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

Our author all this while applied himself to his business; and never waited upon his cousin, or employed any one tospeak or act in his behalf (though many then blamed him for neglecting to do it); only one visit he made him in the November before his death, which was upon a Saturday in the afternoon. He gave him a sermon the next day, received his hearty thanks, and the next morning desired leave to return to the duties of his station; without speaking or even insinuating any thing respecting his estate. His cousin dismissed him with great kindness; and by his looks and manner seemed to have a particular regard for him, but discovered nothing of his intention by words. However, he used to employ persons privately to observe our author’s behaviour (who little suspected any such matter), and his behaviour was found to be such, that the stricter the observations were upon it, the more they turned to his advantage. In fine, Mr. Woliaston, of Shenton, became so thoroughly satisfied of our author’s merit, that he revoked the above-mentioned settlement, and made a will in his favour. In August following, that gentleman fell sick, and sending secretly toour author to come over to him, as of his own accord, without any notice of his illness, be complied with the message, and staid some days at Shenton. But while he was gone home, under a promise of returning, his cousin died, August 19, 1688.

He had now books and leisure, and he was resolved to make use of them, He was perfectly acquainted with the elementary parts of learning, and with the learned languages, Latin, Greek, Hebrew, Arabic, &c. He thought it necessary to add to these such a degree of philology and criticism as seemed likely to be useful to him: and also mathematical sciences, or at least the fundamentals of them; the general philosophy of nature the history and antiquities of the more known and noted states and kingdoms; and in order to attain the knowledge of true religion, and the discovery of truth, the points which he always had particularly in view, and to which he chiefly directed all his studies, he diligently inquired into the idolatries of the heathens; and made himself master of the sentiments, rites, and learning of the Jews; the history of tjie first settlement of Christianity, and the opinions and practice introduced into it since. In the mean time he exercised and improved his mind by using himself to clear images, observing the influence and extent of axioms, the nature and force of consequences, and the method of investigating truth. In general, he accustomed himself to much thinking as well as much reading. He likewise delighted in method and regularity: and chose to have his labours and refreshments periodical, and that his family and friends should observe the proper seasons of their revolution. He was most remarkably cheerful and lively in conversation, which rendered his company agreeable, and himself worthy to be courted by the learned and virtuous. But a general acquaintance was what he never cultivated, and it grew (as is mostly the case) more and more his aversion, so that he passed his days principally at home, with a few friends, with whom he could enjoy an agreeable relaxation of mind, and receive all the advantages of a sincere and open friendship. Having thus fixed his resolution to deserve honours, but not to wear them, it was not long before he published a piece entitled, “The Design of Part of the Book of Ecclesiastes, or the Unreasonableness of Man’s restless Contentions for the present Enjoyments, represented in an English poem,” in 8vo. But as he had never made poetry his study, he was very sensible of the defects of this attempt, and was afterward very desirous to suppress it. Ttiis poem was printed in 1690. Notwithstanding he declined to accept of any public employment, yet his studies were designed to be of public use, and his solitude was far from being employed in vain and trifling amusements, terminating in himself alone. But neither in this last view, could his retirement be without some inconveniences. His intimates were dropping off, and their places remained unsupplied; his own infirmities were increasing; the frequent remission of study, growing more and more necessary; and his solitude at the same time becoming less and less agreeable, for want of that conversation which had hitherto supported it.

It was but a short time before his death that he published his celebrated treatise, entitled “The Religion of Nature delineated.” He appears at first to have doubted the success of this work, and in 1722 printed only a few copies for the use of his friends, but when prevailed upon to publish it, it was so much approved that upwards of 10,000 copies were sold in a few years; and it has in all passed through eight or nine editions, five of which were in quarto.

Of the ingenuity of this work as a composition no doubts have been entertained, but its tendency was soon thought liable to suspicion. Some objected that he had injured Christianity by laying too much stress upon the obligations of truth, reason, and virtue; and by making no mention of revealed religion, nor even so much as dropping the least and most distant hints in its favour. This made him pass for an unbeliever with some; and the late lord Bolingbroke supposes Dr. Clarke to have had him in his eye when he described his fourth sort of theists. Wollaston held and has asserted the being and attributes of God, natural and moral a providence, general and particular; the obligations to morality the immateriality and immortality of the soul a future state and Clarke’s fourth sort of theists held and asserted the same. But whether Wollaston, like those theists, rejected all above this in the system of revelation, cannot with any certainty be concluded, though at the same time the contrary perhaps may not appear; because, whatever might have been thought necessary to prevent offence from being taken, it was not essential to Wollaston’s design to meddle with revealed religion. In the mean time, lord Bolingbroke has treated “The Religion of Nature delineated,” as a system of theism; which it certainly is, whether Wollaston was a believer or not. His lordship calls it “strange theism, as dogmatical and absurd as artificial theology,” and has spent several pages to prove it so; yet allows the author of it to have been “a man of parts, of learning, a philosopher, and a geometrician.” The seventh edition of this work was printed in 1750 in 8vo, to which are added an account of the author, and also a translation of the notes into English. There is prefixed an advertisement by Dr. John Clarke, late dean of Salisbury, which informs us, that this work was in great esteem with her late majesty queen Caroline, who commanded him to translate the notes into English for her own use. Pope, who has taken some thoughts from it into his “Essay on Man,” informs Mr. Bethel in one of his letters how much this work was a favourite with the ladies, but accompanies his information with a sneer at the sex, which we dare not transcribe.

He had begun several other works, but they being in an unfinished state, he had burnt, or ordered them to be burnt, some time before his death. The following, however, happened to be spared; but from the place in which they were deposited, and from some other circumstances, it is probable that they owed their escape to mere forgetful ness. They were in number thirteen (besides about fourscore sermons) viz. 1. “An Hebrew Grammar.” 2. “Tyrocinia Arabica & Syriaca.” 3. “Specimen Vocabularii Biblico-Hebraici, literis nostratibus, quantum fert Linguarum dissonantia, descripti.” 4. “Formulae quasdam Gemarinse.” 5. “De variis generibus pedum, metrorum, carminum, &c. apud Judaeos, Graecos, & Latinos.” 6. “De Vocutii Tonis Monitio ad Tyrones.” 7. “Rudimenta ad Mathesin & Philosophiam spectantia” 8. “Miscellanea Philologica.” 9. Opinions of the ancient Philosophers. 10. “Judaica: sive Religionis & Literatures Judaicae synopsis.” 11. A collection of some antiquities and particulars in the history of mankind; tending to shew, that men have not been here upon this earth from eternity, &c. 12. Some passages relating to the history of Christ, collected out of the primitive fathers, 13. A treatise relating to the Jews, of their antiquities, language, &c. What renders it the more probable, or indeed almost beyond doubt, that he would have destroyed these likewise, if he had remembered them, is, that several of those which remain undestroyed, are only rudiments 01^ rougher sketches of what he afterwards reconsidered and carried on much farther; and which even after such revisal, he nevertheless committed to the flames, as being still (in his opinion) short of that perfection, to which he desired and had intended to bring them, and accordingly none of them have appeared.

, a celebrated cardinal and statesman, but to be remembered with more respect as a benefactor to learning, was so obscure in his origin that scarcely any historian mentions the names of his father and mother. Their names, however, are preserved by Rymer (Feed. vol. XIV. p. 355), in the pope’s bull of favours to those who came to Cardinal college in Oxford, and prayed for the safety of the said cardinal, and after his decease for the souls of him, his father Robert, and his mother Joan. This partly confirms the discovery of his zealous biographer, Dr. Fiddes, that he was the son of one Robert Wolsey, a butcher of Ipswich, where he was born in March 1471. Fiddes says that this Robert had a son whose early history corresponds with that of the cardinal, and that he was a man of considerable landed property. We may from other evidence conclude that his parents were either not poor, or not friendless, since they were able to give him the best education his native, town afforded, and afterwards to send him to Magdalen college. But in whatever way he was introduced here, it is certain that his progress in academical studies was so rapid that he was admitted to the degree of bachelor of arts at the age of fifteen, and from this extraordinary instance of precocity, was usually named the boy bachelor.

