancient barbaric philosophy, and the Jewish and Christian theology. He brought every philosophical tenet to the test of the scriptures, and thought that it would not be a difficult undertaking, to separate from the pagan philosophy those doctrines which originated in divine revelation, and had been transmitted by tradition from the Hebrews to the gentiles. Having persuaded himself that these doctrines had passed in a direct line, and without material corruption, from the Hebrew fountain to Plato, he recommended his philosophical writings as, next to the scriptures, the most valuable remains of ancient wisdom. The chief point which he labours to maintain in his “Philosophia generalis” is, that Plato received his knowledge of theology from the Hebrews, and that the doctrine on this subject taught by him and his followers, for the most part, agrees with that of the holy scriptures. This opinion he implicitly adopts from the ancient fathers, whose authority, with respect to this matter, Brucker thinks there is reason to call in question. His account of other philosophers is given, without much appearance of accurate discrimination, chiefly from Laertius. He divides the Aristotelian philosophy into pure and impure, and supposes, gratuitously enough, that the former passed from Moses to the Stagy rite through the channel of Plato’s instruction.

, celebrated for his knowledge of the Greek language and antiquities, and descended from a family considerable in the North and East Riding of Yorkshire , was born in 1636, at Scruton in Yorkshire. He was sent to Westminster-school, and, being admitted king’s-scholar there, was elected to Trinity college, Cambridge, and became fellow of that society He took his degree of B. A. in 1656; of M. A. in 1662. In the prosecution of his studies, he applied himself to classical and polite literature, and his extraordinary proficiency procured him early a seat in the temple of fame. His knowledge of the Greek tongue recommended him, in 1666, to the office of regius professor of that language in the university, which he resigned in 1672; and his majesty’s Choice was approved by the accurate edition which he gave of the ancient mythologic writers, as well physical as moral, in Greek and Latin, published at Cambridge iri 1671, 8vo. This brought his merit into public view; and the following year he was appointed head master of St. Paul’s school in London; soon after which, by his majesty’s direction, he drew up those inscriptions which are to be seen upon the Monument, in memory of the dreadful conflagration in 1666, and was honoured with a present of plate made to him by the city. His excellent conduct and commendable industry in the school abundantly appear, from the great number of persons, eminently learned, who were educated by him: and, notwithstanding the fatigue of that laborious office, he found time to publish new and accurate editions of several ancient Greek authors.

He accumulated the degrees of B. and D. D. in 1675; and June 7, 1676, was collated to the prebend Consumpt. per mare in the cathedral of St. Paul. He was also elected in 1677 into the royal society, of which he became a very constant and useful member, was frequently of the council, and presented them with many curiosities, particularly a Roman urn with the ashes, found near Peckham in Surrey (part of these burnt bones he gave to Mr. Thoresby); and in 1685, the society having resolved to have honorary secretaries, who would act without any view of reward, Dr. Gale was chosen with sir John Hoskyns into that office, when they appointed the celebrated Halley for their clerkassistant, or under-secretary, who had been a distinguished scholar of our author’s at St. Paul’s school. Dr. Gale continued at the head of this school with the greatest reputation for 25 years, till 1697, when he was promoted to the deanry of York; and being admitted into that dignity Sept. 16, that year, he removed thither. This preferment was no more than a just reward of his merit, but he did not live to enjoy it many years. On his admission, finding the dean’s right to be a canon-residentiary called in question, he was at the expence of procuring letters patent in 1699, to annex it to the deanry, which put the matter out of all dispute. On his removal from London,' he presented to the new library, then lately finished at hi9 college in Cambridge, a curious collection of Arabic manuscripts. During the remainder of his life, which was. spent at York, he preserved an hospitality suitable to his station and his good government of that church is mentioned with honour. Nor has that care which he took, to repair and adorn that stately edifice, passed without a just tribute of praise.

Having possessed this dignity little more than four years and a half, he died April 8, 1702, in his 67th year, in the deanery-house, and was interred with a suitable epitaph; in the middle of the choir of his cathedral. There is a fine portrait of him in the library of Trinity-college, Cambridge, the gift of his son and there- is another at Scruton.

From the list of his publications, it is evident, that dean Gale was a learned divine, and well versed in historical knowledge. This gained him the esteem of most of the learned men his contemporaries, both at home and abroad. With some of them he held a particular correspondence, as Mabillon, from whom he received the ms. of Alcuin de Pontificibus Kboracensibus, published in his “Hist. Brit. Scriptores,” Baluze, Allix, Cappel, Rudolph, Wetstein of Amsterdam, Greevius, Huetius, &c. This last had a singular respect for him, and declares it his opinion, that our author exceeded all men he ever knew, both for modesty and learning.

In Phil. Trans. No. 231, is a letter from Thoresby to Lister, 16S>7, concerning two Roman altars found at Collerton and Blenkinsop castle in the county of Northumberland, with notes by Dr. Gale. This was the Greek inscription to Hercules. See Horsley, p. 245.

The works of this laborious scholar, were, 1. “Opuscula Mythologica Ethica et Physica, Gr. & Lat.” Cantab. 1671, 8vo, reprinted at Amsterdam, 1688, 8vo, with great improvements. This collection consists of Palaephatus, Hefaclitus, & Anonymus de incredibilibus Phurnutus de natura deorum Sallustius de diis Ocellus Lucanus; Timæus Locrus de anima mundi Demophili, Democratis, & Secundi philosophorum sententiae Joan n is Pediasimi desiderium de tnuliere bona et mala Sexti Pythagorei sententice Theophrasti characteres Pythagoreorum frag-, menta; & Heliodori Darisseci capita opticorum. 2. “ Historiæ Poeticæ Scriptores antiqui, Greecè & Latinè. Aecessere breves notæ, & indices necessarii,” Paris, 1675, 8vo. These are, Apollodorus Atheniensis, Conon Grammaticus, Ptolonutus Hephxstion, Parthenius Nicuensis, & Antoninus Liberalis. 3. “Rhetores Selecti, Gr. & Lat. viz. Demetrius Phalereus de Elocutione; Tiberius Rhetor de schematibus Demosthenis; Anonymu* Sophista de Rhetorica; Severi Alexandrini Ethopceisc. Demetrium emendavit, reliquos e Mss. edidit & Latine vertit, omnes notis illustravit Tho. Gale,” Oxon. 1676, 8vo. 4. “Jamblicbus Chalcidensis de Mysteriis. Epistola Porphyrii de eodem argumento, Gr. & Lat. ex versione T. G.” Oxon. 1678, 8vo. 5. “Psalterium juxta exemplar Alexandrinum,” Oxon. 1678, 8?o. 6. “Herodoti Halicarnassensis Historiarnin libri X. ejusdem narratio de vita Homeri excerpta e Ctesia, & H. Stephani Apologia pro Herodoto accedunt chronologia, tabula geographica, variantes Jectiones, &c.” Lond. 1679, fol. a most excellent edition. 7. An edition of “Cicero’s Works” was revised by him, Lond. 1681, 1684, 2 vols. fol. 8. “Histories Anglicanoe Scriptores quinque, &c.” Oxon. 1687, fol. This volume contains Annales de Margan, from 1066 to 1232. Chronicon Thomae Wikes from 1066 to 1334. Annales Waverleienses from 106t3 to 1291. G. Vinisauf Itinerarium regis Ricardi in terram Hierosolymitanam. Chronica Walteri de Hemingford, from 1066 to 1273. He reserved the remainder of this last Chronicle for another volume, which he intended to publish, but did not live to execute. Concerning this, see Hearne’s Preface to his edition of Hemingford, p. xxiii. 9. “A Discourse concerning the Original of Human Literature with Philology and Philosophy,” Phil. Trans, vol. VI. p. 2231. 10. “Historiae Britannicse, Saxonicae, AngloDanicae, Scriptores quindccim, &c.” Oxon. 1691, folio. This volume contains “Gildas de excidio Britannia-, Eddji vita VVilfridi, Nennii historia, Asserii annales, Higdeni Polychronicon, G. Malmesburiensis de antiquitate Glastoniensis ecclesiae, & libri V. de pontificibus Angliae, Histona Ramesiensis, Historia Eliensis, Chronica Joh. Wallingford, Historia Rad. Diceto, Forduni Scotichronicon, Alcuinus de pontificibus Eboracensibus.” This is called by Gale the first volume; and that which contains the Quinque Scriptores (Ingulphus, Peter Blesensis, Chron. de Mailros, Annales Burtonenses, and the Historia Croylandensis) though published in 1684 (by Mr. William Fulrnan under the patronage of Bp. Fell) is called the second, as the authors are of a more modern date. 11. A collection of “Latin Prayers,” by dean Gale, in ms. was in the possession of Dr. Ducarel. He left in ms. “Origenis Philocalia, variis manuscriptis collata, emendata, & nova versione donata” “Jamblichus de vita Pythagoras” and “Antonini Itinerarium Britannia” the latter published afterwards by his son, as were his Sermons preached on public occasions in 1704.

, esq. F. R. and A. Ss. eldest son of the preceding, was born in 1672, and was educated under his father at St. Paul’s school, whence he was admitted of Trinity-college, Cambridge, 1691, made scholar of 'that house 1693, and afterwards fellow (being then B. A.) in 1697. He was possessed of a considerable estate at Scruten, in Yorkshire, now in the possession of his grandson Henry Gale, esq. and represented North Allerton, in that county, in 1705, 1707, 1706, and 1710. His name was added to the commissioners of stamp duties, Dec. 20, 1714, and was continued in a subsequent commission, May 4, 1715-, and he was appointed a commissioner of excise Dec. 24 of the same year. In this he continued uutii 1735, when he was wantonly displaced by sir Robert Waipole, for which no other reason was assigned than that sir Robert wanted to provide for one of his friends, an act of arbitrary tyranny which cannot be too severely condemned. Mr. Gale was the first vice-president of the society of antiquaries; and when that learned body, in 1721, proposed to collect accounts of all the ancient coins relative to Great Britain and its dominions, Mr. Gale undertook the Reman series, and his brother Samuel the Danish. Though he was considered as one of the most learned men of his fege, he only published the following books:

1. “Antonini Iter Britanniarum Commentariis illnstratutn Thomae Gale, S, T. P. nuper Decani Ebor. Opus posthumum revisit, auxit, edidit R. G. Accessit Anonymi Ravennatis Britannia; Chorographia, cum amographo Regis Galliae Mss. & cociice Vaticano collata adjiciuntur conjecturse plurimae, cum nominibus locorum Anglicis, quotquot iis assignari potuerint,” Lond. 1709, 4to. In the preface to this book, Mr. Gale very properly points out what parts of it were his father’s and what his own. Mr. Gough had, among the books which he bequeathed to the Bodleian library, three copies of this edition, enriched with many valuable ms notes by Mr. Roger Gale, Nicholas Man, esq. and Dr. Abraham Francke, fellow of Trintycollege, Cambridge, and rector of West Dene in Wiltshire, 1728; and a fourth with ms various readings from the two Mss. whence H. Stephens first printed this Itinerary . 2. “The Knowledge of Medals, or Instructions for those who apply themselves to the study of Medals both ancient and modern, by F. Jobert,” translated from the French, of which two editions were published without his name; one of them in 1697, the other in 1715, 8vo. 3. “Registrum Honoris de Richmond,” Lond. 1722, folio. His discourse on the four Roman Ways in Britain, is printed in the sixth volume of Leland’s Itinerary. His “Remarks on a Roman Inscription found at Lanchester,” in the Philosophical Transactions, vol. XXX. p. 823 and in vol. XLIII. p. 265, extracts of two of his letters to Mr. Peter Collinson, F. R. S. concerning “the vegetation of melon seeds 33 years old,” and of “a fossil skeleton of a man found at Lathkill-dale near Bakewell, in the county of Derby,” dated in 1743 and 174-1-f. “Explanation of a Roman altar found at Castle Steeds in Cumberland,” in Gent. Mag. vol. XII. p. 135. In Horsley’s “Britannia Romana,” p. 332, &c. is published, “An Account of a Roman Inscription found at Chichester. By Roger Gale, esq.” “Observations on an Inscription at Spello, by Fred. Passarini and Roger Gale, esq.” are printed in the Archaeologia, vol. II. p. 25. He presented to Mr. Drake’s History of York a plate of a beautiful little bronze female bust, which he supposed to be a Lucretia, found at York, and in his possession, engraved by Vertue. To him also Mr. Drake acknowledges himself obliged for a discovery that fixes the building of the Chapter-house at York to archbishop Grey. He died at Scruton, June 25, 1744, in his 72d year, universally esteemed, and much lamented by all his acquaintance; and left all his Mss. by will to Trinity-college, Cambridge, of which he was once fellow, and his cabinet of Roman coins to the public library there, with a complete catalogue of them drawn up by himself, of which Mr. Nichols printed twenty copies in 1780, for the use of particular friends. His correspondence included all the eminent antiquaries, of his time; and the late Mr. George Allan of Darlington possessed, by the gift of his grandson, a large collection of letters to and from him, the principal of which are printed in the “Reliquiae Galeanae,” as a valuable addition to antiquarian literature. The originals are still in the possession of Henry Gale, esq. The “Bibliotheca Topographica Britannica,” No. II. contains many other fragments and notices of the labours of Mr. Gale.

, brother of the preceding, and youngest son of the dean, was born in the parish of St Faith, near St. Paul’s, London, Dec. 17, 16$2, was educated under his father at St. Paul’s school, and intended for the university, but his elder brother Roger being sent to Cambridge, and his father dying 1702, he was provided for in the custom-house, London, and at the time of his death was one of the land surveyors there. He was one of the revivers of the society of antiquaries in 1717, and their first treasurer. On resigning that office Feb. 21, 1740, the society testified their opinion of his merit and services, by presenting him with a handsome silver cup, value ten guineas, with a suitable inscription. He was a man of great learning and uncommon abilities, and well versed in the antiquities of England, for which he left many valuable collections behind him; but printed nothing in his life-time, except “A History of Winchester Cathedral,” London, 1715, begun by Henry earl of Clarendon, and continued to that year, with cuts. A few of his communications have been since printed in the “Archoeologia,” and spme in the “Bibl. Top. Britannica.” He died of a fever Jan. 10, 1754, at his lodgings at Hampstead. His library and prints were sold by auction in the same year, by Langford, but his Mss. became the property of Dr. Stukeley, who married his sister, and some of them, afterwards descended to Dr. Ducarel, at whose sale they were purchased by Mr. Gough. A list of them, which may be seen in our authority, sufficiently attests his industry and knowledge as an antiquary.

, an English surgeon, was born in 1507; and educated under Richard Ferris, afterwards serjeantsurgeon to queen Elizabeth. He was surgeon in the army of king Henry VIII. at Montruil, in 1544; and in that of king Philip at St. Quintin, in 1557, but afterwards settled in London, and became very eminent in the practice of surgery. He was living in 1586. Tanner gives the following list of his writings: “The Institution of a Chirurgeon.” “An Enchiridion of Surgery,” in four books. “On Gun-shot wounds.” “Antidotarie,” in two books. All these were printed together, London, 1563, 8vo. “A compendious method of curing praeternatural Tumours.” “On the several kinds of Ulcers, and their cure.” “A Commentary on Guido de Cauliaco.” “An Herbal, for the use of surgeons.” “A brief declaration of the worthy Art of Medicine, and the office of a Chirurgeon.” “An epitome of Galen de Natural. Facultat.” The two last were printed with a translation of " Galen de Methodo MedenoV' It cannot be supposed that any of these are now of much value, but some of them contain curious information respecting the state of the profession at that time.

, a physician of great repute at Palermo; and not for skill and learning in his profession only, but for his taste also, and knowledge of theology, mathematics, poetry, and polite literature in general, was born in 1605. There are several works of his in Italian, upon different maladies; and some also in Latin, particularly “Hippocrates Redivivus paraphrasibus illustratus,” published in 1650. We owe to him also a collection of little pieces of the Sicilian poets, entitled “The Sicilian Muse,” in five volumes. He died in 1675, greatly regretted; for he was a kind of oracle with his countrymen.

, after Hippocrates prince of the Greek physicians, was a native of Pergamus in the Lesser Asia, where he was born about A. D. 131, in the reign of the emperor Adrian. His father, whose name was Nicon, was an able architect, and spared neither trouble nor expence in the education of his son. Galen studied with success all the philosophy of his time, but finally applied himself to medicine as his profession. Satyro and Peiops, two eminent physicians of his time, were his chief preceptors in that science. But his application to the works of Hippocrates contributed more than any other instruction to the eminence he attained.

Having exhausted all the sources of literature -that could be found at home, he resolved to travel, in order to improve himself among the most able physicians in all parts; intending at the same time to take every opportunity, which his travels would give him, of inspecting on the spot the plants and drugs of the several countries through which he passed. With this view he went first to Alexandria, where he continued some years, induced by the flourishing state of the arts and science^ in that city. From thence he passed into Cilicia; and? J travelling through Palestine, visited the isles of Crete and Cyprus, and other places. Among the rest, he made two voyages to Lemnos, on purpose to view and examine the Lemnian earth, which was spoken of at this time as a considerable medicine. With the same spirit he went into the lower Tyria, to get a thorough insight into the true nature of the Opobalsamum, or balm of Gilead. Having completed his design, he returned home by the way of Alexandria.

He was now only twenty-eight years of age, and had made some considerable advances toward improving his art. He had acquired a particular skill in the wounds of the nerves, and was possessed of a method of treating them never known before; for Galen, as well as all other ancient physicians, united surgery to medicine. The pontiff of Pergamus gave him an opportunity of, trying his new method upon the gladiators, and he was so successful that not a single man perished by any wounds of this kind. He had been four years at Pergamus, exercising his faculty with unrivalled fame, when, being made uneasy by some seditious disturbances, he quitted his country and went to Rome, resolving to settle in that capital. But his views were disappointed. The physicians there, sensible of the danger of such a competitor, found means by degrees so completely to undermine him, that he was obliged, after a few years, to leave the city. He had, however, in that time made several acquaintances, both of considerable rank, and the first character for learning. Among others, he had a particular connection with Eudemus, a peripatetic philosopher of great repute. This person he cured of a fever, which from a quartan, bad degenerated into a triple quartan, by the ill-judged application which the patient had made of the theriacum; and what is somewhat remarkable, Galen cured the malady with the same medicine that had caused it; and even predicted when the fits would first cease to return, and in what time the patient would entirely recover. Indeed, so great was his skill and sagacity in these fevers, that if we may believe his own words, he was able to predict from (he first visit, or from the first attack, what species of a fever would appear, a tertian, quartan, or quotidian. He was also greatly esteemed by Sergius Paulus, praetor of Reme; as also by Barbarus, uncle to the emperor Lucius; by Severus, then consul, and afterwards emperor; and last^ by Boethus, a person of consular dignity, in whose presence he had an opportunity of making dissections, and of shewing, particularly, the organs of respiration and the voice, His reputation, likewise, was much increased by the success which he had in recovering the wife of Boethus, who on that occasion presented him with four hundred pieces of gold. But that on which he valued himself most, was the case of a lady, who was said to lie in a very dangerous condition; whose disorder he discovered to be love, the object of which was a rope-dancer thus rivalling th discovery of the luve of Antiochus for Stratonice, which had given so much celebrity to Krasistratus.

After a residence of about four or five years at Rome, he returned to Pergamus *. But he had not been there long, when the emperors Marcus Aurelius and Lucius Verus, who had heard of his fame, sent for him to Aquileia, where they then resided. He bad no sooner arrived in this city, than the plague, which had shewn itself a little before, broke out with fresh and greater fury, so that the emperors were obliged to remove, attended by a very small retinue. Lucius died on the road, but his corpse was carried to Rome; and Galen found means, though not without some trouble, to follow soon after. He had

He tells us in another place, that causes conspired in determining him to he was forced from Rome at this time that measure. Galen de lib. propr. by the plague, and apparently both c. 1. not been long returned, when Marcus acquainted him with his intention to take him in his train to Germany; hut Galen excused himself, alledging, that jEsculapius, for whom he had a particular devotion, ever since the God cured him of a mortal imposthume, had advertised him in a dream never to leave Rome again. The emperor yielding to his solicitations, he continued in the city; and it was during the absence of Marcus that he composed his celebrated treatise “De usu partium,” and some others.

All this while the faculty persecuted him continually, insomuch that he was apprehensive of some design against his life. Under this suspicion, he retired very often to a country-house, where Commodus the emperor’s son resided. That prince was then under the tuition of Pitholaus, to whom the emperor had given orders, if his son should be taken ill, to send for Galen. This order gave him an opportunity of attending the prince in a fever, which appeared very violent on the first access. He had the good fortune to remove the disease, and the following eulogium was made by Faustina the princess: “Galen,” says she, “shews his skill by the effects of it, while other physicians give us nothing but words.” He also cured Sextus, another son of Aurelius Marcus, and predicted the success, against the opinion of all his colleagues. Thus he raised his fame above the reach of envy; and he continued not only to preserve, but increase it. The emperor, after his return from the German expedition, was suddenly seized in the night with violent pains in the bowels, which, being followed by a great flux, threw him into a fever. Next day, he took a dose of hiera picra, and another of the theriacum ; after which, the physicians who bad attended his person in the army, ordered him to be kept quiet, giving him nothing but a little broth for the space of nine hours. Galen, being called in soon after, attended with the rest, and they, upon feeling the patient’s pulse, were of opinion that he was going into an ague. The emperor, observing that Galen stood still without approaching him, asked the reason: Galen replied, that his luNe being touched twice by his physicians, he depended upon them, not duubting but they were better judges of the pulse than he was. The emperor, little satisfied with this answer, immediately held out his arm. Galen having considered the pulse with great attention, “I pronounce (says he) that we have nothing to do here with the access of an ague; but the stomach is overcharged with something that remains undigested, which is the true cause of the fever.” These words were no sooner uttered, than the prince cried out aloud, “That is the very thing, you have hit the case exactly;” and repeating the words three times, asked what must be done for his relief. “If it was the case of any other person,” replied Galen, “I should order a little pepper infused in wine, which I have often tried with success in this case; but as it is the custom to administer to sovereign princes only mild remedies, it suffices to apply hot to the stomach a piece of flannel dipped in the oil of spike.” Marcus did not neglect to make use of both these remedies; and in the issue said to Pitholaus, his son’s governor, “We have but one physician . Galen is the only valuable man of the faculty.”

Thus distinguished above his contemporaries, did this prince of physicians continue to practise at Rome, the capital of the world, till his death, which happened A. D. 201, in his 70th year. He had usually enjoyed a perfect state of health, the effect of observing a strict regimen both in diet and exercise: for, being subjected to frequent disorders in his younger days he studied his own constitution, and having fixed the methods of preserving it, followed them strictly. This was nothing more than taking care to eat such meats as. were of easy and equal digestion, abstaining particularly from summer fruits, confining himself to figs and raisins, and using a constant and equal exercise. By following these rules, he never had any distemper, except once a fever of one day’s continuance, occasioned by too much study and over-fatigue.

He was a man endowed with excellent parts, and, baring the advantage of the best education, became not only an eminent physician, but also a great philosopher; and was particularly happy in a facility of expression, and an unaffected eloquence; but the style of his works is extremely diffuse, his sentences are sometimes perplexed, and sometimes absolutely obscure. The great number of books which we have of his composing, to pass over those we have lost, are a convincing proof how little pains it cost him to write. Suidas tells us that he wrote not only ou physic and philosophy, but also on geometry and grammar. There are reckoned above five hundred books of his upon physic only, and about half that number upon other sciences. He even composed two books, containing a catalogue of his works; shewing the time and place in which some of them were composed, together with the occasion of writing them, and the proper order of reading them.

Without entering into a long detail of all the particular treatises written by Galen, a vast collection of which is ia the British Museum, it may be sufficient here to notice the different editions of the whole of his works that have been transmitted to us. The Greek editions are those of Aldus and Aud. Asulanus, printed at Venice, 1525, in 5 vols. folio, and of Hieron. Gemusæus, at Basil, 1538, in the same form. The Latin editions are, that of Paris, 1536, folio, printed by Simon Colinteus; and reprinted ?at Lyons, in 1554, with additions and corrections^ by Joan. Frellonius; that of Basil, 1542, folio, printed by Frobeiiius, and edited by Gemusæus; those of Basil again in 1549, 1550, and 1562; the last of which contains a preface by Conrad Gesner, in which he comments with great judgment on the merits of Galen and his works, and of his different translators: the edition of Venice, 1562, with the corrections of John Baptist Rasario: ten editions published at Venice by the Juntas in different years between 1541 and 1625; the ninth of which, printed in 1609, and the last, are precisely the same, and are the best and most correct: lastly, an edition printed at Venice in 1541—45, by John Farreeus, in 7 vols. 8vo, with the notes of Ricci. An edition of Galen’s works, both in Greek and Latin, in an elegant form, was published at Paris, in 13 vols. folio, by U6ii6 Chartier, including also the works of Hippocrates; it is deemed a correct work.

As a physician, the ancients had the highest esteem for him. Athenacus, his contemporary, shews the great opinion he had of his merit as a philosopher, by making him a guest at his feast of the philosophers; where he not only compliments him upon the great number of his writings, but adds, that in elocution and perspicuity of style, he was inferior to none*. Eusebius, who lived about an hundred years after him, observes, that the veneration in which Galen was held as a physician, was such, that many looked upon him as a God, and even paid him divine worship; accordingly Trallian gives him the title of “most divine.” Oribasius, who flourished soon after Eusebius, and was himself Archiater to Julian, testified his esteem for Galen, by the extracts he made of his works, as well as by the praises which he bestows upon him. /Ktius and Paulus vEgineta have also copied Galen, especially the last, and his works were commented on by Stephen the Athenian. Avicenna, Averroes, and the rest of the Arabian physicians, who take the best of what they have from Galen, have not been wanting in their praises of him. After all, however, it is certain he had in his own time a considerable party to contend with, and these latter ages have raised up some powerful adversaries to his name. The practice of Hippocrates, which he laboured to re-establish, did not triumph over the other sects, immediately upon Galen’s declaring against them. The sect of the methodists (as it was called) supported its credit for some ages

It is not, indeed Athenseus, but author was very ancient. Casaubor^'s the author of the arguments prefised notes upon Athcuaeus. to his books, that says this, but that from that time, and even furnished physicians to the emperors long after. Yet it gradually mouldered away; and notwithstanding the efforts of the moderns, the party of Galen is very numerous at this day.

Thus we have exhibited the bright side of this physician’s character, but we must not close this memoir without shewing the other side also: for the greatest geniuses have their blemishes and defects, which too are often in proportion greater, or at least are seen more conspicuously by being linked to so much splendour. The foible which stands foremost on this side of Galen’s character, is his vanity, which was so excessive as to carry him beyond the bounds of prudence and decency. His writings are fulsomely filled with his own praises, and he magnifies himself in the same degree as he debases other physicians who differed from him; in refuting whom, he throws out the flowers of an acrimonious rhetoric with an unsparing hand. We have already given a convincing proof of the good opinion he entertained of himself, and how little scrupulous he was to make his own eulogium in his recital of M. Aurelius’s disorder. That whole book abounds with stories of the same cast, which also at the same time serve to impeach him of pride, and a disdain and contempt of every body else. In this spirit we see him giving way to most injurious reproaches against the methodists, whom he calls “the asses of Thessalus,” who was the principal founder of the sect. He observed, indeed, more decency towards Erasistratus, Asclepiades, and others of the more ancient physicians; but still, among the praises he bestows upon them, there escapes from him haughtiness enough. But he grows absolutely insupportable, in the ostentatious parade which he makes of having done in physic something what Trajan had done in the Roman empire. “No person whatsoever before me (says he) hath shewn the true method of treating diseases. Hippocrates, indeed, pointed out the same road; hut as he was the first who discovered it, so he went not so far therein as was to be wished.”

Galen is likewise reproached with being superstitious; and we have given an instance of his opening a vein, in consequence of a dream. He teils us also in the same place, that he had two more dreams of the same kind; and says in another place, that, being once consulted in the case of a swelled tongue, he directed a purge, and somewhat cooling to be held upon the part; the patient took the purge, and had a dream the same night, jn which he was ordered to apply a gargle of lettuce juice, whicn succeeded very well. But this superstition was the religion of his country, of which Æsculapius, as he teils us, was the God, and was held to be that particular God whose province it was to assist the sick in dreams.

, or Galeotus Martius, was born at Narni, in the pupal territory, and was for some time an instructor of youth at Bologna, but removed and kept a private school in Hungary. Being there distinguished by Matthias Corvinus, king of Hungary, he was admitted into his family, made his private secretary, and, it is supposed, presided over the education of his son John Coryinus. He was also keeper of the library at Buda. In this situation his fame reached Louis the Xlth, king of France, who invited him into that kingdom. Galeoti went accordingly to meet the king at Lyons, but Louis happening to come out of the city, they met a litjtle without the gates, and Galeoti, attempting to descend hastily to pay due honours to the king, fell, and being very fat, was so much hurt, that he died very soon 'after. In 1478, Galeoti published a collection of the bon-mots of Matthias Corvinus, “De jocose dictis ac factis regis Matt. Corvini,” inserted in the folio collection of writers on the history of Hungary. There is also by him a treatise in 4to, entitled “De nomine interiore et de corpore ejus,” and others, “De incognitis vulgo,” never printed; “De doctrina promiscua,” Lyons, 1552, 8vo, which is a miscellany of physical, medical, and astronomical questions. For some of his sentiments the monks accused him of heresy, and he had contentions with them, but he was protected by pope Sixtus IV. who had been his pupil.

, of Milan, a learned ecclesiastical antiquary, and apostolical notary, flourished in the sixteenth century, under the pontificate of Gregory XIII. and Sixtus V. He was an able scholar in the ancient languages, and had devoted much of his time to researches in ecclesiastical history. He endeavoured to correct and illustrate the “Roman Martyrology,” by new-modelling it, and adding a number of new facts respecting the saints. This he dedicated to pope Gregory XIII. and published it at Milan in 1577, but it never was approved by the Roman censors, who thought it too long to be recited in the canonical office; and others have accused him of many inaccuracies. He wrote also the “Lives of the Saints of Milan,” printed there in 1582; some notes on the Greek Septuagint, Rome, 1567, and a “Commentary on the Pentateuch,” ib. 1587. His other works, are translations from Greek into Latin of some discourses of St. Gregory Nyssen and Theodoret new editions of the histories of Sulpicius Severus and of Haymo of Halberstadt, in folio; the acts of Milan; a tract concerning the obelisk which Sixtus V. raised in 1586; and another on the tomb which the same pope erected in. honour of Pius V. a history of the popes, entitled “Theatrum Pontificate;” “S. Didaci Complutensis Canonizatio,” Rome, 1588; “II perfetto Dittionario,” Latin and Italian, Venice, 1659, and 1684. We have no further particulars of his life, except that he died about the year 1590.

, an Italian wit, was born in Naples, about 1720. He was descended of a noble family, his father being a marquis, and his uncle archbishop and great almoner to the king, who is celebrated in the History of the two Sicilies, for hating been the chief author and promoter of the famous concordate of 1741, which happily terminated the jurisdictional disputes between the court of Naples and the holy see. To the high preferments and care of this uncle, Galiani was indebted for a liberal education, and it is said that he displayed very early an extraordinary genius in every study. At the age of sixteen, he had mastered the Latin and Greek languages, and was equally acquainted with classical literature, the mathematics, philosophy, and with the civil and canon law.

At the age of twenty, about 1740, he published a ludicrous work, which evinced the turn of his genius for wit and humour. It was a prevailing custom at that time in Naples (as well as in other cities of Italy), on the decease of any great or eminent person, to make a large collection of songs, sonnets, epigrams, elegies, and inscriptions, in praise of the real or reputed talents and virtues of the deceased. The abuse to which such a practice is liable, called loudly for reformation, and Galiani catching the opportunity of the death of a famous public executioner, named Jannaccone, sported a droll funereal collection of prose and verse in his praise, in which the manner and style of the respective authors, accustomed to that sort of compositions, were ingeniously personated and burlesqued. Much about the same time, Galiani had an opportunity in another work, of producing another specimen of his humour. Pope Benedict XIV. had applied to his uncle, the great almoner, to procure him a complete collection of the various materials which compose mount Vesuvius. This prelate intrusted the commission to his nephew, who actually undertook to make the collection, accompanying each article with a short philosophical comment. Soon after, he addressed them in a box to the pontiiT, with an humorous inscription to the whole, “Si filius Dei es, fae ut Lapides isti Panes fiant.” The turn of this motto was easily apprehended by the pope, who was himself one of the wittiest men of his age, and it could not fail to procure Galiani what he hinted at. He accordingly received soon afterwards a rich abbey, worth four thousand ducats (nearly seven hundred pounds) per annum. Galiani soon afterwards displayed his abilities in philosophy, by publishing about 1745, his well-known political tract “Trattato della Moneta,” (a Treatise on Money). This was unanimously pronounced in Italy an original and capital publication, which firmly established his reputation in the world. He was now appointed secretary to the Neapolitan ambassador in Paris, where he soon exhibited other specimens of his philosophical abilities, by publishing an “Essay on the Commerce of Corn.” This new work was very favourably received in France, where some of their philosophers were candidly wont to say, “Le petit Italien est en cela plus instruit que nous.” By the word -petit, they allude to the diminutive stature of the author.

Being soon recalled to Naples, he was appointed a counsellor in the tribunal of commerce, an office of magistracy not incompatible with the order of a clergyman. He retained this place during the remainder of his life; and as it required much time and application to perform its duties, M. Galiani after this was no<t so active in literary exertions as he had been heretofore. In 1779 he published a work “on the Origin of the Neapolitan Dialect.” This performance, however, does not bear an accurate correspondence to the title, and was judged superficial and unsatisfactory. In 1780, he published a treatise on the Armed Neutrality, which he dedicated to the late empress Catherine of Russia. This work, on a question entirely new and complicated in the system of public law of Europe, fell likewise considerably short of the expectation entertained by his admirers. He died in 1789, and since his death it has been asserted that he was indebted to other writers for the substance of some of those volumes which he published under his own name, and by which he acquired his reputation; but we know not upon what authority this assertion has been made. Galiani was short in stature, full of vivacity, wit, and humour, and a great favourite on that account in all companies.

, the celebrated astronomer and mathematician, was the son of Vincenzo Galilei, a nobleman of Florence, not less distinguished by his quality and fortune, than conspicuous for his skill and knowledge in music; about some points in which science he maintained a dispute with the famous Zarlinas. His wife brought him this son, Feb. 10, 1564, either at Pisa, or, which is more probable, at Florence. Galileo received an education suitable to his birth, his taste, and his abilities. He went through his studies early, and his father then wished that he should apply himself to medicine;. but having obtained at college some knowledge of mathematics, his genius declared itself decisively for that study. He needed no directions where to begin. Euclid’s Elements were well known to be the best foundation in this science. He therefore set out with studying that work, of which he made himself master without assistance, and proceeded thence to such authors as were in most esteem, ancient and modern. His progress in these sciences was so extraordinary, that in 1589, he was appointed professor of mathematics in the university of Pisa, but being there continually harrasted by the scholastic professors, for opposing some maxims of their favourite Aristotle, he quitted that place at the latter end of 1592, for Padua, whither he was invited very handsomely to accept a similar professorship; soon after which, by the esteem arising from his genius and erudition, he was recommended to the friendship of Tycho Brache. He had already, even long before 1586, written his “Mechanics,” or a treatise of the benefits derived from that science and from its instruments, together with a fragment concerning percussion, the first published by Mersennus, at Paris, in 1G34-, in “Mersenni Opera,” vol. I. and both by Menoless, vol. I. as also his “Balance,” in which, after Archimedes’s problem of the crown, he shewed how to find the proportion of alloy, or mixt metals, and how to make theuaid instrument. These he had read to his pupils soon after his arrival at Padua, in 1593.

While he was professor at Padua, in 1609, visiting Ve>­nice, then famous for the nrt of making glass, he heard of the invention of the telescope by James Metius, in Holland. This notice was sufficient for Galileo; his curiosity was raised; and the result of his inquiry was a telescope of his own, produced from this hint, without having seen the Dutch glass. All the discoveries he made in astronomy were the easy and natural consequences of this invention, which opening a way, till then unknown, into the heavens, gave that science an entirely new face. Galileo, in one of his works, ridicules the unwillingness of the Aristotelians to allow of any discoveries not known to their master, by introducing a speaker who attributes the telescope to him, on account of what he says of seeing the stars from the bottom of a deep well. “The well,” says he, “is the tube of the telescope, the intervening vapours answer to the glasses.” He began by observing the moon, and calculating the height of her mountains. He then discovered four of Jupiter’s satellites, which he called the Medicean stars or planets, in honour of Cosmo II. grand duke of Tuscany, who was of that noble family. Cosmo now recalled him from Padua, re-established him at Pisa, with a very handsome stipend, in 1610; and the same year, having lately invited him to Florence, gave him the post and title of his principal philosopher and mathematician.