Wolsey’s first ecclesiastical preferment was the rectory of Lymington in Somersetshire, conferred upon him in 1500, by the marquis of Dorset, to whose three sons he had acted as tutor, when in Magdalen college. On receiving this presentation he left the university, and resided for some time on his cure, when a singular circumstance induced, or perhaps rendered it absolutely necessary for him to leave it. At a merry meeting at Lymington he either passed the bounds of sobriety, or was otherwise accessary in promoting a riot, for which sir Amyas Pauiet, a justice of peace, set him in the stocks. This indignity Wolsey remembered when it would have been honourable as well as prudent to have forgot it. After he had arrived at the high rank of chancellor, he ordered sir Amyas to be confined within the bounds of the Temple, and kept him in that place for five or six years.

This event, important as it was to the kingdom, was of no disadvantage to Wolsey, who saw in the young king, Henry VIII. a disposition that might be rendered more favourable to his lofty views; yet what his talents might have afterwards procured, he owed at this time to a court intrigue. Fox, bishop of Winchester and founder of Corpus Christi college, introduced him to Henry, in order to counteract the influence of the earl of Surrey (afterwards duke of Norfolk), and had probably no worse intention than to preserve a balance in the council; but Wolsey, who was not destined to play a subordinate part, soon rose higher in influence than either his patron or his opponent. He studied, with perfect knowledge of the human heart, to please the young king, by joining in indulgencies which, however suitable to the gaiety of a court, were ill becoming the character of an ecclesiastic. Yet amidst the luxuries which he promoted in his royal master, he did not neglect to inculcate maxims of state, and, above all, to insinuate, in a manner that appeared equally dutiful and disinterested, the advantages of a system of favouritism, which he secretly hoped would one day center in his own person. Nor was he disappointed, as for some time after this, his history, apart from what share he had in the public councils, is little more than a list of promotions following each other with a rapidity that alarmed the courtiers, and inclined the people, always jealous of sudden elevations, to look back on his origin.

In the private conduct of this extraordinary man, while in the height of his prosperity, we find a singular mixture of personal pride and public munificence. While his train of servants rivalled that of the king, and was composed of many persons of rank and distinction, his house was a school where their sons were usefully educated, and initiated in public life. And while he was dazzling the eyes, or insulting the feelings of the people by an ostentation of gorgeous furniture and equipage, such as exceeded the royal establishment itself, he was a general ancj liberal patron of literature, a man of consummate taste in works of art, elegant in his plans, and bpundless in his expences to execute them; and, in the midst of luxurious pleasures and pompous revellings, he was meditating the advancement of science by a munificent use of those riches which he seemed to accumulate only for selfish purposes.

In the mean time, there was no intermission in his preferments. His influence was courted by the pope, who had made him a cardinal, and, in 1516, his legate in England, with powers not inferior to his own; and by the king of Spain, who granted him a pension of three thousand livres, while the duchy of Milan bestowed on him a yearly grant often thousand ducats. On the resignation of archbishop Warham, he was appointed lord high chancellor. “If this new accumulation of dignity,” says Hume, “increased his enemies, it also served to exalt his personal character and prove the extent of his capacity. A strict administration of justice took place during his enjoyment of this high office; and no chancellor ever discovered greater impartiality in his decisions, deeper penetration of judgment, or more enlarged knowledge of law or equity.”

In 1518, he attended queen Catherine to Oxford, and intimated to the university his intention of founding lectures on theology, civil law, physic, philosophy, mathematics, rhetoric, Greek, and Latin; and in the following year three of these, viz. for Greek, Latin, and rhetoric, were founded and endowed with ample salaries, and read in the hall of Corpus Christi college. He appointed for his lectures the ablest scholars whom the university afforded, or whom he could invite from the continent. The members of the convocation, about this time, conferred upon him the highest mark of their esteem by a solemn decree that he should have the revisal and correction of the university statutes in the most extensive sense, and it does not appear that they had any reason to repent of this extraordinary instance of their confidence. The same power was conferred upon him by the university of Cambridge, and in both cases, was accompanied by documents which proved the very high opinion entertained by these learned bodies of his fitness to reform what was amiss in the republic of letters.

In 1524, he intonated to the university of Oxford his design of founding a college there, and soon commenced that great work. About two years after he founded his school , or college, as it has been sometimes called, at Ipswich, as a nursery for his intended college at Oxford, aiul this for a short time is said to have rivalled the schools of Winchester and Eton. As he mixed ecclesiastical dignity with all his learned institutions, he appointed here a dean, twelve canons, and a numerous choir. At the same time he sent a circular address to the schoolmasters of England, recommending them to teach their youth the elements of elegant literature, literatura elegantissima, and prescribed the use of Lily’s grammar.

Of the immense riches which he derived from his various preferments, some were no doubt spent in luxuries which left only a sorrowful remembrance, but the greater part was employed in" those magnificent edifices which have immortalized his genius and spirit. In 1514 he began to build the palace at Hampton Court, and having finished it, with all its sumptuous furniture, in 1528, he presented it to the king, who in return gave him the palace of Richmond for a residence. In this last mentioned year, he acceded to the bishopric of Winchester by the death of Fox, and resigned that of Durham. To Winchester, however, he never went. That reverse of fortune which has exhibited him as an example of terror to the ambitious, was now approaching, and was accelerated by events, the consequences of which he foresaw, without the power of averting them. Henry was now agitated by a passion not to be controuled by the whispers of friendship, or the counsels of statesmen, and when the cardinal, whom he had appointed to forward his divorce from queen Catherine and his marriage with Anne Boleyn, appeared tardily to adhere to forms, or scrupulously to interpose advice, he determined to make him feel the weight of his resentment. It happened unfortunately for the cardinal that both the queen and her rival were his enemies, the queen from a suspicion that she never had a cordial friend in him, and Anne from a knowledge that he had secretly endeavoured to prevent her match with the king. But a minute detail of these transactions and intrigues belongs to history, in which they occupy a large space. It may suffice here to notice that the cardinal’s ruin, when once determined, was effected in the most sudden and rigorous manner, and probably without his previous knowledge of the violent measures that were to be taken.

On the first day of term, Oct. 9, 1529, while he was opening the Court of Chancery at Westminster, the attorney-general indicted him in the Court of King’s Bench, on the statute of provisors, 16 Richard II. for procuring a bull from Rome appointing him legate, contrary to the statute, by which he had incurred a prtemunire^ and forfeited all his goods to the king, and might be imprisoned. Before he could give in any reply to this indictment, the king sent to demand the great seal from him, which was given to sir Thomas More. He was then ordered to leave York-place, a palace which had for some centuries been the residence of the archbishops of York, and which he had adorned with furniture of great value and magnificence: it now became a royal residence under the name of Whitehall. Before leaving this place to go to Esher, near Hampton Court, a seat belonging to the bishopric of Winchester, he made an inventory of the furniture, plate, &c. of York-place, which is said to have amounted to the incredible sum of five hundred thousand crowns, or pounds of our money. He then went to Putney by water, and set out on the rest of his journey on his mule, but he had not gone far before he was met by a messenger from the king, with a gracious message, assuring him that he stood as high as ever in the royal favour, and this accompanied by a ring, which the king had been accustomed to send, as a token to give credit to the bearer. Wolsey received these testimonials with the humblest expression of gratitude, but proceeded on his way to Esher, which he found quite unfurnished. The king’s design by this solemn mockery is not easily conjectured. It is most probable that it was a trick to inspire the cardinal with hopes of being restored to favour, and consequently to prevent his defending himself in the prosecution upon the statute of provisors, which Henry knew he could do by producing his letters patent authorising him to accept the pope’s bulls. And this certainly was the consequence, for the Cardinal merely instructed his attorney to protest in his name that he was quite ignorant of the above statute; but that he acknowledged other particulars with which he was charged to be true, and submitted himself to the king’s mercy. The sentence of the court was, that “he was out of the protection, and his lands, goods, and chattels forfeit, and his person might be seized.”

The next step to complete his ruin was taken by the duke of Norfolk and the privy counsellors, who drew up articles against him, and presented them to the king; but he still affecting to take no personal concern in the matter, remained silent. Yet these probably formed the basis of the forty-four articles presented December 1, to the House of Lords, as by some asserted, or, according to other accounts, by the lords of the council to the House of Commons. Many of them are evidently frivolous or false, and others, although true, were not within the jurisdiction of the House. The cardinal had, in fact, already suffered, as his goods had been seized by the king; he was now in a prtemunire, and the House could not go much farther than to recommend what had already taken place. The cardinal, however, found one friend amidst all his distresses, who was not to be alarmed either at the terrors of the court or of the people. This was Thomas Cromwell, formerly Wolsey’s steward (afterwards earl of Essex), who now refuted the articles with so much spirit, eloquence, and argument, that although a very opposite effect might have been expected, his speech is supposed to have laid the foundation of that favour which the king afterwards extended to him, but which, at no very distant period, proved as fatal to him as it had been to his master. His eloquence had a yet more powerful effect, for the address founded on these articles was rejected by the Commons, and the Lords could not proceed farther without their concurrence.

The society, as he planned it, was to consist of one hundred and sixty persons, according to Wood, or omitting the forty canons of the second order, in the enumeration of whom Wood was mistaken, one hundred and forty-six; but no mention could yet be made of the scholars who were to proceed from his school at Ipswich, although, had he lived, these would doubtless have formed a part of the society, as the school was established two years before his fall. This constitution continued from 1525 to 1529-30, when he was deprived of his power and property, and for two years after it appears to have been interrupted, if not dissolved. It is to his honour that in his last correspondence with secretary Cromwell and with the king, when all worldly prospects were about to close upon him, he pleaded with great earnestness, and for nothing so earnestly, as that his majesty would be pleased to suffer his college at Oxford to go on. What effect this had, we know not, but the urgent entreaties of the members of the society, and of the university at large, were at length successful, while at the same time the king determined to deprive Wolsey of all merit in the establishment, and transfer the whole to himself. The subsequent history of Christ church it would be unnecessary to detail in this place.

An impartial life of cardinal Wolsey is perhaps still a desideratum in English biography. Cavendish is minute and interesting in what he relates of the cardinal’s domestic history, but defective in dates and arrangement, and not altogether free from partiality; which, however, in one so near to the cardinal, may perhaps be pardoned. Fiddes is elaborate, argumentative, and upon the whole useful, as arc extensive collector of facts and authorities; but he wrote for a special purpose, and has attempted, what no man can effect, a portrait of his hero free from those vices and failings of which it is impossible to acquit him. Grove, with all the aid of Cavendish, Fiddes, and even Shakspeare, whose drama he regularly presses into the service, is a heavy and injudicious compiler, although he gives so much of the cardinal’s contemporaries, that his volumes may be consulted with advantage as a series of general annals of the time. But Cavendish, on whom all who have written on the actions of Wolsey, especially our modern historians, have relied, has been the innocent cause of some of their principal errors. Cavendish’s work remained in manuscript, of which several copies are still extant, until the civil wars, when it was first printed under the title of “The Negociations of Thomas Wolsey, &c.” 1641, 4to, and the chief object of the publication was a parallel between the cardinal and archbishop Laud, in order to reconcile the public to the murder of that prelate. That this object might be the better accomplished, the manuscript was mutilated and interpolated without shame or scruple, and no pains having been taken to compare the printed edition with the original, the former passed for genuine above a century, nor until very lately has the work been presented to the public as the author left it, in Dr. Wordsworth’s "Ecclesiastical Biography.

, an eminent English antiquary and biographer, was the son of Thomas Wood, bachelor of arts and of the civil law; and was born at Oxford, December 17, 1632. He was sent to New-college school in that city in 1641; and three years after removed to the free-school at Thame in Oxfordshire, where he continued till his admission at Merton, 1647. His mother in Tain endeavoured to prevail on him to follow some trade or profession; his prevailing turn was to antiquity: “heraldry, music, and painting, he says, did so much crowd upon him, that he could not avoid them; and he could never give a reason why he should delight in those studies more than others; so prevalent was nature, mixed with a generosity of mind, and a hatred to all that was servile, sneaking, or advantatageous, for lucre-sake.” He took the degree of B.A. 1652, and M.A. in 1655, As he resided altogether at Oxford, he perused all the evidences of the several colleges and churches, from which he compiled his two great worts, and assisted all who were engaged in the like designs; at the same time digesting and arranging all the papers he perused; thus doing the cause of antiquity a double service. His drawings preserved many things which soon after were destroyed. In 1665, he began to lay the foundation of “Historia & Antiquitates Universitatis Oxoniensis;” which was published in 1674, in 2 vols. folio. The first contains the antiquities of the university in general, and the second those of the particular colleges. This work was written by the author in English, and so well esteemed that the university procured it to be translated into Latin, the language in which it was published. The author spent eight years about it, and was, as we are told, at the pains to extract it from the bowels of antiquity. Of the Latin translation, Wood himself has given an account. He tells us, that Dr. Fell, having provided one Peers, a bachelor of arts of Christ-church, to translate it, sent to him for some of the English copy, and set the translator to work; who, however, was some time before he could make a version to his mind. “But at length having obtained the knack,” says Wood, “he went forward with the work; yet all the proofs, that came from the press, went through the doctor’s hands, which he would correct, alter, or dash out, or put in what he pleased; which created a great deal of trouble to the composer and author, but there was no help. He was a great man, and carried all things at his pleasure so much, that many looked upon the copy as spoiled and vitiated by him. Peers was a sullen, dogged, clownish, and perverse, fellow; and when he saw the author concerned at the altering of his copy, he would alter it the more, and study to put things in that might vex him, and yet please his dean, Dr. Fell.” And he afterwards complains, how “Dr. Fell, who printed the book at his own charge, took so much liberty of putting in and out what he pleased, that the author was so far from dedicating or presenting the book to any one, that he would scarcely own it.” Among the “Genuine Remains of Barlow, bishop of Lincoln, published by sir Peter Pett in 1693,” 8vo, are two letters of that prelate, relating to this work. In the first letter we have the following passage: “What you say of our late antiquities is too true. We are alarmed by many letters, not only of false Latin, but false English too, and many bad characters cast on good men; especially on the Anti-Arminians, who are all made seditious persons, schismatics, if not heretics: nay, our first reformers are made fanatics. This they tell me; and our judges of assize, now in town, say no less^. I have not read one leaf of the book yet; but I see I shajl be necessitated to read it over, that I may with my own eyes see the faults, and (so far as I am able) endeavour the mending of them. Nor do I know any other way but a new edition, with a real correction of all faults; and a declaration, that those miscarriages cannot justly be imputed to the university, as indeed they cannot, but to the passion and imprudence, if not impiety, of one or two, who betrayed the trust reposed in them in the managing the edition of that book.” In the second letter, after taking notice that the translation was made by the order and authority of the dean of Christ-church; that not only the Latin, but the history itself, is in many things ridiculously false; and then producing passages as proofs of both; he concludes thus: “Mr. Wood, the compiler of those antiquities, was himself too favourable to papists; and has often complained to me, that at Christ-church some things were put in which neither were in his original copy nor approved by him. The truth is, not only th Latin, but also the matter of those antiquities, being erroneous in several things, may prove scandalous, and give our adversaries some occasion to censure, not only the university, but the church of England and our reformation. Sure I am, that the university had no hand in composing or approving those antiquities; and therefore the errors which are in them cannot de jure be imputed to the university, but must lie upon Christ-church and the composer of them.” This work, however, is now in a great measure rescued from misapprehension by the publication of Wood’s ms. in English by the rev. John Gutch, 3 vols. 4to.