It was not long before Galileo discovered the phases of Venus, and other celestial phenomena. He had been, however, but a few years at Florence, before he was convinced by sad experience, that Aristotle’s doctrine, however ill-grounded, was held too sacred to be called in question. Having observed some solar spots in 1612, be printed that discovery the following year at Rome; in which, and in some other publications, he ventured to assert the truth of the Copernican system, and brought several new arguments to confirm it. This startled the jealousy of the Jesuits, who procured a citation for him to appear before the holy office at Rome, in 1615, where he was charged with heresy, for maintaining these two propositions; 1. That the sun is in the centre of the world, and immoveable by a local motion; and, 2. That the earth is not the centre of the world, nor immoveable, but actually moves by a diurnal motion. The first of these positions was declared to be absurd, false in philosophy, and formally heretical, being contrary to the express word of God; the second was also alleged to be philosophically false, and, in a theological view, at least erroneous in point of faith. He was detained in the inquisition till Feb. 1616, on the 25th of which month sentence was passed against him; by which he was enjoined to renounce his heretical opinions, and not to defend them either by word or writing, nor even to insinuate them into the mind of any person whatsoever; and lit obtained his discharge only by a promise to conform himself to this order. It is hard to say whether his sentence betrayed greater weakness of understanding, or perversity of will. Galileo clearly saw the poison of both in it; and therefore following the known maxim, that forced oaths anil promises are not binding to the conscience, he went on, making further new discoveries in the planetary system, and occasionally publishing them with such inferences and remarks as necessarily followed from them, notwithstanding they tended plainly to establish the truth of the above-mentioned condemned propositions.

He continued many years confidently in this course, no juridical notice being taken of it; till he had the presumption to publish at Florence his “Dialogi della duomassime Systeme del Mondo, Tolemaico et Copernicano;” dialogues of the two greatest systems of the world, the Ptolemaic and Copernican, in 1632. Here, in examining the grounds upon which the two systems were built, he produces the most specious as well as strongest arguments for each of those opinions; and leaves, it is true, the question undecided, as not to be demonstrated either way, while many phenomena remained insolvable; bnt all this is done in such a manner, that his inclination to the Copernican system might be easily perceived. Nor had he forborne to enliven his production by several smart strokes of raillery against those who adhered so obstinately, and were such devotees to Aristotle’s opinions, as to think it a crime to depart from them in the smallest degree. This excited the indignation of his former enemies, and he was again cited before the inquisition at Rome; the congregation was convened, and, in his presence, pronounced sentence against him and his books. They obliged him to abjure his errors in the most solemn manner, committed him to the prison of their office during pleasure, and enjoined him, as a saving penance, for three years, to repeat once a week the seven penitential psalms; reserving, however, to themselves the power of moderating, changing, or taking away altogether, or in part, the abovementioned punishment and penance. Upon this sentence he was detained a prisoner till 1634, and his “Dialogues of the System of the World” were burnt at Rome. We rarely meet with a more glaring instance of blindness and bigotry than this 5 and it was treated with as much contempt by our author as consisted with his safety.

He lived ten years after it, seven of which were employed in making still further discoveries with his telescope; but, by continual application to that instrument, added to the damage he received in his sight from the nocturnal air, his eyes grew gradually weaker, till, in 1639, he became totally blind. He bore this great calamity with patience and resignation, worthy of a philosopher. The loss neither broke his spirit, nor hindered the course of his studies. He supplied the defect by constant meditations, by which he prepared a large collection of materials; and began to dictate his own conceptions, when, by a distemper of three months continuance, wasting away by degrees, be expired at Arcetri near Florence , Jan. 8, 1642, in the same year that Newton was born. In stature he was small, but in aspect venerable, and his constitution vigorous; in company he was affable, free, and full of pleasantry. He took great delight in architecture and painting, and designed extremely well. He played exquisitely, on the lute; and whenever he spent any time in the country, he took great pleasure in husbandry. His learning was very extensive; and he possessed in a high degree a clearness and acuteness of wit. From the time of Archimedes, nothing had been done in mechanical geometry till Galileo, who, being possessed of an excellent judgment, and great skill in the most abstruse points of geometry, first extended the boundaries of that science, and began to reduce the resistance of solid bodies to its laws. Besides applying geometry to the doctrine of motion, by which philosophy became established on a sure foundation, he made surprising discoveries in the heavens by means of his telescope. He made the evidence of the Copernican system more sensible, when he shewed from the phases of Venus, like to those of the moon, that Venus actually revolves about the sun. He proved the rotation of the sun on his axis from his spots; and thence the diurnal rotation of the earth became more credible. The satellites that attend Jupiter in his revolution about the sun, represented, in Jupiter’s smaller system, a just image of the great solar system; and rendered it more easy to conceive how the moon might attend the earth, as a satellite, in her annual revolution. By discovering hills and cavities in the moon, and spots in the sun constantly varying, he shewed that there was not so great a difference between the celestial bodies and the earth as had been vainly imagined. He rendered no less service to science by treating, in a clear and geometrical manner, the doctrine of motion, which has justly been called the key of nature. The rational part of mechanics had been so much neglected, that hardly any improvement was made in it for almost 2000 years. But Galileo has given us fully the theory of equable motions, and of such as are uniformly accelerated or retarded, and of these two compounded together. He was the first who demonstrated that the spaces described by heavy bodies, from the beginning of their descent, are as the squares of the times; and that a body, projected in any direction not perpendicular to the horizon, describes a parabola. These were the beginnings of the doctrine of the motion of heavy bodies, which has been since carried to so great a height by Newton. In geometry, he invented the cycloid, or trochoid; though the properties of it were afterwards chiefly demonstrated by his pupil Torricelli. He invented the simple pendulum, and made use of it in his astronomical experiments he li ul also thoughts of applying it to clocks; but did not execute that design the glory of that invention was reserved for his son Vicen210, who made the experiment at Venice in 1649; and Huygens afterward carried this invention to perfection. Of Galileo’s invention also, was the machine, with which the Venetians render their Laguna fluid and navigable. He also discovered the gravity of the air, and endeavoured to compare it with that of water, besides opening up several other inquiries in natural philosophy. In short, he was rtot esteemed and followed by philosophers only, but was honoured by persons of the greatest distinction of all nations. Galileo had scholars too that were worthy of so great a master, by whom the gravitation of the atmosphere was fully established, and its varying pressure accurately and conveniently measured, by the column of quicksilver of equal weight sustained by it in the barometrical tube. The elasticity of the air, by which it perpetually endeavours to expand itself, and, while it admits of condensation, resists in proportion to its density, was a phenomenon of a new kind (the common fluids having no such property), and was of the utmost importance to philosophy. These principles opened a vast field of new and useful knowledge, and explained a great variety of phaenomena, which had been accounted for before that time in a very absurd manner. ‘ It seemed as if the air, the fluid in which men lived from the beginning, had been then but first discovered. Philosophers were every where busy inquiring into its various properties and their effects; and valuable discoveries rewarded their industry. Of the great number who distinguished themselves on this occasion, may be mentioned Torricelli and Viviani in Italy, Pascal in France, Otto Guerick in Germany,’ and Boyle in England.

Galileo wrote a number of treatises, many of which were published in his life-time. Most of them were also collected after his death, and published by Mendessi in 2 vols. 4to, under the title of “L'Opere di Galileo Galilei Lynceo,” in 1656. Some of these, with others of his pieces, were translated into English and published by Thomas Salisbury, in his Mathematical Collections, in 2 vols. folio. A volume also of his letters to several learned men, and solutions of several problems, were printed at Bologna in 4to. His last disciple, Vincenzo Viviani, who proved a very eminent mathematician, methodized a piece of his master’s, and published it under this title, “Quinto libro de gli Elementi d' Euclidi,” &c. at Florence in 1674, 4to. Viviani published some more of Galileo’s things, being extracts from his letters to a learned Frenchman, where he gives an account of the works which he intended to have published, and a passage from a letter of Galileo dated at Arcetri, Oct. 30, 1635, to John Camillo, a mathematician of Naples, concerning the angle of contact. Besides all these, he wrote many other pieces, which were unfortunately lost. Galileo had two daughters and a son by a Greek woman he lived with; the daughters became nuns; one son continued the family, which, Frisi says, is but lately extinct; one turned missionary, and was induced from religious scruples to burn many of his grandfather’s works and the third ran away.

, a learned antiquary of France, member of the academy of inscriptions, and professor of Arabic in the royal college at Paris, was born of poor parents at Hollo, a little town of Picardy, in 1646. After having laid the foundation of learning at Noyon, he went to Paris, where he learned Hebrew and the Oriental languages; and afterwards made a long voyage into the East, and acquired an uncommon knowledge of the manners and of the doctrines of the Mahometans. He returned to his own country, and was made Arabic professor in 1709; but did not live many years after, 'his death happening at Paris in 1715. He was the author of several works, the principal of which are, 1. “An account of the Death of sultan Osman, and of the Coronation of the sultan Mustapha.” 2. “A collection of Maxims and Bon Mots, drawn from the Oriental writers.” 3. “A Treatise upon the origin of Coffee.” 4. “Arabian Tales.” All these are in French. The last, usually called “The Arabian Nights Entertainments,” is a popular book all over Europe, and has been published in various editions in English for above a century. Galland was also the author of many curious dissertations upon some scarce medals, which have been highly commended. He had likewise prepared a translation of the Alcoran, with notes; and a system of the Mahometan theology, more exact than any that has yet appeared; but he did not live long enough to publish them.

, was proctor- general of the domain of Navarre, counsellor of state, and deeply versed in the knowledge of the royal rights in France, and in the history qf that country. His works are replete with curious and profound erudition. They are, 1. “Memoirs for the History of France and Navarre,” folio. 2. “Treatises on the Ensigns and Standards of France,” &c. 3. “Discourse addressed to the king on the origin and rise of the City of Rochelle,” 8vo. 4. “A Treatise against the Franc -aileu, a claim of exemption from Imposts and personal Services,” in 4to. He is supposed to have died about 1644, but at what age is uncertain.

, or Gallæus, a Dutch writer, who was born at Rotterdam, according to the inscription on his portrait, or according to other authorities, at Zuriczee, in 1627, and died at Campen in 1709, was a clergyman and an able philologist. His principal work is his treatise on the “Sybilline Oracles,” 2 vols. 4to, the first of which,containing the Oracles, was published at Amsterdam in 1689, and the second, which consists of dissertations, appeared soon after. In this he has brought together every thing relating to these celebrated fictions, but neither with success, nor judgment, according to Fabricius and his biographer Reimar, who speak with harshness of his abilities, and give us an extraordinary instance of his ignorance in classing Agathias and Jamblicus among Latin writers. They also seem to intimate that he frequently borrows without acknowledgment. Galle was more successful in a very correct edition of “Lactantius,” published at Leyden in 1660. He had also begun an edition of “Minutius Felix,” but did not live to complete it.

It was soon after his professional celebrity at the operahouse that he married lady Elizabeth Bertie, sister of the late earl of Abingdon. Admitted at first as a dancingmaster, by his vivacity, talents, knowledge of the Italian language, and manners, he so insinuated himself into the favour of this noble family, as to bring about this not very creditable alliance. Many ridiculous stories were in circulation at the time, of signor Gallini’s expectations of the honours which would accrue to him by his marriage into a noble family; which he imagined would confer on him the title of My lord. But he was soon convinced of his mistake, and content with an inferior title. When the marriage became a subject of conversation, Dr. Burney happened to hear in the gang-way of the opera pit the following conversation. One of two ladies going into the front boxes, says to the other, “It is reported that one of the dancers is married to a lady of quality;” when Gallini, who happened to be in the passage near the lady who spoke, says, “Lustrissima, son io.” “And who are yon?” demanded the lady. “Eudenza, mi chiamo signor Gallini esquoire.” This match, as is usual with such disproportioned alliances, was not the source of permanent felicity. They lived asunder many years. Lady Elizabeth died Aug. 17, 1804, aged 80.

It was after this period, in going to Italy to engage performers, that he obtained his title at Rome of the pope, who made him “Cavaliere del speron d'Oro,” knight of the golden spur, the only order which his holiness has to bestow. But lord Kenyon, when his title was introduced in court on a trial, refused to acknowledge it, and treated the assumption with indignation and contempt. Sir John, however, continued to retain it, and was abetted by the public.

Although he was extremely worldly, dextrous at a bargain, and cautious in his dealings with mankind, he became an unfortunate projector in his attempt at a rapid increase of his property. The rooms in Hanover-square, we believe, were very productive, as he let every floor and every room, not only to concerts, balls, and assemblies, but to exhibitions, lectures, and lodgers of all kinds, scarcely allowing himself a habitable apartment for his own residence. When the opera house was burned down in 1789, he advanced 30,000l. towards rebuilding it, and sent an architect to Italy to procure plans of all the great theatres of that country, out of which to choose the most eligible for the new construction; but it has been generally believed, that by some jumble of clashing interests, or chicane of law, the management was taken out of his hands, and he not only lost his power but his money. While the great theatre in the Hay market was rebuilding, sir John fitted up the opposite little theatre as a temporary opera house, but it was so small and inconvenient, that it could not contain an audience sufficient to cover his expences. The next year the Pantheon was transformed into an opera house before that in the Haymarket was finished; and the unfortunate knight of the golden spur, tired of the squabbles and accidents which happened previous to the opening of his new theatre, sold his patent, and afterwards wholly confined himself to the produce of his Hanoversquare rooms, and the exercise of his profession as a dancjng-master, to the end of his life.

Indeed, at the time of the French revolution, he could not resist the temptations which were thrown out in that country for turning the penny in the purchase of the estates of the guillotined and emigrant nobility and gentry under the title of national domains. And he bought an estate near Boulogne, which cost him 30,000l.; but of which, by the artifice of French lawyers, and connivance of the usurpers, he was never able to obtain secure possession, and at length abandoned all hopes of the estate or his money. This loss had much less effect upon his avaricious character than could be expected, considering that he was so rigid an economist, that his private life would furnish materials for a new drama on the subject of frugality. It has, however, been justly said of him, that he was generally considered as the most able teacher of his art that ever appeared in this country; and is supposed, by his incessant labours in this respect, notwithstanding his great losses, to have left money and effects to the Amount of lOO,Ooo/. to portion his family, which consisted of' a son and two daughters. He was a very shrewd, intelligent man, who perfectly knew the world; and, if he was not generous, he was, however, honourable in his dealings; and if few had cause to be grateful for his bounty, no one had a right to complain of his injustice.

In the height of his professional practice and favour he published a book, in which he gave a history of dancing, from its origin, and the manner in which it is practised in various parts of the world. It appeared in 1762, under the title of “A Treatise on the art of Dancing, by Giovanni Andrea Gallini, director of the dancers at the royal theatre in the Haymarket,” 8vo. Until the more elegant “Lettres sur la Dance” of the celebrated ballet-master Noverre, published at Stutgard in 1760, had penetrated into this country, Gallini’s book was much read and talked of as a literary performance; but unluckily, in a work of M. Cahusac, published at the Hague, in three small volumes, 1754, 12mo, we find all the historical part of Gallini’s treatise, with the same stories of the wonderful powers of the ancient mimics Bathyllus and Pylades, at Rome, their quarrel, and the feuds it occasioned; and his biographer seems to think that he never had literature sufficient to write an original work in his own language, or even to translate such a one as that of Noverre or Cahusac into any language. Gallini, by temperance and exercise, enjoyed a good state of health, and escaped decrepitude to the last: for it was said in the printed accounts that “sir John Gallini, on Saturday, 5th of January, 1805, rung his bell at eight o‘clock, and, upon his servant entering his chamber, ordered his breakfast to be prepared immediately, his chaise to be at the door at nine o’clock, and his chariot in waiting at three.” A few minutes after giving these directions, he complained of not being well, and said, “I will rest till nine o'clock.” In half an hour he rang his bell again, and ordered medical assistance, as he had a violent pain in his stomach. Dr. Hayes and Dr. Wood immediately attended; butatnineo'clock he expired without a groan, aged about? I.

, a learned Frenchman, was born of a good family, at Paris, in 1632. He bad studied divinity, ecclesiastical and profane history, philosophy, mathematics, the Oriental, together with the Italian, Spanish, English, and German languages; and was deemed an universal scholar. He is now memorable chiefly for having been the first who published the “Journal des Sgavans,” in conjunction with M. de Sallo, who had formed the design of this work. The first journal was published on Jan. 5, 1665; but these gentlemen censured new books with so much severity, that the whole tribe of authors rose up against their work, and effectually cried it down. De Sallo abandoned it entirely, after having published a third journal, in March following. Gallois was determined to continue' it, yet did not venture to send out a fourth journal till Jan. 1666, and then not without an humble advertisement in the beginning of it, in which it is declared, that the author “will not presume to criticize, but only simply to give an account of books.” This, and the protection shewn by the minister Colbert, who was much pleased with the work, gradually reconciled the public to the Journal. Thus began literary journals, which have been continued from that time to this under various titles, and by various authors; among whom are the names of Bayle and Le Clerc. Gallois continued his journal to 1674, when more important occupations obliged him to drop it, or rather transfer it to another person. Colbert had taken him into his house the year before, with a view of being taught Latin by him; and the minister of state, it is said, took most of his lessons in his coach, as he journeyed from Versailles to Paris, Voltaire observes on this occasion, that “the two men, who have been the greatest patrons of learning, Louis XIV. and Colbert, neither of them understood Latin.” ' Gallois had been made member of the academy of sciences in 1668, and of the French academy in 1675. He lost his patron by death in 1683; and then, being at liberty, was first made librarian to the king, and afterwards Greek professor in the royal college. He died of the dropsy in 1707; and in 1710 a catalogue of his books was printed at Paris, consisting of upwards of 12,000 volumes. It is remarkable of this learned man, that though he had served many friends by his interest with Colbert, yet he had neglected to make any provision for himself: whence it happened, that, at the death of that minister, he was but in poor circumstances, although an abbé.