Mr. Wood afterwards undertook his more important work, which was published in 1691, folio; and a second edition in 1721. folio, with this title: “Athenæ Oxonienses. An exact history of all the writers and bishops who have had their education in the most ancient and famous university of Oxford, from the fifteenth year of king Henry the seventh, A.D. 1500, to the author’s death in November, 1695; representing the birth, fortune, preferment, and death of all those authors and prelates, the great accidents of their lives, and the fate and character of their writings. To which are added, the Fasti, or annals of the skid university. In two volumes. The second edition, very much corrected and enlarged; with the addition of above 500 new lives from the author’s original manuscript.” Impartiality and veracity being qualities so essential in an historian, that all other qualities without them cannot make a history good for any thing, Wood has taken some pains to prove, that these great qualities were not wanting in him; and for that purpose thought it expedient to prefix to his work the following curious account of himself. “As to the author himself,” says he, “he is a person who delights to converse more with the dead than with the living, and has neither interest with, nor inclination to flatter or disgrace, any man, or any community of men, of whatever denomination. He is such a universal lover of all mankind, that he could wish there was such a standing measure of merit and honour agreed upon among them all, that there might be no cheat put upon readers and writers in the business of commendations. But, since every one will have a double balance herein, one for himself and his own party, and another for his adversary and dissenters, all he can do is, to, amass and bring together what every side thinks will make best weight for themselves. Let posterity hold the scales and judge accordingly; suu m cuique decus. posteritas rependat. To conclude: the reader is desired to know, that this Herculean labour had been more proper for a head or fellow of a college, or for a public professor or officer of the most noble university of Oxford to have undertaken and consummated, than the author, who never enjoyed any place or office therein, or can justly say that he hath eaten the bread of any founder. Also, that it had been a great deal more fit for one who pretends to be a virtuoso, and to know all men, and all things that are transacted; or for one who frequents much society in common rooms, at public fires, in coffee-houses, assignations, clubs, &c. where the characters of men and their works are frequently discussed; but the author, alas! is so far from frequenting such company and topics, that he is as it were dead to the world, and utterly unknown in person to the generality of scholars in Oxon. He is likewise so great an admirer of a solitary and retired life, that he frequents no assemblies of the said university, hath no companion in bed or at board, in his studies, walks, or journeys; nor holds communication with any, unless with some, and those very few, of generous and noble spirits, that have in some measure been promoters and encouragers of this work: and, indeed, all things considered, he is but a degree different from an ascetic, as spending all or most of his time, whether by day or night, in reading, writing, and divine contemplation. However, l>e presumes, that, the less his company and acquaintance is, the more impartial his endeavours -will appear to the ingenious and learned, to whose judgments only he submits them and himself.”

But, as unconnected as Wood represents himself with all human things and persons, it is certain that he had his prejudices and attachments, and strong ones too, for certain notions and systems; and these prejudices and attachments will always be attended with partialities for or against those who shall be found to favour or oppose such notions or systems. They had their influence upon Wood, who, though he always spoke to the best of his judgment, and often with great truth and exactness, yet sometimes gave way to prejudice and prepossession. Among other, freedoms, he took some with the earl of Clarendon, their late chancellor, which exposed him to the censure of the university. He had observed in the life of judge Glynne, that “after the restoration of Charles II. he was made his eldest serjeant at law, by the corrupt dealing of the then chancellor,” who was the earl of Clarendon: for which expression, chiefty, the succeeding earl preferred an action in the vice-chancellor’s court against him for defamation of his deceased father. The issue of the process was a hard judgement given against the defendant; which, to be made the more public, was put into the Gazette in these words: “Oxford, July 31, 1693. On the-29th instant, Anthony Wood was condemned in the vice-chancellor’s court of the university of Oxford, for having written and published, in the second volume of his book, entitled `Athense Oxonienses,' divers infamous libels against the right honourable Edward late earl of Clarendon, lord high chancellor of England, and chancellor of the said university; and was therefore banished the said university, until such time as he shall subscribe such a public recantation as the judge of the court shall approve of, and give security not to offend in the like nature for the future: and his said book was therefore also decreed to be burnt before the public theatre; and on this day it was burnt accordingly, and public programmas of his expulsion are already affixed in the three usual places.” An historian who has recorded this censure says, that it was the more grievous to the blunt author, because it seemed to come from a party of men whom he had the least disobliged. His bitterness had been against the Dissenters; but of all the zealous Churchmen he had given characters with a singular turn of esteem and affection. Nay, of the Jacobites, and even of Papists themselves, he had always t spoken the most favourable things; and therefore it was really the greater mortification to him, to feel the storm coming from a quarter where he thought he least deserved, and might least expect it. For the same reason, adds the historian, this correction was some pleasure to the Presbyterians, who believed there was a rebuke due to him, which they themselves were not able to pay. Wood was animadverted upon likewise by Burnet, in his “Letter to the bishop of Litchfield and Coventry, concerning a book of Anthony Harmer (alias Henry Wharton), called `A Specimen of some Errors and Defects in the History of the Reformation,' &c.” upon which, in 1693, he published a vindication of himself, which is reprinted before the second edition of his “Athenæ Oxonienses.”

, whom Dr. Whitby pronounces “the most ingenious and solid writer of the Roman (catholic) party,” and who merits some notice from his name occurring so frequently in the popish controversy at the latter end of the seventeenth century, was the son of John Woodhead of Thornhill in Yorkshire, and was born in 1608 at Meltham in the parish of Abbersbury, or Ambury, in that county. He had his academical education in University college, Oxford, where he took his degrees in arts, was elected fellow in 1633, and soon after entered into holy orders. In 1641 he served the office of proctor, and then set out for the continent as travelling tutor to some young gentlemen of family who had been his pupils in college. While at Rome he lodged with the duke of Buckingham, whom he taught mathematics, and is supposed about the same time to have embraced the communion of the church of Rome, although for a long time he kept this a profound secret. On his return to England he had an apartment in the duke of Buckingham’s house in the Strand, and was afterwards entertained in lord Capel’s family. In 1648 he was deprived of his fellowship by the parliamentary visitors, but merely on the score of absence, aod non-appearance, when called. After the restoration he was reinstated in his fellowship, but rinding it impossible any longer to conform, he obtained leave to travel, with the allowance of a travelling fellowship. Instead, Kbwever, of going abroad, he retired to an obscure residence at Hoxton near London, where he spent several years, partly in instructing some young gentlemen of popish families, and partly in composing his works. Here he remained almost undiscovered, until a little while before his death, which happened at Hoxton, May 4, 1678. He was buried in St. Pancras church-yard, where there is a monument to his memory.