, a native of Rome, where he died in 1605, excelled in theology, and was priest of the congregation of the oratory. His works were numerous, but he is chiefly known by his “Trattato de gli instrumenti di Martirio, &c.” “A Treatise on the different kinds of Cruelties inflicted by the pagans on the Martyrs of the primitive Church, illustrated with engravings of the instruments of torture made use of by them.” This work, first published in Italian in 1591, was compiled from unquestionable authorities. In 1594 the author translated it into Latin, and published it at Rome, under the title “De Sanctorum Martyrum Cruciatibus, &c.” illustrated with wood cuts. It has since gone through many editions on the continent. In 1591 he published his “History of the Virgins,” also in Italian “The Lives of certain Martyrs,” 1697, 4to “The Life of St. Philip Neri” and “De Monachatu Sancti Gregorii,” the account of St. Gregory when a monk, in 1604.

, an Italian Jesuit, was born at Macerata in 1593, and in his thirteenth year entered the Jesuits’ college, where he was educated, and where he afterwards taught rhetoric for twenty-four years. He died at Rome, Feb. 28, 1674. He is the author of some Latin orations, but principally of a history of the wars of the Netherlands, “Commentarii de Bello Belgico,” including the period from 1593 to 1609. This history, which is written in Latin, was published at Rome, 1671, 2 vols. fol. and in 1677 in 2 vols. 4to. It was afterwards translated into Italian by James Cellesi. His style is pure, but less flowing than his predecessor on the same subject, Strada.

, a learned Italian astronomer, who lived in the sixteenth century, and was a member of the academy of Venice, is said to have invented an instrument for observing the celestial phenomena. He published several works, among which are, 1. “Delia fabrica et uso di diversi stromenti di Astronomia et Cosmografia,” Venice, 1597. 2. “Specimen Uranicum,” Venice, 1595. 3. “Ccelestium corporum et rerum ab ipsis pendentium Explicatio,” Venice, 1605. This work has been improperly ascribed to Paulus Galvicius in the catalogue of Thuanus’s library. 4. “Theatrum mundi et temporis,” Venice, 1589. 5. “De Themate erigendo, parte fortune, divisione Zodiaci, dignitatibus Planetarum et temporibus ad medicandum accommodatis.” This is printed with “Hasfurtus de cognosceudis et medeudis morbis ex corporum coelestium positione, cui argumenta et explicationem inscripsit,” Venice, 1584.

, an Italian Jesuit, was born at Sabina, in Italy, in 1574, and was for some years a celebrated professor of rhetoric at Roma. He was then made rector of the Greek college in that city, where he died July 28, 1649. He published a small volume of orations on various literary arguments, an oration recited by him at the funeral of cardinal Bellarmine, also “Virgilianx VinUicationes,” with three commentaries on tragedy, comedy, and elegy, Rome, 1621, 4to. He was a strenuous defender of Virgil, in whose behalf, against Homer, he contended with madam Dacier. His most considerable publication was a commentary on Aristotle’s Morals, published at Paris, 2 vols. fol. 1632 1645.

, an ancient Roman poet, and a person of distinction, was born at Frejus, in Provence, or as some think Friuli, in Italy. He was the particular favourite of Augustus Caesar, who made him governor of Egypt, after the death of Antony and Cleopatra; but he was guilty of such mal-administration in his government, that he was condemned to banishment, and deprived of his estate. This disgrace so afflicted him that he put an end to his life, when he was aged about forty-three, in the year 26. Virgil has complimented him in many places; and the whole tenth eclogue is on the subject of his love to Lycoris, the poetical name of Callus’s mistress, whose cruel disdain is there lamented. Gallus had written four books of elegies on his amour, which Propertius commends; but Quintilian thinks him not so tender as Tibullus or Propertius. As to those six elegies which have been published under his name, the critics are agreed that they are spurious, and that they were written by Maximus Etruscus, a contemporary with Boethius. Aldus Manutius met with some fragments at Venice ascribed to Gallus; which, though written in a better taste than the former, Joseph Scaliger has proved to be also spurious. Some think he is the author of the little poem called “Cms,” found among the works attributed to Virgil. His fragments have been printed with the editions of Catullus, printed in 1659, 1755, &c.

, an English divine, born at Beckenham, in Kent, in August 1696, was admitted pensioner of Bene't college, under the tuition of Mr. Fawcett, May 8, 1714, and became scholar of the house in July following. He took the degree of M. A. in 1721, and was upon tbfc king’s list for that of D. D. (to which he was admitted April 25, 1728) when his majesty honoured the university of Cambridge with his presence. In 1721 he was chosen lecturer of St. Paul’s Covent-garden, and instituted the same year to the rectory of Wavenden, or Wanclen, in Buckinghamshire. The lord chancellor King appointed him his domestic chaplain in 1725, preferred him to a prebend in the church of Gloucester in 1728, and to another in that of Norwich ahout three years after. He presented him likewise to the rectory of Ashney, alias Ashton, in Northamptonshire, in 1730; and to that of St. Giles’s in the fields, in 1732; his majesty made him also one of his chaplains in ordinary in October 1735. Dr. Gaily died August 7, 1769. He was the author of, 1. “Two sermons on the Misery of Man, preached at St. Paul’s Covent-garden, 1723,” 8vo. 2. “The Moral Characters of Theophrastus, translated from the Greek, with notes, and a Critical Essay on Characteristic Writing,” 1725, 8vo. 3. “The Reasonableness of Church and College Fines asserted, and the Rights which Churches and Colleges have in their Estates defended,” 1731, 8vo. This was an answer to a pamphlet called “An Enquiry into the Customary Estates and Tenants of those who hold Lands of Church and other Foundations by the tenure of three Lives and twenty-one years. By Everard Fleet wood, esq.” 8vo. 4. “Sermon before the House of Commons, upon the Accession, June 11, 1739,” 4to. 5. “Some Considerations upon Clandestine Marriages,” 1750, 8vo. This was much enlarged in a second edition the year following, and had the honour afterwards to be noticed in the house of commons in the debates on the marriage act. 6. “A Dissertation against pronouncing the Greek language according to Accents,” 1754, 1755, 8vo. 7. “A Second Dissertation,” on the same subject, 8vo.

, from whose name the appellation of Galvanism was given to a supposed new principle in nature, also called animal electricity, was born Sept. 9, 1737, at Bologna, of a family, several of which had distinguished themselves in the professions of law and divinity. In his early youth he shewed a great propensity to religious austerities; but being dissuaded from entering into an order of monks, whose convent he frequented, he directed his attention to the study of medicine. He pursued this study under able masters, and gained their esteem, especially that of professor Galcazzi, who received him into his house, and gave him his daughter in marriage. To this union his success in life is in a great measure to be ascribed. In 1762, after having sustained an inaugural thesis, “De Ossibus,” he was appointed public lecturer in the university of Bologna, and reader in anatomy to the institute in that city, chiefly by the interest of his wife’s relations. By the excellence of his method of teaching he obtained crowded audiences, and by his researches and experiments in physiology and comparative anatomy he established a high reputation throughout the schools of Italy. A singular accident is said to have given birth to the discovery which has immortalized his name. His wife, to whom he was most tenderly attached, being in a declining state of health, used a soup made from frogs as a restorative: and some of these animals, skinned for the purpose, happening to lie on a table in Galvani’s laboratory, on which was placed an electrical machine, one of the assistants in his experiments, by accident, brought the point of a scalpel near the crural nerves of a frog lying not far from the conductor. Instantly the muscles of the limb were agitated with strong convulsions. The experiment was repeated, the fact ascertained, and a long series of new experiments, ingeniously varied, were put in execution, by which he investigated the law of nature of which accident had thus given him a glimpse. His first publication on the subject was printed for the institute at Bologna in 1791, and entitled “Aloysii Galvani de viribus Electricitatis in motu Musculari Commentarius.” This work immediately excited the attention of philosophers both in Italy and other countries, and the experiments were repeated and extended. In the hands of the celebrated Volta the agent was increased in power to a great extent; and, directed by the genius of sir Humphrey Davy, it has already led to most important discoveries in regard to the composition of many substances, heretofore deemed elementary, and bids fair to change the whole face of chemical science.

In conjunction with his physiological inquiries, the duties of his professorship, and his employment as a surgeon and accoucheur, in which practice he was very eminent, gave full occupation to the industry of Galvani. Besides a number of curious observations on the urinary organs, and on the organ of hearing in birds, which were published in the Memoirs of the Institute of Bologna, he drew up various memoirs on professional topics, which have remained inedited. He regularly held learned conversations with a few literary friends, in which new works were read and commented upon. He was a man of most amiable character in private life, and possessed of great sensibility, insomuch that the death of his wife, in 1790, threw him into a profound melancholy* His early impressions on the subject of religion remained unimpaired, and he was always punctual in practising its minutest rites. During the troubles in Italy he had espoused the side of the old established government, and was stript of all his offices, because he refused to take the oaths of allegiance to the new Cisalpine republic; and most of his relations perished by sudden or violent deaths, many of them in defence of their country. In a state of melancholy and poverty he retired to the house of his brother James, a man of very respectable character, and fell into an extreme debility. The republican governors, probably ashamed of their conduct towards such a man, passed a decree for his restoration to his professional chair and its emoluments: but it was now too late. He expired Dec. 5, 1798.

, an illustrious Portuguese, is immortalized by his discovery of the passage to the East Indies by the Cape of Good Hope. The maritime town of Sines in Portugal was the place of his birth, his family was good, but not noble, till made so by the h.)no;irs he acquired. In 1497, Emanuel king of Portugal, earnestly desirous of making discoveries in those parts of the globe, appointed Gama to command an expedition to endeavour to sail round the Cape, then called the Cape of Tempests. Vasco highly pleased with this appointment, which suited his undaunted and adventurous spirit, sailed from the Tagus, July 8, having two ships besides his own, and a store ship. At Lisbon he was generally considered as going to certain destruction, and the whole equipment as devoted; but though, on his approach to the Cape, he actually encountered dreadful storms, his perseverance was not to be conquered. Like Columbus, he had to contend with the mutinous despondence of his own people, as well as with the elements, but was superior to all. Having doubled the Cape on the 20th of November, he sailed along the eastern coast of Africa, but met with inveterate hostility and treachery from the Moorish settlers, except the king of Melinda. He proceeded as far as Calicut, doubled the Cape again in April 1499, and returned to Lisbon in the space of two years and alifkost two months. The king and nation were overjoyed at this success, and he was created count of Vidiguere, and admiral of the Indian, Persian, and Arabian seas. Gama now rested a few years, while Cabral was sent out with thirteen ships; and John de Nova, with a reinforcement of three more, visited Calicut; but it was found that greater force was wanted, and in 1502, he set sail again, having twenty ships under his command. He returned in September 1503, with thirteen ships laden with riches. When Emanucl, kingof Portugal died, the credit of Gama continued unimpaired, and in 1524, he was by his successor, John III. appointed viceroy of India. He returned thither a third time, and established his seat of government at Cochin, but died on the 24th of December 1525, almost as soon as he was settled. He was honoured with the title of don fof himself and his posterity, and created a grandee of Portugal. Gama was formed by nature to conduct the most arduous enterprises. His intrepidity, which was invincible, was not more remarkable than his sagacity and prudence: and the feelings of his heart appear to wonderful advantage, when we find him, amidst all the extravagance of public applause, after his first return from India, drooping for the loss of his brother and companion of his voyage, Paulus de Gama, and unable to enjoy his fame. He had even sent his flag-ship home before him, under the command of Coello, his next officer, that he might attend and sooth the death-bed of tbis beloved brother. Such a victory of tenderness over ardent and successful ambition, gives a better picture of his heart than the most elaborate eulogium. The poem of Camoens, entitled “The Lusied,” on Gama’s first expedition, is now well known in this country by Mickle’s able translation.

, a writer of some eminence, and a member of the French academy of sciences, was born at Meulan in 1672, and, entering the church, obtained the office of canon of the Holy Cross de la Bretonniere, and died at Paris in 1756. He was much esteemed for his literary talents, which appeared in the following works: 1. “Physical Astronomy,” 1740, 4to. 2. “Literary and Philosophical Dissertations,” 1755, 8vo. 3. 4 “System of the Christian Philosopher,” 1721, 8vo. 4. “System of the Heart,” published in 1708, under the feigned name of Clerigny. 5. “The Elegancies of Language reduced to their Principles,” a book called by one writer, the “Dictionary of fine Thoughts,” and by others pronounced to be a work which every man who writes should read.

, was an Italian poet of the sixteenth century, protected and beloved by cardinal Alexander Farnese r whose writings were much esteemed in his day, but now are thought flat and insipid. He wrote, 1. “A Latin treatise on Poetry, in which he dissuades Christian poets from using pagan mythology.” This was the amende honorublt for many licentious and profane poems written in his youth. 2. “A Latin poem on Columbus.” Also eclogues, entitled, “Venatoria,” and other productions. Muretus treats this author with the greatest contempt, bnt he is highly praised by Giraldi and Manutius. He died in 1586, at the age of 90.

, an Italian poetess, born in 1485, was the daughter of the count John Francis Gambara, and was married in 1509 to Giberto X. lord of Correggio, whom she survived many years. Her natural disposition, the course of her education, and, above all perhaps, the instructions and advice of Peter Bembus, led her in her youth to devote a part of her leisure to the cultivation of her poetical talents, which through all the vicissitudes of her future life, was her occasional amusement. In 1528 she went to reside at Bologna, with a brother who was governor of that city, where she established a kind of academy that vras frequented by many of the literati, who then resided at the Roman court. On her return to Correggio, she had the honour of receiving as her guest the emperor Charles V. She died in 1550. Her writings which had been dispersed in various collections of the time, were corrected and published by Zamboni in 1759, Brescia, 8vo, with a life of the authoress. They display a peculiar originality and vivacity, both in sentiment and language, which raise them far above those insipid effusions, which under the name of sonnets at that time inundated Italy.

, a pious bishop among the Moravian brethren, was born near Haverford Wes in SouthWales, and became a member of Christ- church, Oxford, where he took the degree of M. A. May 30, 1734; and was afterwards vicar of Stanton Harcourt, in Oxfordshire, to which he was presented by Dr. Seeker, when bishop of Oxford. At this place, in 1740, he wrote “The Martyrdom of Ignatius, a Tragedy,” published after his death by the rev. Benjamin La Trobe with the Life of Ignatius, drawn from authentic accounts, and from the epistles written by him from Smyrna and Troas in his way to Rome, 1773, 8vo. A sermon, which he preached before the university of Oxford, was published under the title of “Christianity, Tidings of Joy,” 1741, 8vo. In 1742 he published at Oxford, from the university-press, a neat edition of the Greek Testament, but without his name, “Textu per omnia Milliano, cum divisione pericoparum & interpunctura A. Bengelii,” 12mo. Joining afterwards the Church of the Brethren, established by an act of parliament of 1749, and known by the name of “Unitas Fratrum,” or, the United Brethren; he was, for many years, the regular minister of the congregation settled at London, and resided in Neville’s-court, Fetter-lane, where he preached at the chapel of the society. His connexion with these sectaries commenced in 1748, when Peter Boehler visited Oxford, and held frequent meetings with John and Charles Wesley, for the edification of awakened people, both learned and unlearned. His discourses were in Latin, and were interpreted by Mr. Gambold. He was consecrated a bishop at an English provincial synod held at Lindsey house in Nov. 1754, and was greatly esteemed for his piety and learning by several English bishops, who had been his contemporaries in the university of Oxford. In 1765 a congregation was settled by bishop Gatnbold, at Cootbill, in Ireland. Soon after he had joined the brethren, he published a treatise, written while he was at Stariton Haiv.ourt, and which proves his steady attachment to the church of England, entirely consistent with his connexion with, and ministry in, the church of the brethren. The title of it is, “A short summary of Christian Doctrine, in the w.iy ol question and answer; the answers being all made in the sound and venerable words of the Common-? prayer-book of the church of England. To which are added, some extracts out of the Homilies. Collected for the service of a few persons, members of the established church i but imagined not to be unuseful to others.” We know not the exact date of this treatise; but a second edition of it was printed in 1767, 12mo. Mr. Gam-bold also published in 1751, 8vo, “Maxims and Theological Ideas and Sentences, collected out of several dissertations and discourses of count Zinzendorf, from 1738 till 1747*” His “Hymns for the use of the Brethren” were printed in 174-8, 1749, and 1752; Some Hymns, and a small hymnbook for the children belonging to the brethren’s congregations, were printed entirely by Mr. Gambold’s own hand in Lindsey house at Chelsea. A letter from Mr. Gambold to Mr. Spangenberg, June 4, 1750, containing a concise and well-written character of the count of Zinzendorf, was inserted in Mr. James Mutton’s “Essay towards giving some just ideas of the personal character of count Zinzendorf, the present advocate and ordinary of the brethren’s churches,” 1755, 8vo. In 1752 he was editor of “Sixteen Discourses on the Second Article of the Creed, preached at Berlin by the ordinary of the Brethren,” 12mo. In June 1753 appeared “The ordinary oi' the Brethren’s churches his short and peremptory remarks on the way and manner wherein he has been hitherto treated in controversies, &c. Translated from the High Dutch, with a preface, by John Gambold, minister of the chapel in Fetterlane.” In the same year he published, “Twenty-one discourses, or dissertations, upon the Augsburg Confession, which is also the Brethren’s Confession of Faith; delivered by the ordinary of the Brethren’s churches before the seminary. To which is prefixed a synodical writing relating to the subject. Translated from fche High Dutch, by F. Okeley, A. B.” In 1754 he was editor of “A clest Plea for the Church of the Brethren,” &c. 8vo with a preface hy himself. In the same year, in conjunction with Mr. Hutton, secretary to the brethren, he also drew up 4< The representation of the committee of the English congregation in union with the Moravian church,“addressed to the archbishop of York; and also” The plain case of the representatives of the people known by the name f the Unitas Fratrum, from the year 1727 till these times, with regard to their conduct in this country under misrepresentation.“And in 1755 he assisted in the publication of” A letter from a minister of the Moravian branch of the Unitas Fratrum, together with some additional notes by the English editor, to the author of the Moravians compared and detected;“and also of” An exposition, or true state of the matters objected in England to the people known by the name of Unitas Fratrutn; by the ordinary of the brethren; the notes and additions by the editor.“In 1756 he preached at Fetter-lane chapel, and printed afterwards, a sermon upon a public fast and humiliation, setting forth” the reasonableness and extent of religious reverence.“He was not only a good scholar, but a man of great parts, and of singular mechanical ingenuity. It was. late in both their lives before the learned Bowyer was acquainted with his merits; but he no sooner knew them, than he was happy in his acquaintance, and very frequently applied to him as an occasional assistant in correcting the press; in which capacity Mr. Gambold superintended (among many other valuable publications) the beautiful and very accurate edition of lord chancellor Bacon’s works in 1765; and in 1767 he was professedly the editor, and took an active part in the translation from the High Dutch, of” The History of Greenland;“containing a” description of the country and its inhabitants; and particularly a relation of the mission carried on for above these thirty years by the Unitas Fratrum at New Herrnhut and Lichtenfels in that country, by David Crantz; illustrated with maps and other copper-plates: printed for the brethren’s society for the furtherance of the Gospel among the Heathen," 2 vols. 8vo. In the autumn of 1768 he retired to his native country, where he died, at Haverford West, universally respected, Sept. 13, 1771.