Woodhead was considered as one of the ablest controversial writers, on the popish side, in his time, aqd some protestants have paid respect to his abilities and candour. Most of his works were printed at Mr. Obadiah Walker’s private press, and some of them have been attributed to him. Wood gives a long list of about twenty-three articles, some of which are translations. The principal of his original writings is his “Guide in controversies,” or more fully, “A rational account of the doctrine of catholics, concerning the ecclesiastical guide in controversies of religion: reflecting on the late writings of protestants, particularly of archbishop Laud, and doctor Stillingfleet, on this subject; in four discourses” under the initials R. H. 1666, 1667, and 1673, 4to. Wood adds, “Many stick not to say, which is a wonder to me^ that he was the author of” The Whole Duty of Man“and of all that goes under the name of that author.” The protestant writers with whom he was involved in controversy, and in whose lives or writings his name occurs, were, Peter Heylyn, Stillingfleet, archbishop Wake, Drs. Aldrich, Smalridge, Harrington, Tully, Hooper, and Whitby.

During his residence here, sir Ralph Dutton, who was Dr. Barwick' s son-in-law, invited Mr. Woodward to accompany the doctor on a visit to his seat at Sherborne, in Gloucestershire. He probably made some stay here, for we are told that he was now first led to inquire into that branch of natural philosophy, which became afterwards the favourite object of his studies, and the foundation of the fame which he acquired. The country about Sherborne, and the neighbouring parts of Gloucestershire, to which he made frequent excursions, abounded with stone; and there being quarries laid open almost every where, he was induced to visit them, and to examine the nature and condition of the stone. In these visits he was struck with the great variety of sea-shells, and other marine productions, with which the sand of most of this stone was incorporated; and being encouraged by the novelty, and as he judged, the singular importance of this speculation, he resolved to pursue it through the remote parts of the kingdom. In consequence of this resolution, he travelled throughout almost all England, in order to inform himself of the present condition of the earth, and all bodies contained in it, as far as either grottoes, caverns, mines, quarries, &c. led him into a knowledge of the interior, and as far as his best observations could extend in respect to the exterior surface, and such productions as any where occurred, plants, insects, sea, river, and land-shells. He directed his attention likewise to the fluids; as well those within the surface of the earth, the water of mines, grottoes, caverns, &c. as those upon the surface, the sea, rivers, and springs; and in making these observations, he entered every curious circumstance, with great care$ in a journal. When he had finished these researches, and had returned to London, he would gladly have gone to the continent on the same pursuit, hut was prevented by the war which at that time disturbed the quiet of Europe. In order, however, to supply this defect as far as possible, he applied to gentlemen who had travelled, and were likely to give him information on the subject of his inquiries; and he also drew up a list of questions upon this subject, which he sent off to all parts of the world, whereever either himself, or any of his acquaintance, had any friends resident; the result of which was, that in time he was abundantly satisfied, that the circumstances after which he inquired, were much the same every where. Being now prepared with information, and, as it will appear, not unprovided with a theory, he published in 1695, in 1 vol. 6vo, “An Essay towards a natural history of the Earth and terrestrial bodies, especially minerals; as also of the sesj rivers, and springs. With an account of the universal deluge, and of the effects that it had upon the earth.' 1 He called it an” Essay," because it was designed, as, he said, to be followed by a large work upon the same subject, of whi-ch this was but a specimen.

In 1699 he published, in the Philosophical Transactions, “Some thoughts and experiments concerning Vegetation.” These experiments have acquired great celebrity, and are constantly referred to by all writers on vegetable physiology. They consist in putting sprigs of vegetables into the mouths of phials filled with water, allowing them to vegetate for some time, and then determining the quantity of water which they have imbibed, and the quantity of weight which they have gained. The difference obviously indicates the quantity of moisture exhaled by the plant. About 1693, Dr. Woodward’s attention was directed to an object of a very different kind. He had purchased from the museum of a deceased friend, a small, but very curious icon shield of a round form; on the concave side of which were represented, in the upper part, the ruins of Rome when burnt by the Gauls; and below, the weighing out the gold to purchase their retreat, together with the arrival of Camillus, and flight of the Gauls; and in the centre appeared a grotesque mask with horns very large and prominent; the figures all executed in a spirited and beautiful manner. Mr. Conyers, in whose collection this curiosity was, had purchased it of a brazier, who bought it among some brass and iron fragments which came out of the armoury in the Tower of London, near the end of Charles II.'s reign. As soon as it came into the possession of Dr. Woodward, many inquisitive persons came to see it, and in order to enable others, who had not that opportunity, to form a judgment of it, he not only had several casts made of it, but also, in 1705, had it engravenat Amsterdam, on a copper-plate of the size of the original copies of which were transmitted to many learned foreigners, for their opinion. Antiquaries, however, could not agree as to its age. The professors and other critics in Holland, in general, pronounced it antique; but those in France thought otherwise, and Woodward wrote against their opinion a letter to the abbe Bignon, which is published by Dr. Ward in the appendix to his “'Lives of the Gresham Professors.” Dodwell wrote a “Dissertatio de Parma equestri Woodwardiana,” which was published by Hearne (See Hearne) in 1713. Dodwell supposed this shield came out of some public collection; such as the Shield Walk in Whitehall-­palace, from Henry VIII.'s time to Charles I. Theophilus Downes, fellow of Baliol college, differed from him as to the antiquity of this monument; and after his death were published, in two leaves, 8vo, his “De clypeo Woodwardiano stricturae breves.” Ainsworth abridged Dodwell’s dissertation, and inserted it at the end of the “Museum Woodwardianum,” or catalogue of the doctor’s library and curiosities, sold by auction at Covent-garden in 1728. He afterwards enlarged the piece, considered the objections, and reprinted it with the title, “De Clypeo Camilli antique,” &c. 1734, 8vo. Spanheim and Abr. Seller had both begun to write dissertations on it, but were prevented by death. Ward was the last who made any remarks on it, and those in favour of its antiquity; but Moyle’s objection to its antiquity from the ruins of an amphitheatre has not been removed by Dr. Ward. No ancient artist, Mr. Gough observes, could be so ignorant as to ascribe such buildings to that period. At Dr. Woodward’s sale, this shield was purchased by Col. King, one of his executors, for 100l., and at the sale of the colonel’s effects, in 1768, it was sold to Dr. Wilkinson for forty guineas, along with the letters, &c. relating to it.

Dr. Woodward declined in his health a considerable time before he died; and though he had all along continued to prepare materials for his large work, relating to the Natural History of the Earth, yet it was never finished; but only some collections, said to have been detached frooi it, were printed at different times, as enlargements upon particular topics in his essay. He was confined first to his house, and afterwards to his bed, many months before his death. During this time, he not only drew up instructions for the disposal of his books and other collections, but alsocompleted and sent to the press his “Method of Fossils,” in English; and lived to see the whole of it printed, except the last sheet. He died in Gresham-college April 25, 1728; and was buried in Westminster-abbey, where is a monument to his memory. After his death, the two following* works were published, 1. “Fossils of all kinds, digested into a Method suitable to their mutual relation and affinity,” &c. 8vo. 2. “A Catalogue of Fossils in the Collection of John Woodward, M. D.” in 2 vols. 8vo. By his last will, he founded a lecture in the university of Cambridge, to be read there upon his “Essay towards the Na-r tural History of the Earth, his Defence of it, his Discourse of Vegetation, and his State of Physic;” for which he ordered lands of 150l. per annum in South-Britain to be purchased and conveyed to that university, and out of this a hundred pounds per annum to the lecturer, who, after the death of his executors Dixie Windsor, Hugh Bethel, Richard Graham, esqrs. and colonel Richard King, is to be chosen by the archbishop of the province, the bishop of the diocese, the presidents of the College of Physicians and of the Royal Society, the two members of parliament, and the whole senate of the university. This lecturer to be a bachelor; to have no other preferment to read four lectures a year in English or Latin, of which one is to be printed; to have the custody of the two cabinets of fossils given by the doctor to the university, to shew them three days in ach week gratis; and to be allowed ten pounds per annum for making experiments and observations, and keeping correspondence with learned men. Some of these conditions it would not be easy to fulfil, yet the professorship continues, and has been held by men of talents. Dr. Conyers Middleton was the first appointed to the office, who opened the lectures with an elegant Latin oration in praise of the founder, and upon the usefulness of his institution.