, an able artist, although little known, was born in 1619, and instructed by Vandyck; and his works are a sufficient proof of the signal improvement he received from the precepts and example of that great master. The cause of his being so totally unknown was, his being brought into Ireland by the old duke of Ormond, and retained in his service. And as Ireland was at that time in a very unsettled condition, the merit and the memory of this master would have been entirely unnoticed, if some of his performances, which still subsist, had not preserved him from oblivion. There are at this time in Ireland many portraits, painted by him, of noblemen and persons of fortune, which are very little inferior to Vandyck, either for expression, colouring, or dignity; and several of his’copies after Vandyck, which were in the Ormond collection at Kilkenny, were sold for original paintings of Vandyck. Mr. Gandy died in 1689.

, who was elevated to the popedom by the name of Clement XIV. was the son of a physician, and born in 1705. He was educated at Rimini, near his birth-place, and at the age of eighteen entered into the Franciscan order at Urbino. After finishing his studies at various seminaries, he was appointed in 1740 to be professor of divinity in the college of St Bonaventure, at Rome. In this situation he gained the good opinion of pope Benedict XIV. who gave him the place of counsellor of the holy office; and in 1759 Clement XIII. made him a cardinal. It is said that in all his intercourse with his brethren and at their public assemblies, he endeavoured to lower their tone, and to persuade them that it was almost too late to oppose the will of the sovereigns of Europe by a display of ecclesiastical power. This could not be very acceptable to the cardinals, who persisted in their opinion of the power of the reigning pontiff, and encouraged him in his disputes with France and other kingdoms. On the death of Clement XIII. Ganganelli was elected in his room In May 1769, chiefly by the influence of the courts of France and Spain, who now urged him to suppress the order of Jesuits, and although he did not enter on that measure without much deliberation, it was at last carried, and forms the principal event of his pontificate. He signed the brief for this purpose on July 21, 1773, and it is said, with considerable reluctance. The consequence to papal power was no doubt great, but it appeared after all to be but one link in the great chain of causes which must relieve the world entirely from its influence. Ganganelli did not long survive this event, dying Sept. 22, 1773. After his death, a life of him was published by Caraccioli, replete with anecdotes illustrative of his amiable character and liberal sentiments; but we know not how to give credit to a writer who soon afterwards published some volumes of “Letters” by Ganganelli, which, it is now universally acknowledged, were forgeries.

, a French engraver and letter-founder, was a native of Paris, and began to distinguish himself about 1510; when he founded his printing types, clear from all remains of the gothic, or, as it is usually called, the black letter. He brought them to so great a degree of perfection, that he can neither be denied the glory of having surpassed whatever had been done in this way before, nor that of not being excelled by any of his successors in this useful mechanic art. His types were prodigiously multiplied, as well by the great number of matrices which he engraved of every size, as by the letters which were founded from these, so that all parts of Europe were supplied with them; and as often as they were used by foreigners, they took care, by way of recommending their works, to distinguish them by his name, both in Italy, Germany, England, and even in Holland; particucularly the small Roman, by way of excellence, was known among the printers in all these countries, by the name of Garamond’s small Roman. He likewise, by the special command of Francis I. founded three species of Greek tj-pes for the use of Robert Stephens, who printed with them all his beautiful editions, both of the New Testament, and several Greek authors. Garamond died in 1561; and all his fine types came into the hands of Fournier the elder, an eminent letter- founder at Paris.

, a French Jesuit, and the author of the enmity between the Jesuits and the Jansenists, in the church of Rome, was born at Angouleme in 1585, and having laid a good foundation of grammar-learning, entered of the Jesuits’ college in 1600. It was the special care of those fathers, to admit none into their society but youths of genius; and Garasse was not wanting in good natural parts, nor did he neglect to improve them by reading and study; of which he gave an admirable proof in his book of elegies on the death of Henry IV. and in a poem in heroic verse, addressed to Louis XIII. upon his inauguration, in the name of the college at Poictiers. The titles of these two pieces are, 1. “Elegiarum de funesta morte Henrici magni liber singularis,” Pictavii, 1611, 4to. 2. “Sacra Rhemensia Carolina Heroica nomine Collegii Pictavensis oblata Ludov. XIII. Regi Christianissimo in sua inauguratione,” ibid. The two following pieces are also ascribed to him: 1. “De la.Resemblance de la lumiere du Soleil & de la Justice,” Bourdeaux, 1612. 2. “Les champs Elysiens pour la Reception du Roy Louis XIII. lors qu‘il entroit a Bourdeaux a l’occasion de son Marriage.”

As he had a great deal of spirit and imagination, and a strong voice, he became a popular preacher in the chief cities of France. He acquitted himself in the pulpit with uncommon vivacity, and had a peculiar turn for the wit then in vogue, which, being enforced by a suitable delivery, made deep impressions upon his audience. But he was not content with the honour he thus did to his order. His ambition led him to aim at being more extensively serviceable by his writings. With that spirit, while yet in his noviciate, he published in 1614 a defence of the Jesuits against three of their adversaries at once. This piece he entitled “The Horoscope of Anti-Coton, together with the life, death, burial, and apotheosis of his two cousingermans Marteliere and Hardeviliere.” The treatise appeared under a feigned name, and was drawn up in the ironical style, but too much vitiated by buffoonery; and, in the same name and style, he printed in 1615, “The Calvinistic Elixir, or Reformed Philosopher’s Stone, first dug up by Calvin at Geneva, and afterwards polished by Isaac Casaubon at London, with the testamentary codex of Anti-Coton, lately found upon Charenton-bridge.” The first of these is entitled “Andrew Schioppii Casparis fratris horoscopus,” &c. Antwerp, 1614, 4to. The second “Andres Schioppii Casparis fratris Elixir Calvinisticum,” &c. ibid. 1651, 8vo. In the first he attacked the three following pieces; 1. “L'Anticoton, on refutation de la Lettre declaratoire du Pere Colon,” 1610, 8vo. 2. “Playdoye du Pierre de la Martiliere Avocat en Parlement pour le Recteur de l'University de Paris contre lesJe-r suits,” Paris, 1612, 8vo. 3. “Petri Hardovilierii Actiopro Academia Parisiensi adversus Presbyteros & Scholasticos Collegii Claromontanii habita in Senatu Parisiensi. ann. 1611,” Paris, 1612, 8vo. Niceron observes, that our author’s satirical style was very like that of the famous Schioppius, which was apparently the reason of his chusing that mask, which suited him exactly well.

The two subsequent years he employed his pen in satire and panegyric, both grossly exaggerated. These panegyrics are, 1. “Oraisou L'Andrese de Nesmond premier President du Parlement de Bourdeaux.” This oration was made in 1616, when that president died, and was printed with his remonstrances at Lyons, 1656, 4to. 2. “Colossus Henrico Magno in ponte novo positus, Carmen,” Paris, 1617, 4to. That famous equestrian statue was erected Aug. 25, 1614. The satire is, “Le banquet des Playdoiers de Mr. Servin, par Charles de PEspinoell,” 1617, 8vo a virulent attack on the magistrate Servin.

In 1618, he took the four vows, and became a father or his order. This is the highest title conferred on that or any other of the monastic institutions; and our author, being thereby admitted to read and study the sublimest mysteries of his religion, in a few years appeared upon the stage of the public in the character of a zealous champion for the faith, against the infidels and prophaners of those mysteries. But in the mean time his pen was far from lying idle. In 1620 he printed a piece entitled “Rabelais reformed by the ministers, particularly Peter du Moulin, minister of Charenton, in answer to the buffooneries inserted in his book” (of the invocation of pastors); and two years afterwards he ventured to attack the ghost of Stephen Pasquier, in another piece, entitled “Recherches des Recherches & autres ceuvres d'Etienne Pasquier.” There cannot be given a better specimen of the peculiar strain of his satirical wit, than is furnished by the epistle dedicatory to this book. It is addressed to the late Stephen Pasquier, wherever he may be “for,” says he, “having never been able to find out your religion, I know not the route or way you took at your departure out of this life; and therefore I am forced to write to you at a venture, and to address this packet wherever you may be.”

Garassethe next year, 1628, published “La Doctrine curieuse des beaux esprits de ce temps, &c. The curious doctrine of the wits, or pretenders to wit, of this age, containing several maxims pernicious to the state of religion and good manners, refuted and overthrown.” He took occasion in several places of this work, to throw out rough and abusive raillery upon Pasquier; and went on in the same strain, in a third production, printed in 1625, 4to. The sons of Pasquier were at last provoked beyond all patience, to see the manes of their father so irreligiously disturbed. Resolving to revenge his memory, and to pay our author in his own coin, they published a treatise, in which Garasse was thus accosted: having recounted the words of his dedication just mentioned; “This,” say they, in the singular number, “has made me use the same freedom with you, and forced me to address this packet to you, in what place soever you may be. For, not knowing whether you may be at the service-tree, which you call a tavern of honour, and where you confess you have had many a good meal free-cost; or at the town of Clomar, in the suburbs of St. Germain, where your name is written in such fair characters on all the mantle-trees of the chimnies; or in some other place of the same kind; -I am constrained to send you this book at a venture, and to direct it to you in what place soever you be.” The truth was, that in general the free course of Garasse' s life ran parallel to that of his wit, which he had indulged to such a height in his “Doctrine Curieuse,” that notwithstanding the specious title against atheists and atheistical libertines prefixed by the author, a very different one was bestowed upon it by others, particularly Naude, who distinguished it by the title of “Atheism reduced to an art.” Prior Ogier, in particular, having observed that our author was better qualified for a satirical poet or a merry Andrew, than for a catholic doetor, exclaimed against the whole order, for making choice of such a champion. This was made public the same year; and in the following our author issued a defence, entitled “Apologie de F. Garasse,” &c. To this the prior immediately prepared for a reply; but here the fraternity stepped in, and procured such mediators as found means to end the dispute in an amicable way. The Jesuit prevented his antagonist by a letter full of civilities, which was answered in the same way by the prior, 1 and care was taken to let the public see those letters, as soon as they were written, in 1624. By the same method our author was also reconciled to Balzac, with whose character he had made free, having provided a seat, for him among the atheists of the times.

The “Doctrine Curieuse,” carried the strongest marks of a most busy and active temper; vivacity was the characteristic of the author, and he had no sooner escaped the difficulties which that treatise brought upon him, but he plunged into another, of a much more threatening aspect. This was created by a book he published in 1625, under the title of “La Somme Theologique des verites capitales de la religion Chretienne.” It was this book which first excited the war between the Jansenists and the Jesuits, and in the following manner. The abbot of St. Cyran, observing in Garasse’s book a prodigious number of falsifications of Scripture and the fathers, besides many heretical and impious opinions, thought the honour of the church required a refutation of them. Accordingly, he wrote an answer at large, in four parts. But while the first part was in the press, the noise it every where made occasioned Garasse’s book to be more carefully examined. March 2, 1626, the rector of the Sorbonne declared before that society that he had received several complaints of it; and, proposing to have it examined, a committee was appointed for that purpose, who should give their opinion of it on the 2d of May following. This matter alarming Carasse, he presently after this appointment published at Paris, “L'abus decouverte,” &c. In this piece he drew up a list of 111 propositions the most easy to maintain that he could find, and having composed a censure of them, which he pretended was that of the abbot St. Cyran, he refuted that answer with ease. This coming to the hands of St. Cyran, March 16, he wrote some notes upon it the same day, which were printed with the title of “A refutation of the pretended abuse, and discovery of the true ignorance and vanity of father Francis Garasse;” and the committee of the Sorbonne made their report on the day appointed. But some persons who approved the book desired more time, and that the propositions censured might be communicated to them. This was granted; and on the 1st of July, attempting partly to defend, and partly to explain it, they found themselves under a necessity of confessing that there were some passages in it which could not be excused; and that F. Garasse had promised to correct them, without performing his promise. On this, the doctors agreeing that the book ought to be censured, the censure was accordingly passed Sept. 1, and immediately published, with the title of “Censura S. Facultatis Theofogicse, &c. The Censure of the sacred Faculty of the Clergy at Paris, upon a book entitled Theological Summary of F. Francis Garasse.” The sentence was to this effect, that the summary contained several heretical, erroneous, scandalous, and rash propositions; several falsifications of passages of Scripture, and of the holy fathers, falsely cited, and wrested from their true sense; and an infinite number of expressions unfit to be written or read by Christians and divines.

This sentence was perfectly agreeable to the abbot of St. Cyran’s critique, which, after many hindrances raised by the Jesuits, came out the same year, entitled, “A Collection of the faults and capital falsities contained in the Theological Summary of F. Francis Garasse .” In answer to which, our author wrote, “Avis touchant la refutation, &c. Advice concerning the refutation of the Theological Summary of F. Garasse.” This came out also before the end of the year, and concluded the dispute between the two combatants in particular. But the two orders of Jesuits and Jansenists in general, of whom these were respectively the champions, grew from the consequences of it, into such an implacable hatred and animosity against each other, as seemed not be extinguishable by ordinary means. With respect to Garasse, the Jesuits used some kind of prudence. They did not obstinately persist in supporting him, but banished him to one of their houses at a great distance from Paris, where he was heard of no more. This punishment, to a man of his ambitious and busy temper, was worse than death. Accordingly, as if weary of such a life, when the plague raged violently in Poictiers, in 1631, he asked earnestly of his superiors to attend those that were seized with it; leave was granted, and in that charitable office, catching the contagion, he died among the infected persons in the hospital, on the 14th of June that year. He is styled by bp. Warburton, in his Commentary on the “Essay on Man,” an eminent casuist.

, or Garcias Lasso de La Vega, a celebrated Spanish poet, was born of a noble family at Toledo, in 1500 or 1503. His father was a counsellor of state to Ferdinand and Isabella, and employed by them on several important negociations, particularly in an embassy to pope Alexander VI. Garcilasso was educated near the emperor Charles V. who had a particular regard for him, and took him with him in his military expeditions, where he became as renowned for his courage as for his poetry. He accompanied that emperor into Germany, Africa, and Provence; and it was in this last expedition, in 1536, that he commanded a “battalion, when he received a wound, of which he died at Nice, about three weeks after, aged only thirty -three. The wound was made by a stone thrown by a countryman from a turret, and falling upon his head. The Spanish poetry was greatly obliged to Garcilasso, not only for extending its bounds, but also for introducing new beauties into it. He had strong natural talents for poetry; and he did not fail to improve them by culture, studying the best poets ancient and modern. His poems are full of fire; have a nobleness and majesty without affectation; and, what is somewhat singular, there is in them a great deal of ease, united with much subtilty. Paul Jovius has not scrupled to say that his odes have all the sweetness of Horace. Though his imitations of the ancients may be traced throughout almost all his works, yet, as they are conspicuous for good taste and harmonious versification, and were written amidst many distracting occupations, there can be no doubt that he would have gained great celebrity if he had lived longer. The learned grammarian Sanctius has written commentaries upon all his works, and has illustrated him every where with very learned and curious notes. They were all printed at Naples in 1661, with this title,” Garcilasso de la Vega Obras Poeticas con annotationes de Franc. Sanchez,“in 8vo. We must not confound this poet with another person of the same name, a native or” Cusco, who wrote in Spanish the History of Florida, and that of Peru and the Incas.

, better known to the public by the title of Lord Gardenstone, was born at Edinburgh June 24, 1721. His father was Alexander Garden, of Troop, an opulent land-holder in Aberdeenshire; and his mother was Jane, daughter of sir Francis Grant, of Cullen, one of the senators of the college of justice. After passing through the usual course of liberal education at school and at the university, he applied to the study of law as a profession, and in 1744 was admitted a member of the faculty of advocates, and called to the Scottish bar. In his practice as an advocate he soon began to be distinguished by a strong native rectitude of understanding; by that vivacity of apprehension and imagination, which is commonly denominated genius; by manly candour in argument, often more persuasive than subtilty and sophistical artifice; by powers which, with diligence, might easily attain to the highest eminence of the profession. But the same strength, openness, and ardour of mind which distinguished him so advantageously among the pleaders at the bar, tended to give him a fondness for the gay enjoyments of convivial intercourse, which was in some respects unfavourable to his progress in juridical erudition, yet without obstructing those promotions to which his talents entitled him. In 1764 he became his, majesty’s solicitor, and afterwards one of the judges in the courts of session and justiciary, the supreme judicatures, civil and criminal, for Scotland. On this occasion he assumed, according to the usual practice, the title of lord Gardenstone. His place in the court of session he continued to occupy till his death, but had some years before resigned the office of a commissioner of justiciary, and in recompense got a pension of 200l. per annum. Clear discernment, strong good sense, conscientious honesty, and amiable benevolence, remarkably distinguished his opinions and conduct as a judge.