Mr. Woollett died at his house, Upper Charlotte-street, Rathbone-place, May 23, 1785, aged fifty and the record of his death is given in these words “To say he was the first artist in his profession would be giving him his least praise, for he was a good nian. Naturally modest and amiable in his disposition, he never censured the works of others, or omitted pointing out their merits; his patience under the continual torments of a most dreadful disorder upwards of nine months was truly exemplary; and he died as he had lived, at peace with all the world, in vtfhich he never had an enemy. He has left his family inconsolable for his death, and the public to lament the loss of a man whose works (of which his unassuming temper never boasted) are an honour to his country.” An elegant monument was afterwards put up to his memory in the cloisters, Westminster abbey.

, an English divine, very notorious in his day for the pertinacity with which he published the most dangerous opinions, was born in 1669, at Northampton, where his father was a reputable tradesman. After a proper education at a grammar-school, he was entered of Sidney college, in Cambridge, in 1685, where he took both the degrees in arts, and that of bachelor of divinity, and was chosen fellow of his college. From this time, in conformity to the statutes of that society, he applied himself to the study of divinity and entering into holy orders, soon, we are told, became distinguished and esteemed for his learning and piety. Of what sort the latter was, his life will shew. It appears that he had very early conceived some of those notions which afterwards so much degraded his character. His first appearance as an author was in 1705, when he printed at Cambridge a work entitled “The old Apology of the Truth for the Christian Religion against the Jews and Gentiles revived,” 8vo. The design of this work, which is an octavo of near 400 pages, is to prove that all the actions of Moses were typical of Christ, and to shew-tljat some of the fathers did not think them real, but typical relations of what was to come. This allegorical way of interpreting the scriptures of the Old Testament our author is said to have adopted from Origen, whose works, however, he must have studied very injudiciously; yet he became so enamoured of this methocf of interpretation, that he not only thought it had been unjustly neglected by the moderns, but that it might be useful, as an additional proof of the truth of Christianity. He preached this doctrine first in the college chapel, and afterwards before the university at St. Mary’s, to the great surprise of his audience. Yet, as his intentions seemed to be good, and his character respected, and as he had not yet begun to make use of the indecent language which disgraced his subsequent works, no opposition was raised; and when the volume appeared in print, though there were some singular notions advanced, and a new manner of defending Christianity proposed, yet there was nothing that gave particular offence, and many things which shewed great ingenuity and learning. He still continued to reside at Cambridge, applying himself indefatigably to his studies, in a quiet and retired way, until 1720, ^hen he published a Latin dissertation entitled “De Pontii Pilati ad Tiberium Epistola circa res Jesu Christi gestas; per Mystagogum,” 8vo, in which he endeavours to prove that Pontius Pilate wrote a letter to Tiberius Caesar concerning the works of Christ; bwt that the epistle delivered down to us under that name among the writings of the fathers, was forged. The same year he published another pamphlet in Latin, with the title of “Origenis Adamantii Renati Epistola ad Doctores Whitbeium, Waterlandium, Whistonium, aliosque literates hujus saeculi disputatores, circa fidem vere orthodoxam et scripturarum interpretationem;” and, soon after, a second epistle with the same title. The rage of allegorizing the letter of the holy scriptures into mystery, with which this writer was incurably infected, began now to shew itself more openly to the world than it had hitherto done. In 1720 and 1721, he published two letters to Dr. Bennet, rector of St. Giles’s, Cripplegate, London; one upon this question, “Whether the people called quakers do not the nearest of any other sect of religion resemble the primitive Christians in principles and practice?” by Aristobulus; the other, “In defence of the Apostles and Primitive Fathers of the Church, for their allegorical interpretation of the law of Moses, against the ministers of the letter and literal commentators of this age;” and, soon after, he himself published an answer to these two letters; in all which his view appears to have been rather to be severe upon the clergy th,an to defend either apostles, fathers, or quakers. At what time he left college does not appear, but he had about this time absented himself from it beyond the time limited by the statutes. The society and his friends, however, compassionating his case, and judging it to be in some degree the effect of a bodily distemper, allowed him the revenues of his fellowship for a support. The supposition hurt his pride, and he went directly to Cambridge to convince the gentlemen of his college that he laboured under no disorder, and as he at the same time refused to reside, he lost his fellowship.

The “Four free gifts” were scarcely published, when, the controversy with Collins going on at this time, Mr. Woolstou, under pretence of acting the part of an impartial inquirer, published his “Moderator between an Infidel and Apostate,” and two “Supplements to the Moderator.” In these pieces, he pursued his allegorical scheme, to the exclusion of the letter; and, with regard to the miracles of Christ, not only contended for sublime and mystical interpretations of them, but also asserted that they were not real, or ever actually wrought. As he conducted this attempt with greater rudeness and insolence than any of those that had appeared before him, his presumption was not likely to be unnoticed in a Christian country, and he was prosecuted by the attorney-general; but the prosecution was stopped at the intercession of Mr. Whision*. In 1727, 1728, 1729, and 1730, were published his “Six Discourses on the Miracles of Christ,” and his two “Defences” of them. The six discourses are dedicated to six bishops: Gibson, of London; Chandler, of Litchfield; Smalbroke, of St. David’s Hare, of Chichester; Sherlock, of Bangor; and Potter, of Oxford, who are all treated with the utmost rudeness. What he undertakes to prove is, that the miracles of our Saviour, as we find them in the Evangelists, however related by them as historical truths, were not real, but merely allegorical; and that they are to be interpreted, not in literal but only in mystical senses. His pretence is, that the fathers of the church considered our Saviour’s miracles in the same allegorical way that he does; that is, as merely allegorical, and excluding the letter: but this is not so. Some of the fathers, indeed, and Origen in particular, did not confine themselves to the bare letter, but endeavoured, upon the

* It does not appear very clearly Clarke, to persuade him to go with me whether this was at the intercession of to lord Townsend (th‘e secretary of Wbiston. Winston informs us of his state) but he refused, alledging that having applied sto theattorney-gene- the report would then go abroad, that ral, sir Philip Yorke, who said that he the kmij supported blasphemy. Howwould not’ proceed unless the secretary ever, no farther progress was made i of state sent himan order so to do. Mr. Woolston’s trial. “1 then,” addsWhiston, “went to Dr. foundation of the letter, to raise spiritual meanings, and to allegorize by way of moral application; and they did this,­not only upon the miracles of Christ, but upon almost all the historical facts of the Old and New Testament: but they never denied the miracles or the facts. This strange and enthusiastic scheme of Woolston was offensive enough of itself, but infinitely more so from his manner of conducting it; for he not 'only argues against the miracles of Christ, but treats them in a most ludicrous and outrageous way: expressing himself in terms of astonishing insolence and scurrility. Such conduct raised a general disgust: and many books and. pamphlets, berth from bishops and inferior clergy, appeared against his discourses; and a second prosecution was commenced and carried on with vigour, against which there seemed to be now little or no opposition, he having by his disingenuity of argument and scurrility of manner, excluded himself from all the privileges of a fair reasoner. At his trial in Guildhall before the lord chief-justice Raymond, he spoke several times himself; and among other things urged, that” he thought it very bard to be tried by a set of men, who, though otherwise very learned and worthy persons, were yet no morejudges of the subjects on which he wrote than he himself was a judge of the most crabbed points of law.“He was sentenced to a year’s imprisonment, and to pay a fine of Iool He purchased the liberty of the rules of the King’s Bench, where he continued after the expiration of the year, being unable to pay the fine. Dr. Samuel Clarke had begun his solicitations at court for the releasement of Woolston, declaring that he did not undertake it as an approver of his doctrines, but as an advocate for that liberty which he himself had always contended for; but he was hindered from effecting it by his death, which happened soon after Woolston’s commitment. The greatest obstruction to his deliverance from confinement was the obligation of giving security not to offend by any future writings, he being resolved to write again as freely as before. While some supposed this author not in earnest, but meaning to subvert Christianity under a pretence of defending it; others believed him disordered, and not perfectly in his right mind; and many circumstances concurred to persuade to the latter of these opinions; but how, in either case, a prosecu-r tion for blasphemy comes to* be considered as persecution for religion, remains yet to be explained. Such a construction, however, appears to have been put upon it by the Clarkes and Lardners of those days, and by their successors in our own. As the sale of Woolston’s books was very great (for such blasphemies will find readers as well as advocates for the publication of them), his gains arising from them must have been proportionable; but he defrayed all the expences, and those not inconsiderable, to which his publishers were subjected by selling. He died January 27, 1732-3, after an illness of four days; and, a few minutes before his death, uttered these words:” This is a struggle which all men must go through, and which I bear not only patiently, but with willingness." His body was interred in St. George’s church-yard, Southwark.

Bishop Godwin, the biographer, who married one of his daughters, and seems to have been with him in his last moments, says, he dictated letters, not two hours before his death, on subjects of importance, full of the piety and prudence of a man in health and vigour; and being reminded to consult his health, he repeated and applied the saying of Vespasian, that “a bishop ought to die upon his legs;” which in him, as before in the emperor, was verified, for as he was supported across the room (his complaint being an asthma) he sunk, and expired almost before he touched the ground, in the fifty-ninth year of his age. He was interred in Exeter cathedral, with a Latin inscription by his son. He composed many theological tracts, monitory and practical, which were all printed and published in the space of about twelve months, in the years 1576 and 1577. 1. “Anatornie of the whole man.” 2. “Christian manual.” 3. “Of Conscience.” 4. “Armour of proofe.” 5. < Immortalitie of the soule.“6.” Fortresse of the Faithfull,“and 7.” David’s Chain," which last is not mentioned by Wood or Ames.

Wormius had three wives, who brought him a family of sixteen children. He published some works on subjects relating to his profession, several in defence, of Aristotle’s philosophy, and several concerning the antiquities of Denmark and Norway. For these last he is principally remembered now, and they are esteemed very learned and correct; particularly his, I. “Fasti Danici,” 1626. 2. “A History of Norway,” 1633, 4to. 3. “Litteratnira Danica antiquissima, vulgo Gothica dicta, & de prisca Danorura Poesi,” 1636, 4to. 4. “Monumentorum Danicorurn libri VI.” 1643, folio. 5. “Lexicon Runicum, & Appendix ad Monumenta Danica,” 1650, folio. 6. “Series Regum Danise duplex, & limitum inter Daniam & Sueciam Descriptio,” 1642, folio. 7. “Talshoi, seu Monumentuni Stroense in Scania,” 1528, 4to. 8. “Monumentum Trygvvaldense,” 1636, 4to. All printed at Hafnia, or Copenhagen.

, a learned English divine, was born in Merionethshire in 1703, and educated at Oswestry-school, whence he came to Jesus-college, Oxford, where he made great proficiency in learning. From college he returned to Oswestry, and became usher in that school. He took the degree of M. A. at Cambridge in 1742; was afterwards incorporated at Jesus-college, Oxford, July 3, 1758; and proceeded B. and D. D.July 10, in that year. He was early taken notice of by that great encourager of learning bishop Hare, then bishop of St. Asaph, who presented him first to the vicarage of Llanyblodwell, in the county of Salop, and afterwards removed him to Llanrhayader, or Llanrhadra, in Denbighshire, where he lived much beloved, and died Oct. 6, 1778, much lamented. As he could never be prevailed upon to take two livings, bishop Hare gave him a stall at St. Asaph, and a sinecure, “to enable him,” he said, “to support his chanties” (for charitable he was in an eminent degree). Afterwards archbishop Drummond (to whom he had been chaplain for several years) presented him to a stall in the cathedral of York. These were all his preferments. He was a studious man, and wrote several books, of which the principal are here enumerated. I. “An Essay on the Scheme and Conduct, Procedure and Extent, of Man’s Redemption; designed for the honour and illustration of Christianity. To which is annexed, a Dissertation on the Design and Argumentation of the Book of Job,” by William Worthington, M. A. vicar of Blodwel in Shropshire, London, 1743, 8vo. 2. “The historical Sense of the Mosaic Account of the Fall proved and vindicated,” 17. . , 8vo. 3. “Instructions concerning Confirmation,” 17.,. , 8va. 4. “A Disquisition concerning the Lord’s-Supper,” 17. . , 8vo. 5. “The Use, Value, and Improvement, of various Readings shewn and illustrated, in a Sermon preached before the University of Oxford, at St. Mary’s, on Sunday Oct. 18, 1761,” Oxford, 1764, 8vo. 6. “A Sermon preached in the parish-church of Christchurch, London, on Thursday April the 21st, 1768; being the time of the yearly meeting of tl^e children educated in the charityschools in and about the cities of London and Westminster,” 1768, 4to. 7. “The Evidences of Christianity, deduced from Facts, and the Testimony of Sense, throughout all Ages of the Church, to the present Time. In a series of discourses, preached for the lecture founded by the hon. Robert Boyle, esq. in the parish-church of St. James, Westminster, in the years 1766, 1767, 1768; wherein is shewn, that, upon the whole, this is not a decaying, but a growing, Evidence,” 1769, 2 vols. 8vo. 8. “The Scripture Theory of the Earth, throughout all its Revolutions, and all the periods of its existence, from the creation to the final renovation of all things; being a sequel to the Essay on Redemption, and an illustration of the principles on which it is written,” 1773, 8vo. 9. “Irenicum; or, the Importance of Unity in the Church of Christ considered, and applied towards the healing of our unhappy differences and divisions,” 1775, 8vo. 10. “An Impartial Enquiry into the Case of the Gospel-Demoniacs with an appendix, consisting of an Essay on Scripture-­Demonology,” 1777, 8vo. This last was a warm attack on the opinion held out by the Rev. Hugh Farmer, in. his “Essay on the Demoniacs,” 1775, 8vo. and, having produced a spirited reply in 1778, Dr. Worthington prepared for the press (what by the express directions of his will was given to the public after his death) “A farther Enquiry into the case of the Gospel-Demoniacs, occasioned by Mr. Farmer’s on the subject,” 1779, 8vo.