As he advanced in years, humanity, taste* and public spirit, became still more eminently the predominant principles in his mind. He pitied the condition of the peaa^ntry, depressed rather by their ignorance of the most skilful modes of labour, and by their remoteness from the sphere of improvement, than by any tyranny or extortion of their landlords. He admired, protected, and cultivated the fine arts. He was the ardent votary of political liberty, and friendly to every thing that promised a rational amelioration of public oeconomy, and the principles of government. In 1762 he purchased the estate of Johnston, co. Kincardine. Within a few years after he began to attempt a plan of the most liberal improvement of the value of tins estate, by an extension of the village of Laurencekirk, adjoining. He offered leases of small farms, and of ground for building upon, which were to last for the term, of one hundred years; and of which the conditions were extremely inviting to the labourers and tradesmen of the surrounding country. These offers were eagerly listened to; and being more desirous to make the attempt beneficial to the country than profitable to himself, he was induced within a few years to reduce his ground-rents to one half of the original rate. Weavers, joiners, shoemakers, and other artizans in a considerable number, resorted to settle in the rising village. His lordship’s earnestness for the success of his project, and to promote the prosperity of the people whom he had received under his protection, led him to engage in several undertakings, by the failure of which he incurred considerable losses. Projects of a print-field, and of manufactures of linen and of stockings, attempted with sanguine hopes in the new village, and chiefly at his lordship’s risk and expence, misgave in such a manner as might well have dispirited a man of less steady and ardent philanthropy. But the village’still continued to advance under his lordship’s eye and fostering care. In 1779 he procured it to be erected into a burgh of barony, having a magistracy, an annual fair, and a weekly market. He provided in it a good inn for the reception of travellers, and furnished it with a library for their amusement, the only one of the kind probably in either kingdom. We remember, likewise, an Alburn^ in which were many ingenious contributions, both in prose and verse, by the literati of Scotland. He invited an artist for drawing, from the continent, to settle at Laurencekirk. He had at length the pleasure of seeing a considerable linen-manufactory fixed in it; and before his death he saw his plan of improving the condition of the labourers, by the formation of a new village at Laurencekirk, crowned with success beyond his most sanguine hopes. He has acknowledged in a memoir concerning this village, “That he had tried in some measure a variety of the pleasures” which mankind pursue; but never relished any so much as the pleasure arising from the progress of his village.“In 1785, by the death of a brother, he became possessed of the family estates, worth about 3000l. a year, which not only enabled him to pursue his usual course of liberality, but to seek relief from the growing infirmities of his age, by a partial relaxation from business, which he determined to employ in travel. Accordingly, he set out in Sept. 1786, and performed the tour of France, Geneva, Swisserland, the Netherlands, and Italy, and after three years, returned to his native country, with a large collection of objects of natural history, and specimens of the fine arts. His last years were spent in the discharge of the duties of his office as a judge; in performing many generous offices of benevolence and humanity, and in promoting the comfort of his tenants. As an amusement for the last twoor three years of his life, he revised some of the light fugitive pieces, in which he had indulged the gaiety of his fancy in his earlier days; and a small volume was published under the title of” Miscellanies in prose and verse,“in which the best pieces are upon good authority ascribed to lord Gardenstone. He revised also the” Memorandums“which he had made upon his travels, and two volumes of them were published during his lifetime, under the title of” Travelling Memorandums,“containing a number of interesting observations, criticisms, and anecdotes. A third volume appeared after his death, with an account of him, from which we have borrowed the greater part of this article. His lordship died July 22, 1793, deeply regretted by his friends and by his country. His last publication was” A Letter to the Inhabitants of Laurencekirk," containing much salutary advice.

, a brave officer of the army, and not less celebrated for his piety, was born at Carriden, in Linlithgow shire, in Scotland, Jan. 10, 1687-8. He was the son of captain Patrick Gardiner, of the family of Torwoodhead, by Mrs. Mary Hodge, of the family of GladsKiitir. His family was military, his father, his uncle by the mother’s side, and his elder brother, all fell in battle. He was educated at the school of Linlithgow, but was soon removed from it, owing to his early zeal to follow his father’s profession. At the age of fourteen he had an ensign’s commission in the Dutch service, in which he continued until 1702; when he received the same from queen Anne, and being present at the battle of Ramillies, in his nineteenth year, was severely wounded and taken prisoner by the French. He was carried to a convent, where he resided until his wound was cured; and soon after was exchanged. In 1706 he obtained the rank of lieutenant, and after several intermediate promotions, was appointed major of a regiment commanded by the earl of Stair, in whose family he resided for several years. In January 1730, he was advanced to the rank of lieutenant-colonel in the same regiment, in which he continued until April 1743, when he received a colonel’s commission over a regiment of dragoons. During the rebellion in Scotland, in 1745, his regiment being in that country, and the rebel army advancing to Edinburgh, he was ordered to march with the utmost expedition to D unbar, which he didj and that hasty retreat, with the news soon afterwards received of the surrender of Edinburgh to the rebels, struck a visible panic into the forces he commanded. This affected his gallant mind so much, that on the Thursday before the battle of Preston-pans, he intimated to an officer of considerable rank, that he expected the event would be as it proved; and to a person who visited him, he said, “I cannot influence the conduct of others as I could wish; but I have one life to sacrifice to my country’s safety, and I shall not spare it.” On Friday Sept. 20th, the day before the fatal battle, when the whole army was drawn up, about noon, the colonel rode through the ranks of his regiment, and addressed them in an animated manner, to exert themselves with courage in defence of their country. They seemed much affected by his address, and expressed a very ardent desire of attacking the enemy immediately, a desire in which he, and another gallant officer of distinguished rank, would have gratified them, had it been in their power, but their ardour and their advice were overruled by the strange conduct of the commander-in-chief, sir John Cope, and therefore all that colonel Gardiner could do, was to spend the remainder of the day in making as good a disposition as the circumstances would allow. He continued all night under arms, wrapped Mp in his cloak, and sheltered under a rick of barley which happened to be in the field. By break of day the army was roused by the noise of the approach of the rebels; and the attack was made before sun -rise. As soon as the enemy came within gun-shot, they commenced a furious fire; and the dragoons which constituted the left wing immediately fled. The colonel at the beginning of the attack, which lasted but a few minutes, received a ball in his left breast, which made him give a sudden spring in his saddle; upon which his servant, who had led the horse, would have persuaded him to, retreat; but he said it was only a flesh-wound, and fought on, though he presently after received a shot in his right thigh. The colonel was for a few moments supported by his men, and particularly by about fifteen dragoons, who stood by him to 'the last; but after a faint fire, the regiment in general was seized with a panic; and though their colonel and some other brave officers did what they could to rally them, they at lust took to a precipitate flight. Just in the moment when colonel Gardiner seemed to be making a pause to deliberate what duty required him to do in such a circumstance, he saw a party of the foot fighting bravely near him, without an officer to lead them, on which he rode up to them immediately, and cried out aloud, “Fire on, my lads, and fear nothing.” As he had uttered these words, a Highlander advanced towards him with a scythe fastened to a long pole, with which he gave him such a deep wound in his right arm, that his sword dropped from his band, and several others coming about him at the same time, while he was thus dreadfully entangled with that savage weapon, he was dragged from his horse. The moment he fell, another Highlander gave him a stroke either with a broad -sword, or a Lochaber axe, on the hinder part of the head, which was the mortal blow. All that his faithful servant, John Forster, who furnished this account, saw further at this time, was, that as his hat was falling olf, he took it in his left hand, waved it as a signal for him to retreat, and added, which were the last words he ever heard him speak, “Take care of yourself.” The servant immediately fled to a mill, about two miles distant, where he changed his dress, and disguised like a miller’s servant, returned with a cart about two hours after the engagement. He found his master not dnly plundered of his watch and other things of value, but even stripped of his upper garments and boots. He was, however, still breathing, and from appearances, not altogether insensible. In this condition he was conveyed to the church of Tranent, and from that to the clergyman’s house, where he expired about eleven o'clock in the forenoon, Saturday Sept. 21, 1745. The rebels entered his house before he was carried off from the field, and plundered it. His remains were interred on the Tuesday following, Sept. 24, at the parish church of Tranent. Even his enemies spoke honourably of him, and seemed to join in lamenting the fall of so brave and so worthy a man. Nor was it for bravery only that colonel Gardiner was distinguished. He was perhaps one of the most pious men of his age and country. He was, says his biographer, in the most amazing manner, without any religious opportunity, or peculiar advantage, deliverance, or affliction, reclaimed on a sudden, in the vigour of life and health, from a life of licentiousness, not only to a steady course of regularity and virtue, but to high devotion, and strict, though unaffected sanctity of manners. All this is amply illustrated in Dr. Doddridge’s well-known life of this gallant hero, whose death was as much a loss, as the cause of it, the battle of Preston-pans, was a disgrace to his country.

, an English divine, a native of Hereford, where he was born ki 1591, was educated at the school there, and became a student of Christ- church, Oxford, about 1607. After taking his degrees in arts, he entered into holy orders, and was noted for a quaint singularity in his manner of preaching. King James I. beingmuch pleased with a speech which he had delivered before him in the Scotch tone, when he was deputy-orator, gave him the reversion of the next canonry of Christ-church; into which he was installed, on the death of Dr. Thomas Thornton, in 1629; and taking his degrees in divinity the following year, he was made one of the chaplains in ordinary to king Charles I. In 1648 he was ejected from his canonry by the parliamentary visitors, and lived obscurely in Oxford, until the restoration, when he-was re-instated in his stall, and from that time devoted the profits of it to charitable uses, with some benefactions to his relations, and to Christ-church. He published several sermons, particularly a volume containing sixteen, Lond. 1659, 8vo. 2; “Specimen Oratorium,” Lond. 1653, containing some of his university orations. This was reprinted in 1657, and in 1662, with additional orations and letters. There were subsequent editions printed at Oxford in 1668 and 1675, &c. yet the book is very scarce. He died Dec. 20, 1670, and was buried in Christ-church cathedral, with an elegant Latin epitaph, written at the desire of his executors, by Dr. South, who succeeded him in his canonry.

, bishop of Winchester, and chancellor of England, was the illegitimate son of Dr. Lionel Woodvill or Wydville, dean of Exeter, and bishop of Salisbury, brother to Elizabeth, queen consort to Edward IV. He was born in 1483, at Bury St. Edmonds, in Suffolk, and took his name from his reputed father , whom his mother married, though in a menial situation, to conceal the incontinence of the bishop. After a proper education at school, he was sent to Trinity-hall, in Cambridge; where pursuing his studies with diligence, he soon obtained reputation by the quickness of his parts, and was particularly distinguished for his elegance in writing and speaking Latin, as well as for his uncommon skill in the Greek language . In the former he made Cicero his pattern, and became so absolute a master of his style, as to be charged with affectation in that respect. With these attainments in classical learning, he applied himself to the civil and canon law; and took his doctor’s degree in the first of these, in 1520; in the latter, the following year; and it is said, was the same year elected master of his college.

But his views were far from being confined to the university. He had some time before been taken into the family of the duke of Norfolk, and thence into that of Cardinal Wolsey, who made him his secretary. This post he now held, and it proved the foundation of his rise at court. The cardinal having projected the treaty of alliance with Francis I. in 1525, employed his secretary to draw up the plan, and the king coming to his house at Morepark, in Hertfordshire, found Gardiner busy at this work. He looked at it, liked the performance extremely well, the performer’s conversation better, and his fertility in the invention of expedients best of all; and from this time Gardiner was admitted into the secret of affairs, and entirely confided in, both by the king and his first minister. He received a public mark of that confidence in 1527, when he was sent to Rome, in order to negociate the arduous business of Henry’s divorce from queen Katharine. Edward Fox, provost of King’s-college, in Cambridge, went with him on this embassy; but Gardiner was the chief, being esteemed the best civilian in England at this time; and having been admitted into the king’s cabinet-­council for this affair, he is styled in the cardinal’s credential letters to the pope, “primary secretary of the most secret counsels.” He was now in such favour with the cardinal, that, in these very letters, he called Gardiner the half of himself, “Dimidium sui,” than whom none was dearer to him. He wrote that Gardiner should unlock his [the cardinal’s] breast to the pope; who, in hearing him speak, he might think he heard the cardinal himself. The successful issue of this embassy in obtaining a new commission, directed to the cardinals Wolsey and Campejus, as well as Gardiner’s address in the negociation, may be seen in the general histories of England. We shall only notice one particular not mentioned there, which is his success in disposing Campejus to make a tour to England. This requiring some extraordinary management, Gardiner took it upon himself; and having put every thing requisite to set the affair in a proper light at home, into the hands of his colleague Fox, dispatched him to carry the account to the king, who joined with Anne Boleyn in applauding the ingenuity, intrepidity, and industry of the new minister. But the loudest in his praises was the cardinal, in whose private business Gardiner had reconciled the pope to the endowment of his two colleges at Oxford and Ipswich, out of the revenues of the dissolved lesser monasteries. This added to the rest, made such an impression upon the cardinal’s mind, that crying out, “O inestimable treasure and jewel of this realm!” he desired Fox to remark those words, and insert them in his letter. There was still another instance of Gardiner’s abilities and attachment to Wolsey, which had its share in exciting this burst of admiration. During the course of this embassy, the pope falling dangerously ill, the cardinal set all his engines to work, to secure the keys provisionally to himself, in case of a new election, and the suffrages of one-third part of the cardinals were procured for him. He dispatched orders immediately to provide that those cardinals should be withdrawn to a place of safety, and should there declare him pope, though the majority should appear against him; assuring his own party, that they should be vigorously sustained by king Henry and his allies. This scheme, however, was rendered abortive by the recovery of Clement VII. but the pains taken in it by the cardinal’s agents, among whom Gardiner had at least an equal share, could not fail to be highly pleasing to him. In the event, indeed, the king had most reason to be satisfied with his minister, who gave his opinion that all solicitations at Rome would be lost time; the pope, in his judgment, being immoveable in the resolution to do nothing himself; though he might not improbably be brought to confirm such a sentence as his majesty could draw from the legates Henry, fully persuaded in the issue of the sincerity and judgment of this advice, recalled Gardiner, resolving to make use of his abilities in managing the legantine court .

During his residence at Rome, he had among other things obtained some favours at that court for bishop Nix of Norwich, who on his return rewarded him with the archdeaconry of Norfolk, in 1529; and this probably was the first preferment he obtained in the church. In truth, it must be owned that his merit as a divine did not entitle him to any extraordinary expectations that way, but as he made his first entrance into business in a civil capacity, so he continued to exercise and improve his talents in state affairs, which, gave him an opportunity of rendering himself useful, and in a manner necessary to the king; who soon after his arrival, took him from Wolsey, and declared him secretary of state. Thus introduced into the ministry at home, besides the ordinary business of his office, and the large share he is said to have had in the administration of affairs in general, he was particularly advised with by the king in that point which lay nearest to his heart; and when cardinal Campejus declared that the cause of the divorce was evoked to Rome, Gardiner, in conjunction with Fox the almoner, found out Cranmer, and discovering his opinion, introduced him to his majesty, whom they thus enabled to extricate himself out of a difficulty then considered as insuperable.

As this step proved the ruin of Wolsey, in his distress he applied to his old servant the secretary, who on this occasion is said by the writer of his life in the Biog. Britannica, to have afforded an eminent proof of his gratitude, in soliciting his pardon; which was followed in three days by his restoration to his archbishopric, and 6000l. sent him, besides plate and furniture for his house and chapel. It is certain, however, that Gardiner did not interpose before Wolsey had supplicated him more than once in the most humble manner, to intercede for him, and it is equally certain that Gardiner did not risk much in applying to the king, who for some time entertained a considerable regard for the fallen Wolsey. Gardiner also, at the cardinal’s recommendation, in 1530, introduced the provost of Beverly to the king, who received him graciously, and shewed him that he was his good and gracious lord, and admitted and accepted him as his orator and scholar. These were matters of easy management. But the year had not expired, when the king’s service called the secretary to a task of another nature, which was to procure from the university of Cambridge their declaration in favour of his majesty’s cause, after Cranmer’s book should appear in support of it. In this most difficult point his old colleague Fox was joined with him; and they spared no pains, address, or artifice in accomplishing it. To make amends for such an unreserved compliance with the royal will, a door was presently opened in the church, through which, by one single step (the archdeaconry of Leicester, into which he was installed in the spring of 1531), Gardiner advanced to the rich see of Winchester, and was there consecrated the November following. Gardiner was not, at the time, apprized of the king’s design of conferring on him this rich bishopric; for Henry, in his caprice, would sometimes rate him soundly, and when he bestowed it on him said, “I have often squared with you, Gardiner, but I love you never the worse, as the bishopric I give you will convince you.” As bishop of Winchester he now assisted in the court when the sentence, declaring Katharine’s marriage null and void, was passed by Cranmer, May 22, 1533. The same year he went ambassador to the French king at Marseilles, to discover the designs of the pope and that monarch in their interview, of which Henry was very suspicious; and upon his return home, being called, as other bishops were, to acknowledge and defend the king’s supremacy, he readily complied, and published his defence for it, with this title, “De vera Obedientia.” His conduct was very uniform in this point, as well as in that of the divorce and the subsequent marriage, and he acquired great reputation by his writings in defence of them.

In 1535, Cranmer visiting the see of Winchester, in virtue of his metropolitan power, Gardiner disputed that power with great warmth. Some time afterwards, he resumed his embassy to France, where he procured the removal of Pole (then dean of Exeter, afterwards cardinal) out of the French dominions, having represented him as his master’s bitter enemy; and this was the original root of that disagreement between them, which in time became public. Before his return this second time, being applied to by Cromwell for his opinion about a religious league with the protestant princes of Germany, he declared himself against it, and advised a political alliance, which he judged would last longer, as well as answer the king’s ends better, if strengthened by subsidies. In 1538 he was sent ambassador to the German diet at Ratisbon, where he incurred the suspicion of holding a secret correspondence with the pope. Whatever truth there may be in this charge, it is certain that Lambert this year was brought to the stake by his instigation, for denying the real presence in the sacrament. This instance of a sanguinary temper was then shown before the statute of the six articles was enacted; a law on which many were put to death, and which he undeniably framed and promoted in the house of lords to the utmost extent of his influence. This act passed in 1540; and the first person condemned by it, and burnt in Smithfield, the same year, was Robert Barnes, who at his death declared his suspicion of Gardiner’s having a hand in it . Upon the death of Cromwell, his rival long in the king’s favour, the university of Cambridge, where he still held his mastership of Trinity-hall, chose him their vice-chancellor; and in return he shewed his sense of it by an assiduity in his office among them, and a warm zeal to assist them on all occasions with his interest at court; which, as long as the sunshine of any signal service lasted, was very good. But in this, his case, like other courtiers, was subject to the sudden vicissitudes of light and shade which so remarkably checquered the series of that reign; and this minister was no more excepted than his fellows from complying with those conditions of ministerial greatness, which were indispensable as long as Henry sat at the helm: and, though he tells us himself that, after the king had let him into the secret, that he could look sour and talk roughly, without meaning much harm, he ever after bore those sallies with much less anxiety, and could stand a royal rattling pretty well ; yet this was only sometimes, and on some occasions. For upon others, we rind him submitting to very disagreeable supplications and expressions of deep humility, and great sense of his failings, directly contrary to the convictions of his own conscience and understanding. Of this we have the following remarkable instance. The bishop had for his secretary a relation of his own name, Gardiner, who, in some conferences with Fryth the martyr, had acquitted himself so well that they were judged fit for the public view. This young clergyman was much in his master’s favour, yet he fell under a prosecution upon the act of supremacy; and being very obstinate, was executed as a traitor, March 7, 1544. This was made an engine against the bishop by his enemies, who whispered the king that he was very likely of his secretary’s opinion, notwithstanding all he had written; and that if he was once in the Tower, matter enough would come out against him. On this suggestion, his majesty consented to his proposed imprisonment. But the bishop being informed of it in time, repaired immediately to court; confessed all that his majesty had charged him with, whatever it was; and thus, by complying with the king’s humour, and shewing the deepest concern for real or pretended failings, obtained full pardon, to the great mortification of his enemies. We have selected this instance from many others of a similar nature, all which are evident proofs of Gardiner’s want of honest and sound principle, because it may be of use in discovering his real principles upon the subject of the supremacy, which will at last be found to be nothing more, in fact, than an engine of his political craft. It has indeed been alleged in his behalf, that he was not always so servile and ready an instrument of the king’s will, especially upon the matter of the supremacy, and Strype publishes (Memorials, vol. I. p. 215) a letter in the Cottonian library, which Gardiner wrote to the king in consequence of his majesty’s being angry with him for approving some sentiments in a book that seemed to impugn his supremacy. But if this letter, as Strype conjectures, was written about 1535, this was the time when the king had some thoughts of a reconciliation with the see of Rome, and of returning the supremacy to the pope, which being very well known to Gardiner, might encourage him to speak with the more freedom on that subject. Gardiner, than whom no man seems to have more carefully studied the king’s temper, was not accustomed to look upon himself as undone because he sometimes received such notices of his majesty’s displeasure as threw some other courtiers into the most dreadful apprehensions. This knowledge and his artful use of it taught him to seek his own safety, in taking a share with others, in the divorce of Anne of Cleves, and that of queen Catherine Howard; the first of which, if we consider his skill in the law, must have been, against his conscience, and the second as much against his inclination, on account of his attachment to that noble family. The same regard for himself might also, had he been in the kingdom at the time, have led him to take a part against queen Anne Boleyn, sir Thomas More, and bishop Fisher.

All his sagacity, subtlety, and contrivance, however, were not sufficient to save him from a cloud, which shewed itself in the close of this reign; a change which might be attributed to the unsteadiness of the master, were there not facts sufficient to throw the imputation in some measure upon the servant.' Certain it is, though upon what particular provocation is not known, that he engaged deeply in a plot against the life of Cranmer; which being discovered and dispersed by the king, his majesty, fully satisfied of the archbishop’s innocence, left all his enemies, and among the rest Gardiner, to his mercy. The malice, though forgiven by Cranmer, cannot be supposed to be forgotten by Henry. But this did not hinder him from making use of this willing servant, against his last queen, Katharine Parr. That lady, as well as her preceding partners of the royal bed, falling under her consort’s distaste, he presently thought of a prosecution for heresy; upon which occasion he singled out Gardiner, whose inclinations that way were well known, as a proper person for his purpose to consult with. Accordingly the minister listened to his master’s suspicions, improved his jealousies, and cast the whole into the form of articles; which being signed by the king, it was agreed to sendKatherine to the Tower. But she had the address to divert the storm from breaking upon her head, and to throw some part of it upon her persecutors. The paper of the articles, being entrusted to chancellor Wriothesly, was dropt out of his bosom, and carried to her; and she, with the help of this discovery to her royal consort, found charms enough left to dispel his suspicions: the result whereof was, severe reproaches to the chancellor, and a rooted displeasure to the bishop, insomuch that the king would never see his face afterwards. His behaviour to him corresponded with that resentment. In the draught of his majesty’s will, before his departure on his last expedition to France, the bishop’s name was inserted among his executors and counsellors to prince Edward. But after this, when the will came to be drawn afresh, he was left out; and though sir Anthony Brown moved the king twice, to put his name as before into it, yet the motion was rejected, with this remark, that “if he (Gardiner) was one, he would trouble them all, and they should never be able to rule him.” Besides this, when the king saw him once with some of the privy- counsellors, he shewed his dislike, and asked his business, which was, to acquaint his majesty with a benevolence granted by the clergy: the king called him immediately to deliver his message, and having received it, went away. Burnet assigns Gardiner’s known attachment to the Norfolk family for the cause of this disgrace: but, whatever was the cause, or whatever usage he met with on other occasions, this justice is undeniably due to him, that he ever shewed a high respect to his master’s memory, and either out of policy or gratitude, he always spoke and wrote of him with much deference.

In this unhinged situation he stood when Edward VI. ascended the throne; and his behaviour under the son more than justified the father’s censure upon the unruliness of his temper. Being prevented from disturbing the council within doors, he opposed all their measures without. The reformation was the great object of this reign; and that, as planned by Cranmer, he could not by any condescension of the archbishop be brought to approve, or even to acquiesce in. He condemned the diligence in bringing it on as too hasty, which would cause a miscarriage; observing, that under a minority, all should be kept quiet, and for that reason no alterations attempted; and this served him also for a ground to oppose the war with Scotland, as too hazardous and expensive. From the same principle, he no sooner heard of the intended royal visitation, than he raised objections to it: he both questioned its legality, and censured its imprudence as an innovation; alledging that it would tend to weaken the prerogative as assumed by Henry, in the eyes of the meanest, when they saw all done by the king’s power as supreme head of the church (on the due use of which all reformation must depend) while he was a child, and could know nothing at all, and the protector, being absent, not much more. These, however, were words only, and he did not stop there; for when the homilies and injunctions for that visitation were published, he insisted, on the perusal of them, that he could not comply with them, though at the expepce of losing his bishopric; asserting, at the same time, that all their proceedings were framed against the law both of God and the king, of the danger of which, he said, he was well apprized.

Upon his coming to London he was called before the council, Sept. 25, 15-17; and there refusing to promise either to receive the homilies, or pay obedience to the visitors, if they came into his diocese, he was committed close prisoner to the Fleet. Some days after, he was sent for to the deanery of St. Paul’s by Cranmer, who, with other bishops, discoursed in defence of the hornily upon justification; which he had censured, as excluding charity from any share in obtaining it. The archbishop proceeded to apologize for Erasmus’s “Paraphrase on the New Testament,” as the best extant; which, being ordered by the injunctions to be set up in all churches, had been objected to by Gardiner. His grace, seeing no hopes from arguments, which made no impression, let fall some words of bringing him into the privy-council, in case of his concurrence with them; hut that too having no effect, he was remanded to the Fleet, where he continued till the parliament hroke up, Dec. 24, and then was set at liberty by the general act of amnesty, nsuajly passed on the accession of a prince to the throne. He was never charged with any offence judicially, every thing being done in virtue of that extent of prerogative which had been assumed by Henry VIII. which was thought necessary for mortifying the pre r late’s haughty temper, as well as to vindicate their proceedings from the contempt he had shewn them.

After his discharge he went to his diocese;and,- though he opposed, as much as possible, the uew establishment in its first proposal, yet now it was settled by act of parliament, he knew how to conform; which he not 'only did himself, but took care that others should do the same. Yet he no sooner returned to town than he received an order, which brought him again before the council; where, after some rough treatment, he was directed not to stir from his house till he went to give satisfaction in a sermon, to be preached before the king and court in zt public audience; for the matter of which he was directed both what, he should, and what he should not say, by sir William Cecil. He did not refuse to preach, which was done on St. Peter’s day but so contrarily to the purpose required , that he was sent to the Tower the next clay, June 3O, 1548, where he was kept close prisoner for a year. But his affairs soon after put on a more pleasing countenance. When the protector’s fall was projected, Gardiner was deemed a necessary implement for the purpose; his head and hand were both employed for bringing it about, and the original draught of the articles was made by him. Upon this change in the council he had such assurances of his liberty, aid entertained so great hopes of it, that it is said he provided a new suit of clothes in order to keep that festival; but in all this he was disappointed: his first application for a discharge was treated with contempt by the council, who laughing said, “the bishop had a pleasant head;” for reward of which, they gave him leave to remain five or six weeks longer in prison, without any notice taken to him of his message. Nor did the lords shew any regard to his next address: and he had been almost two years in the Tower, when the protector, restored to that high office, went with others by virtue of an order of council, June 9, 1550, to confer with him in that place. In this conference they proposed to release him upon his submission for what was past, and promise of obedience for the future, if he would also subscribe the new settlement in religion, with the king’s complete power and supremacy, though under age; and the abrogation of the six articles. He consented to, and actually subscribed, all the conditions except the first, which he refused, insisting on his innocence. The lords used him with great kindness, and encouraged him to hope his troubles should be quickly ended, and upon this, seeing also the protector among them, he flattered himself with the hopes of being released in two days, and in that confidence actually made his farewell feast But the contempt he had at first shewn to the council, being still avowed by his refusing to make a submission. now, was not so readily overlooked. On the contrary, this first visit was followed by several others of the like tenor; which meeting with the same refusal, at length the lords Herbert, Petre, and bishop Ridley, brought him new articles, in which the required acknowledgement, being made more general, runs thus: “That he had been suspected of not approving the king’s proceedings, and being appointed to preach, had not done it as he ought to have done, and so deserved the king’s displeasure, for which he was sorry;” and the other articles being enlarged were, “besides the king’s supremacy, the suppression of abbies and chanteries, pilgrimages, masses, and images, adoring the sacrament, communion in both kinds, abolishing the old books, and bringing in the new book of service, with that for ordaining priests and bishops, the completeness of the scripture, and the use of it in the vulgar tongue, the lawfulness of clergymen’s marriage, and for Erasmus’s Paraphrase, that it had been on good considerations ordered to be set up in churches.” These being read, foe insisted first co be released from his imprisonment, and said that he would then freely give his answer, such as he would stand by, and suffer if he did amiss; but he vvoukl trouble himself with no more articles while he was detained in prison, since he desired not to be delivered out of his imprisonment in the way of mercy, but of justice. On July ly, he was brought before the council, who having told him that they sat by a special commission to judge him, asked whether he would subscribe these last articles or no? which he answering in the negative, his bishopric was sequestered, and he required to conform in three months on pain of deprivation. Upon this the liberty he had before of walking in some open galleries, when the duke of Norfolk was not in them, was taken from him, and he was again shut up in his chamber. At the expiration of the limited time, the bishop still keeping his resolution, was deprived for disobedience and contempt, by a court of delegates, in which Cranmer presided, after a trial which lasted from Dec. 15 to Feb. 14 following, in twenty-four sessions. He appealed from the delegates to the king; but no notice was taken of it, the court being known to be final and unappealable.

In the course of the proceedings, Gardiner always behaved himself contemptuously toward the judges, and particularly called them sacramentarians and heretics; on which account he was ordered to be removed to a meaner lodging in the Tower; to be attended by one servant only, of the lieutenant’s appointment to have his books and papers taken from him to be denied pen, ink, or paper; and nobody suffered to visit him. However, as he continued a close prisoner here during the rest of Edward’s reign, the severity of this order was afterwards mitigated; as appears from various pieces written by him in this confinement. He is said to have kept up his spirits and resolution, and it is not improbable, that he foresaw the great alteration in affairs which was speedily to take place. The first dawning of this began to appear on the demise of king Edward, when Mary was publicly proclaimed queen July 19, 1553. On Aug. 3 she made her solemn entry into the Tower, when Gardiner, in the name of himself and his fellow-prisoners, the duke of Norfolk, duchess of Somerset, lord Courtney, and others of high rank, made a congratulatory speech to her majesty, who gave them all their liberty. The spokesman took his seat in council the same day, and on the 8th performed the obsequies for the late king in the queen’s presence. On the 9th he went to Winchester-house in Southwark, after a confinement of somewhat more than five years; and was declared chancellor of England on the 23d. He had the honour of crowning the queen Oct. I, and on the 5th opened the lirst parliament in her reign. By these hasty steps Gardiner rose to the prime ministry; and was possessed at this time of more power, civil and ecclesiastical, than any English minister ever enjoyed, except his old master cardinal Wolsey. He was also re-chosen chancellor of Cambridge, and restored to the mastership of Trinity-hall there, of which, among his other preferments, he had been deprived in the former reign.

The great and important attain* transacted under his administration, in bringing about the change in the constitution by queen Mary, are too much the subject of general history to be related here. The part that Gardiner acted is very well known; and although from the arrival of cardinal Pole in England, he held only the second place in affairs relating to the church, in matters of civil government, his influence was as great as before, and continued without the least diminution to the last. By his advice a parliament was summoned to meet in Oct. 1555. As he was always a guardian of the revenues of the ecclesiastics, both regular and secular, he had at this time projected, some additional security for church and abbey lands. He opened the session with a well-judged speech, Oct. 21, and. was there again on the 23d, which was the last time of his appearing in that assembly. He fell ill soon after, and died Nov. 12, aged seventy-two. His death was occasioned probably by the gout; the lower parts of his body, however, being mortified, and smelling offensively, occasion was hence taken to consider the manner of his death as a judgment. The report that he was seized with the disury in consequence of the joy with which he was transported on hearing of the martyrdom of Latimer and Ridley, has been disproved by the dates of that event, and of his illness, in this way. Fox says that when seized with the disorder he was put to bed, and died in great torments a fortnight afterwards. But, says Collier, Latimer and Ridley suffered Oct. 16, and Gardiner opened the parliament on the 2 1st, and was there again on the 23d, and lastly, died Nov. 12, not of the disury, but the gout. The reader will determine whether the disorder might not have been contracted on the 16th, and increased by his subsequent exertions; and whether upon the whole, Collier, with all liis prejudices in favour of popery, which are often very thinly disguised, was likely to know more of the master than the contemporaries of Gardiner. Godwin and Parker say that he died repeating these words, “Erravi cum Petro, at non flevi cum Petro;” i. e. “I have sinned with Peter, but I have not wept with Peter.”

He died at York place, Whitehall, whence his body was removed to a vault in St. Mary Overy’s church, Southwark; and after great preparations for the solemnity, was carried for final interment to Winchester cathedral.

Gardiner, says an excellent modern biographer, was one of those motley ministers, half statesman and half ecclesiastic, which were common in those needy times, when the revenues of the church were necessary to support the servants of the crown. It was an inviduous support; and often fastened the odium of an indecorum on the king’s ministers; who had, as ministers always have, opposition enough to parry in the common course of business; and it^is very probable that Gardiner, on this very ground, has met with harder measure in history, than he might otherwise have done. He is represented as having nothing of a churchman about him but the name of a bishop. He had been bred to business from his earliest youth; and was thoroughly versed in all the wiles of men, considered either as individuals, or embodied in parties. He knew all the modes of access to every foible of the human heart; his own in the mean time was dark, and impenetrable. He was a man, “who,” as Lloyd quaintly says, “was to be traced like the fox; and, like the Hebrew, was to be read backwards;” and though the insidious cast of his eye indicated, that he was always lying in wait, yet his strong sense, and persuasive manner, inclined men to believe he was always sincere; as better reasons could hardly be given, than he had ready on every occasion. He was as little troubled with scruples as any man, who thought it not proper entirely to throw off decency. What moral virtues, and what natural feelings he had, were all under the influence of ambition; and were accompanied by a happy lubricity of conscience, which ran glibly over every obstacle. Such is the portrait, which historians have given us of this man; and though the colouring may be more heightened in some than in others; yet the same turn of feature is found in all.

In opposition to this character, so ably epitomized by Mr. Gilpin, in his Life of Cranmer, we are not surprized at the labours of Roman catholic writers to palliate the vices of Gardiner; our only surprise, not unmixed with shame, is that such writers as Heylin and Collier, and Dr. Campbell in the “Biographia Britannica,” should have engaged in the same cause, and with such effect as to be quoted as authorities by the enemies of the reformation. After all, however, Gardiner’s actions sufficiently attest the badness of his character. Nor can he even be screened under the pretext that he acted under mistaken principles of conscience, unless at the same time we deprive him of that knowledge and those talents which have been justly ascribed to him. In the first edition of this Dictionary, it was said that “no maxim was more constantly professed, nor more uniformly observed by him, than that of making the law the rule of his conduct.” But this is not justified by fact. Many of the protestants were thrown into prison by him, while the laws of Edward VI. were yet in force, and they were kept there until he could procure a law by which they might be brought to the stake. And that sanguinary measures were delightful to him, appears from the gross scurrility with which he treated the protestants who were tried before him. Another curious apology has been advanced, that although he was the author of those cruelties, yet he very soon grew weary of them, and refused to have any hand in them, leaving the whole to Bonner. But even this was, without any alteration in his disposition merely a change of policy. He saw that the end was not promoted by the means, and that the courage of the martyrs in their sufferings could not be concealed from the people, on whom it produced an effect the very reverse of what he purposed; and he seems to have discovered the truth of the maxim that “the blood of the martyrs was the seed of the church.”

In his private character, Gardiner is entitled to some respect, not from its morality, for he is said to have been, licentious; but he was a man of learning, and in some remarkable instances a patron of learned men. Thomas Smith, who had been secretary to Edward VI. was permitted by him to live in Mary’s days, in a state of privacy unmolested, and with a pension of 100l. a year for his better support, though he had a good estate of his own. Roger Ascham, another secretary to the same prince, of the Latin tongue, was continued in his office, and his salary inCreased by this prelate’s favour; which he fully repaid, by those elegant epistles to him, that are extant in his works. Strype, who notices this circumstance, adds: “Thus lived two excellent protestants, under the wings, as it were, of the sworn enemy and destroyer of protestants.” He is said also to have been of a liberal and generous disposition; kept a good house, and brought up several young gentlemen, some of whom became afterwards men of the first rank in the state.

He wrote several books, of which the principal are, 1. “De vera Obedientia, 1534.” 2. “Palinodia dicti libri” when this was published is not known. 3. “A necessary doctrine of a Christian mart, set forth by the king’s majestie of England, 1543.” 4. “An Explanation and Assertion of the true Catholic Faith, touching the most blessed Sacrament of the Altar, &c. 1551.” 5. “Confutatio Cavillatiqnum quibiu sacrosanctum Eucharistise sacramentum ab impiis Capernaitis impeti solet, 1551.” This he composed while a prisoner in the Tower: he managed this controversy against Peter Martyr and others, who espoused Cranmer. After the accession of queen Mary, he wrote replies in his own defence, against Turner, Bonet, and other protestant exiles. Some of his letters to Smith and Cheke, on the pronunciation of the Greek tongue, are still extant in Bene't-­college library at Cambridge. The controversy made a great noise in its time, but was not much known afterwards; till that elegant account of it appeared in public, which is given by Baker in his “Reflections on Learning,” p. 28, 29, who observes, that our chancellor assumed a power, that Cæsar never exercised, of giving laws to words. However, he allows that, though the controversy was managed with much warmth on each side, yet a man would wonder to see so much learning shewn on so dry a subject. J)u Fresne was at a loss where the victory lay; but Roger Ascham, with a courtly address, declares, that though the knights shew themselves better critics, yet Gardiner’s letters manifest a superior genius; and were only liable to censure, from his entering further into a dispute of this kind, than was necessary for a person of his dignity.

, a physician at Caen, but a native of Paris, received his degree before the age of twenty, and came over to England, where he abjured the Roman catholic religion. He was incorporated in the university of Oxford on the 10th of March, 1657, and having settled in London, was appointed physician to the French ambassador: but fortune was altogether adverse to him, and he died overwhelmed with poverty and distress, in some part of Westminster, occasioned, as Wood says, “by the ill usage of a certain knight,” whose name, however, he does not mention, nor the time of our author’s death.He was a man of some science, as his works evince. They consist of a treatise, in English, on the nature and properties of the tincture of coral, printed in 1676, in 12iuo; and another in Latin, entitled “Angiiae Flagellum, seu, Tabes Anglica numeris omnibus absolute,” 1647, in iSmo. He also translated into English, “The true Prophecies or Prognostics of Michael Nostradamus, physician to Henry II. Francis II. and Charles IX. kings of France,” 1672, folio.

, an eminent French surgeon, was born at Vitre, a small town in Brittany, on the 13th of July, 1683, where his father practised surgery. In order to improve himself, he spent five years in the hospital of Angers, and in the great naval hospitals of Brittany; and afterwards made two voyages in the navy. In 1711 he went to Paris, and studied under Winslow, Thibaut, Meri, &c. and afterwards gave a course of lectures on anatomy in the medical schools; and henceforth his reputation extended even to foreign countries; for he was elected a member of the royal society of London. He was also appointed demonstrator royal in the schools of medicine. On the establishment of the society of academicians, under the patronage of the king, in 1731, Garengeot was chosen “Commissaire pour les extraits,”' which office he retained until 1742. He then succeeded Terryer in the place of surgeon-major of the king’s regiment of infantry. He died at Cologne, in consequence of an attack of apoplexy, Dec. 10, 1759.

The first of the works of Garengeot, entitled “Traite” des Operations de Chirurgie,“was published at Paris in 1720, and translated into the English and German languages. 2.” Trait des Instrumens de Chirurgie,“printed at Paris and the Hague, 1723, and at Paris again in 1727, in two volumes, with plates. 3.” Myotomie humaine,“Paris, 1724, 1728, 1750, two volumes, 12mo. The last of these editions is much more correct than the two former. 4.” Splanchnologie, ou, Traite d'Anatomie concernant les visceres,“Paris, 1728, 1729, in 12mo; ibid. 1742, in two volumes, 12mo. A German edition was printed at Berlin, in 8vo, in 1733, which is said to contain some valuable matter, but chiefly belonging to Winslow and Morgagni. 5.” His last work was “L‘Operation de la Taille par l’appareil lateral corrigee de tous ses defauts,” Paris, 1730, in 12mo.

, a French protestant divine, was born in 1587, at Montauban. During his academical studies, he made so rapid a progress in divinity, that he was appointed minister at Puylaurens, when only twentyfour years of age, by the synod of Castres. He was afterwards minister and professor of divinity at Montauban, and died there in 1650. His principal works are, an epic poem in 12 books, entitled “Adolphidos,” in which he celebrates the great exploits of Gustavus Adolphus, in elegant Latin verse another Latin poem in praise of the protestant Swiss Cantons several theological theses a treatise “De Imputatione priuai peccati Adse,” 8vo another, “De Christo Mediators,” 4to and an explanation in Latin of Calvin’s Catechism, which he wrote with his colleague M. Charles, 8vo, &c.

, or Joannes de Garlandia, a grammarian, is said to have been a native of Garlande en Brie in Normandy; hut as he came into England soon after the Conquest, Bale, Pitts, Tanner, have supposed him an Englishman, and Prince has enrolled him among the “Worthies of Devon.” He was not dead in 1081. His works have not all b.een printed but among those that have, are, 1. “A Poem on the contempt of the World,” improperly attributed to St. Bernard, Lyons, 1489, 4ta 2. Another poem, entitled “Floretus, or Liber Floreti;” on the Doctrines of Faith, and almost the whole circle of Christian morality. 3. A treatise on “Synonimes,” and another on Equivoques,“or ambiguous terms, Paris, 149O, 4 to, and reprinted at London by Pynson in 149.6, and again in 1500. 4. A poem in rhymed verses, entitled” Facetus,“on the duties of man towards God, his neighbour, and himself, Cologne, 1520, 4to the three poems are often printed together. 5.” Dictionarium artis Alchymiae, cum ejusdem artis compendio," Basle, 1571, 8vo.

, a person memorable in English history for having been privy to the celebrated conspiracy called “The Gunpowder Plot,” was born in Nottinghamshire in 1555, and bred at Winchester school; whence he went to Rome, and took the Jesuit’s habit in 1575. After studying under Bellarmin, Saurez, and Christopher Clavius, he was for some time professor of philosophy and Hebrew in the Italian college at Rome; and when Clavius, professor of mathematics, was disabled by old age, he supplied his place in the schools. He returned to England in 1586, as provincial of his order; although it was made treason the year before, for any Romish priest to come into the queen’s dominions. Here, under pretence of establishing the catholic faith, he laboured incessantly to raise some disturbance, in order to bring about a revolution; and with this view held a secret correspondence with the king of Spain, whom hs solicited to project n expedition against his country. This not proceeding so fast as he would have it, he availed himself of the zeal of some papists, who applied to him, as head of their order, to resolve this case of conscience; namely, “Whether, for the sake of promoting the catholic religion, it might be permitted, should necessity so require, to involve the innocent in the same destruction with the guilty?” to which this casuist replied without hesitating, that, “if the guilty should constitute the greater number, it might.” This impious determination gave the first motion to that horrible conspiracy, which was to have destroyed at one stroke the king, the royal family, and both houses of parliament; but the plot being providentially discovered, Garnet was sent to the Tower, and was afterwards tried, condemned to be hanged for high-treason, and executed at the west end of St. Paul’s, May 3, 1606. He declared just before his execution, that he was privy to the gunpowder plot; but, as it was revealed to him in confession, thought it his duty to conceal it. But besides this miserable subterfuge, it was proved that he knew something of it, out of confession. He has been placed by the Jesuits among their noble army of martyrs. He was pyobably an enthusiast, and certainly behaved at his execution in a manner that would have done credit to a better cause. It is said, however, upon other authority, that he declined the honour of martyrdom, exclaiming, “Me niartyretn O quale martyrem” “I a martyr! O what a martyr!” Dodd’s account of his execution is rather interesting. He published some works, among which are enumerated, i. “A treatise of Christian Renovation or Birth,” London, 1616, 8vo. 2. “Canisius’s Catechism, translated from the Latin,” ibid. 1590, 8vo, and St. Omers, 1622. Several works were published in defence of the measures taken against, him.

, an ingenious English physician, was born at Caste rton, near Kivkby Lonsda'le, Westmoreland, April 21, 1766. About the age of fourteen, after having received the first rudiments of education at his native village, he was placed as an apprentice under the tuition of Mr. Dawson, at Sedbergh, in Yorkshire, a celebrated mathematician, who was at that time a surgeon and apothecary, Here he laid the foundation of his medical and philosophical knowledge. After this he proceeded to Edinburgh, and took his degree about 1758. During his residence there, he became the pupil of Dr. Brown, whose new system of medicine Dr. Garnet, from this time, held in the highest estimation. Soon after he visited London, and attended the practice of the hospitals. He had now arrived at an age which made it necessary for him to think of some permanent establishment. With this view he left London, and settled at Bradford in Yorkshire, where he gave private lectures on philosophy and chemistry, and wrote a treatise on the Horley Green Spa. In 179J he removed to Knaresborough, and in summer to Harrogate, and was soon engaged in an extensive practice. As this, however, was necessarily limited to the length of the season, which lasted only three or four months, Dr. G. soon after his marriage, which took place in 1795, formed the design of emigrating to America. At Liverpool, where he was waiting to embark, he was strongly solicited to give a chemical course of lectures, which met with a most welcome reception, as did also another course on experimental philosophy. He then received a pressing invitation from Manchester, where he delivered the same lectures with equal success. These circumstances happily operated to prevent his departure to America, and he became a successful candidate for the vacant professorship of Anderson’s institution at Glasgow, in 1796. In Scotland, his leisure hours were employed in collecting materials for his “Tour through the Highlands;” which work was in some degree impeded by the sudden death of his wife in child-birth; an event which so strongly affected his feelings, that he never thought of it but with agony. Dr. G. was induced to relinquish the institution at Glasgow, by favourable offers from the new Royal Institution in London, where, for one season, he was professor of natural philosophy and che-p mistry, and delivered the whole of the lectures. On retiring from this situation, which was far too laborious for the state of his health, at the close of 1801, he devoted himself to his professional practice, and took a house in Great Marlborough-street, where he built a new and convenient apartment, completed an expensive apparatus, and during the winter of 1801 and 1802, he gave regular courses on experimental philosophy and chemistry, and a new course on “Zoonomia,” or, “the Laws of Animal Life, arranged according to the Brunonian theory.” These were interrupted in February, for some weeks, by a dangerous illness, which left him in a languid state; though he not only resumed and finished the lectures he had begun, but also commenced two courses on botany, one at his own house, and the other at Brompton. In the midst of these, he received, by infection, from a patient whom he had attended, the fever which terminated his life, June 28, 1802. His “Zoonomia” was afterwards published for the benefit of his family. “Thus,” says his biographer, “was lost to society a man, the ornament of his country, and the general friend of humanity. In his personal attachments, he was warm and zealous. In his religion he was sincere, yet liberal to the professors of contrary doctrines. In his political principles he saw no end, but the general good of mankind; and, conscious of the infirmity of human judgment, he never failed to make allowances for error. As a philosopher and a man of science, he was candid, ingenuous, and open to conviction; he never dealt in mystery, or pretended to any secret in art; he was always ready in explanation, and desirous of assisting every person willing to acquire knowledge.” Besides his “Tour in Scotland,” and the other works mentioned before. Dr. Garnet contributed many papers to the Memoirs of the Medical Society of London, the Royal Irish Academy, and other scientific societies.

, an English divine, was born at Bury St. Edmund’s, May 1, 1753, and was the only surviving child of the rev. Robert G. many years master of the free grammar-school at Bury, and rector of Nowton and Hargrave, in Suffolk . His mother was Mary, daughter of Mr. Benton, and sister of the late Edward Benton, esq. secondary in the court of king’s-bench. He was educated partly by his father, who supported a considerable reputation for classical learning, and partly at Bury school, whence he was admitted of Trinity-college, Cambridge, in 1770, and the following year was elected scholar. In 1774 he was admitted to his degree of B. A. which he obtained with credit to his college and himself; and was elected fellow in 1775, and proceeded M. A. in 1777. In 1793 he was elected college preacher, and in November 1797, was advanced into the seniority. He was ordained deacon March 3, 1776, and afterwards entered on the curacies of Newton and Great Welivatham, in the neighbourhood of Bury. On June 15, 1777, he was ordained priest, but having imbibed some scruples as to the articles of the church, of the Socinian cast, he determined sever to repeat his subscription to the articles for any preferment which he might become entitled to from the college patronage, or which might be offered to him from any other quarter. Agreeably to, and consistently with, this state of mind, be resigned, at Midsummer, 1789, the curacies in which he was then engaged, and resolved thenceforward to decline officiating in the ministry. Mr. Garnham’s health was never robust, and, during the last five or six years of his life, suffered much from sickness, which prevented his residing at Cambridge after the death of his father, in 1798, and indisposed and disqualified him from pursuing his former application to his studies. His indisposition and infirmities continued to increase; and, in the summer of 1801, he evidently appeared to be much broken. For some short time he had complained of an asthma; and, on the Saturday preceding his death, was attacked with an inflammation on the lungs and breast. He continued till the morning of the following Thursday, June 24, 1802, when he expired in the- 50th year of his age, and was buried in the chancel of Nowtoa church. His writings were numerous, but all anonymous. 1. “Examination of Mr. Harrison’s Sermon, preached in the cathedral church of St. Pawl, London, before the lord mayor, on May 25, 1788, 1789.” 2. “Letter to the right rev. the bishop of Norwich (Dr. Bagot), requesting him to name the prelate to whom he referred as * contending strenuously for the general excellence of our present authorized translation of the Bible,' 1789.” 3. “Letter to the right rev. the bishop of Chester (Dr. Cleave*), on the subject of two sermons addressed by him to the clergy of his diocese comprehending also a vindication of the late bishop Hoadly, 1790.” 4. “Review of Dr. Hay’s sermon, entitled, t Thoughts on the Athanasian Creed,' preached April 12, 1790, at the visitation of the archdeacon of Bucks,” 1790. 5. “Outline of a Commentary on Revelations xi. 114,” 1794. 6. “A Sermon preached in the chapel of Trinity-college, Cambridge, on Thursday, Dec. 19, 1793, the day appointed for the commemoration of the benefactors to that society,” 1794. He wrote also the papers in “Commentaries and Essays” signed Synergus: and some in “The Theological Repository,” signed Ereunetes, and Idiota.

, a Jesuit, professor of classical learning, philosophy, and rhetoric, was born at Paris ifl 1612, and died at Bologna in 1681, in a deputation to Rome from his order. His principal works are, 1. An edition of “Mercator,” folio, 1673. 2. An edition of the “Liberat,” in 8vo, Paris, 1675, with learned notes. 3. An edition of the “Liber diurnus,” or Journal of the Popes, with historical notes, and very curious dissertations, 168Q, 4to. 4. “The supplement to the works of Theodoret,” 1685, 4to. 5. “Systemæ Bibliothecæ Collegii Parisiensis, societatis Jesu,” Paris, 1678, 4to; a very useful book to those who are employed in arranging large libraries.

, an ingenious French writer, was born at Goron in the Maine, March 13, 1729. After b.eing educated, probably in his own country, he came to Paris, withput money or interest, and depending only on his learning. This soon recommended him, however, to a place in the college of Harcourt, and in 1760 he was appointed coadjutor to the abbé Sellier in the royal college, and was made before 1764 Hebrew professor, and chosen a member of the academy of inscriptions au4 belles lettres. His useful studies were interrupted by the revolution, and in 1793 he was compelled ta fly, for refusing the republican oaths. He then went to Bougival, where he died in 1795. All he could save from confiscation was his library; but his friend Lalande, the celebrated astronomer, so effectually represented to the government, the disgrace of suffering a man of so much merit to want bread, that a pension was granted him. He wrote, 1. “L'Homme de lettres,” Paris, 1764, 2 vols. 12mo, in which the method he lays down to form a map of letters is highly liberal and ingenious. 2. “Traité” de l'origine du gouveruement françoise,“1765, ib. 12 mo. 3.” De l'education civile,“1765, 12mo. 4.” De commerce remis a sa place." In 1770 he published the 9th vol. 4to of Velly and Villaret’s History of France, beginning with the year 1469, and continuing his labours in this work, produced the 15th vol. in 1786, displaying throughout the whole more erudition than his predecessors. He wrote several papers in the memoirs of the academy of inscriptions, relative, among other subjects, to the philosophy of the ancients, and especially to that of Plato, of which he was perhaps rather too fond, though less fanciful than some modern Platonists.

, a French tragic poet, was born at Ferte" Bernard in the province of Maine, in 1534. He was designed for the law, which he studied some time at Toulouse; but afterwards quitted it for poetry, in which he succeeded so well, that he was deemed by his contemporaries not inferior to Sophocles or Euripides. Thuanus says, that Ronsard himself placed nobody above Gamier in this respect: what Ronsard says, however, is no more than that he greatly improved the French drama.

But although his tragedies were read with great pleasure by all sorts of persons, and held in the highest estimation, when they had no better to read, upon the introduction of a more refined taste, they gradually fell into disesteem, and now only serve to shew, that France, like other nations, has been capable of admiring very indifferent poets. Besides tragedies, he wrote songs, elegies, epistles, eclogues, &c. of no better stamp. He died in 1590, after having obtained several considerable posts. Seneca the tragedian, was Garnier’s model, which single circumstance may easily give the learned reader an idea of his taste and manner. His dramatic works were printed collectively at Lyons, in one vol. 12mo, 1597, and reprinted at Paris in 1607.

, or Gerards, a Flemish painter, was born at Bruges in 1561, and practised history, landscape, architecture, and portrait. He also engraved, illuminated, and designed for glass-painters. His etchings for Esop’s fables, and view of Bruges were much esteemed. He came to England not long after the year 1580, and remained here until his death in 1635, having been painter to queen Elizabeth and Anne of Denmark. His works are numerous, though not easily known, as he never used any peculiar mark. In general they are neat, the ruffs and liabits stiff, and rich with pearls and other jewels. His flesh-colours are thin and light, tending to a blueish tincture. His procession of queen Elizabeth to Hunsdonhouse has been engraved by Vertue, who thought that part of the picture of sir Thomas More’s family at Burford might have been completed by this painter.

, an unrivalled actor, was grandson of Mr. Garrick, a merchant in France, who, being a protestant, fled to England as an asylum, upon the revocation of the edict of Nantes in 1685; and son of Peter Garrick, who obtained a captain’s commission in the army, and generally resided at Lichfield. Peter Garrick was on a recruiting party in Hereford, when his son David was born; and, as appears by the register of All-saints in that city, baptized Feb. 28, 17^16. His mother was Arabella, daughter of Mr. dough, one, of the vicars in Lichfield cathedral. At ten years of age, he was sent to the grammar-school at Lichfield; but, though remarkable for declining puerile diversions, did not apply himself with any assiduity to his books. He had conceived an early passion for theatrical representation; and, at little more than eleven years of age, procured “The Recruiting Officer” to be acted by young gentlemen and ladies, himself performing the part of serjeat Kite. From school he went on invitation to an uncle, a wine-merchant, at Lisbon; but returning shortly to Lichfield, he was sent once more to the grammar-school, where, however, he did not make any considerable progress in learning.