, ranked by Fuller among the learned writers of JCing’s-college, Cambridge, was born in London, about the latter part of the sixteenth century, and educated at Eton, whence, being elected to King’scollege, he was entered, Oct. 1, 1579, commenced B. A. in 1583, M. A. in 1587, and B. D. in 1594. He was also fellow of that college, and some time chaplain to Robert earl of Essex. On the death of Dr. Whitaker in 1596 he stood candidate for the king’s professorship of divinity in Cambridge, with Dr. John Overall of Trinity-college; but failed, by the superior interest of the latter, although he performed his probationary exercises with general applause. In March 1596 he was chosen professor of divinity in Gresham-college, upon the first settlement of that foundation, and in 1598 quitted his fellowship at Cambridge, and marrying soon after, resigned also his professorship. He was then chosen lecturer of Allhallows Barking; but in 1604 was silenced by Dr. Bancroft, bishop of London, for some expressions used either in a prayer or sermon, which were considered as disrespectful to the king; but it does not appear that he remained long under suspension; at least, in a volume of sermons printed in 1609 he styles himself minister of Allhallows.

His writings are, 1. “An answer to a popish pamphlet, &c. entitled ‘Certain Articles,’ &c.” Lond. 1605, 4to. 2. “A defence of Mr. Perkins’ booke called A Reformed Catholike, &c.” ibid. 1606, 4to. 3. “The tryal of the Roman Clergy’s title to the Church,” ibid. 1608, 4to. 4. “Sermons on part of chapter first of St. John’s Gospel,” ibid. 1609, 4to. 5. “Run from Rome; or, The necessity of separating from that Church,” ibid. 1624, 4to. 6. “De reconciliatione peccatoris, &c.” Basil. 1624, 4to. 7. “An answer to a book, entitled Appello Coesarem, written by Mr. Richard Mountague,” ibid. 1626. 8. “The art of Logick,” ibid. 1626, 8vo. This is an English translation of Ramus’s logic, made by his son, and with a dedication by our author. This son, Samuel, who died in 1680, was rector of East and West Wretham in Norfolk.

Sir Henry was the only son of the second marriage of his father Thomas Wotton, esq. with Eleanora, daughter of sir William Finch, of Eastwell in Kent (ancestor to lord Winchelsea), and widow of Robert Morton, of the same county, esq. He was educated first under private tutors, and then sent to Winchester-school whence, in 1584, he was removed to New- college in Oxford. Here he was entered as a gentleman-commoner, and had his chamber in Hart-hall adjoining; and, for his chamber-fellow, Richard Baker, his countryman, afterwards a knight, and author of the well known “Chronicle” which goes by his name. Wotton did not continue long there, but went to Queen’s-college, where he became well versed in logic Uid philosophy-, and, being distinguished for his wit, was solicited to write a tragedy for private acting in that society, The name of it was “Tancredo” and Walton relates, “that it was so interwoven with sentences, and for the method and exact personating those humours, passions, and dispositions, which he proposed to represent, so performed, that the gravest of the society declared^ he had in a slight employment given an early and solid testimony of his future abilities.” In 1588 he supplicated the congregation of regents, that he might be admitted to the reading of any of the books of Aristotle’s logic, that is, be admitted to the degree of bachelor of arts; but “whether he was admitted to that or any other degree doth not appear,” says Wood, ^from the university registers;“although Walton tells us, that about his 20th year he proceeded master of arts, and at that time read in Latin three lectures de oculo, on the blessing of sight, which he illustrated by some beautiful passages aud apt reflexions. In 1589 he lost his father, and was left with no other provision than a rent-charge of 100 marks a-year. Soon after, he left Oxford, betook himself to travel, and went into France, Germany, and Italy. He stayed but one year in France, and part of that at Geneva; where he became acquainted with Beza and Isaac Casaubon. Three years he spent in Germany, and five in Italy, where both in Rome, Venice, and Florence, he cultivated acquaintance with the most eminent men for learning and all manner of fine arts; for painting, sculpture, chemistry, and architecture; of all which he was an amateur and an excellent judge. After having spent nine years abroad, he returned to England highly accomplished, and with a great accumulation of knowledge of the countries through which he had passed. His wit and politeness so effectually recommended him to the earl of Essex that he first admitted him into his friendship, and afterwards made him one of his secretaries, the celebrated Mr. Henry Cuff being the other. (See Cuff.) He personally attended all the councils and employments of the earl, and continued with him till he was apprehended for high treason. Fearing now lest he might, from his intimate connexion, be involved in his patron’s ruin, he thought proper to retire, and was scarcely landed in France, when he heard that his master Essex was beheaded, and his friend Cuff hanged. He proceeded to Florence, and was received into great confidence by the grand duke of Tuscany. This place became the more agreeable to him, from his meeting with signor Vietta, a gentleman of Venice, with whom he had been formerly intimately acquainted, and who was now the grand duke’s secretary. It was during this retreat that Mr. Wotton drew up his” State of Christendom, or a most exact and curious discovery of many secret passages, and hidden myteries of the times." This was first printed, a thin fol. in 1657, and afterwards in 1677, with a small alteration in the title. It was here also that the grand duke having intercepted letters which discovered a design to take away the life of James VI. of Scotland, dispatched Wouon thither to give him notice of it. Wotton was on this account, as well as according to his instructions, to manage this affair with all possible secrecy: and therefore, having parted from the duke, he took the name and language of an Italian; and to avoid the line of English intelligence and danger, he posted into Norway, and from that country to Scotland, He found the king at Stirling, and was admitted to him under the name of Octavio Baldi. He delivered his message and his letters to the king in Italian: then, stepping up and whis^ pering to his majesty, he told him he was an Englishman, requested a more private conference with him, and that he might be concealed during his stay in Scotland. He spent about three months with the king, who was highly entertained with him, and then returned to Florence, where, after a few months, the news of queen Elizabeth’s death, and of king James’s accession to the crown of England, arriyep!.

Sir Henry Wotton then returned to England, and, as it seems, not sooner than welcome, for king James, finding, among other officers of the late queen, sir Edward, who was afterwards lord Wotton, asked him, “if _he knew one Henry Wotton, who had spent much time in foreign travel?” Sir Edward replied, that “he knew him well, and that he was his brother.” Then the king asking, “Where he then was” was answered, “at Venice, or Florence; but would soon be at Paris.” The king ordered him to be sent for, and to be brought privately to him; which being done, the king took him into his arms, and saluted him by the nanie of Octavio Baldi. Then he knighted him, and nominated him ambassador to the republic of Venice; whither he went, accompanied by sir Albertus Morton, his nephew, who was his secretary, and Mr. William Bedel, a man of great learning and wisdom, and afterwards bishop of Kilrnore in Ireland, who was his chaplain. He continued many years in king James’s favour, and indeed never entirely forfeited it, although he had once the misfortune to displease his majesty, by an apparently trifling circumstance. In proceeding as ambassador to Venice, he passed through Germany, and stayed some days at Augsburg; where, happening to spend a social evening with some ingenious and learned men, whom he had before known in his travels, one Christopher Flecamore requested him to write some sentence in his Album, a paper book which the German gentry used to carry about with them for that purpose. Sir Henry Wotton, consenting to the motion, took occasion from some incidental discourse of the company, to write a definition of an ambassador in these words: “Legatus est vir bonus peregre missus ad memiendum Reipublicae causa:” which Walton says he would have interpreted thus; “An ambassador is an honest man sent to lie abroad for the good of his country.” The word lie was the hinge on which this conceit turned, yet it was no conceit at all in Latin, and therefore could not bear the construction sir Henry, according to Walton, wished to have put upon it: so that when the Album fell afterwards into the hands of Caspar Scioppius (See Sciop­pjus), he printed it in his famous hook against king James, as a principle of the religion professed by that king, and his ambassador sir Henry Wotton; and in Venice it was presently after written in several glass windows, and spitefully declared to be sir Henry’s. This coming to the knowledge of king James, he apprehended it to be such an oversight, such weakness, or worse, that he expressed much anger against him; which caused sir Henry to write two apologies in Latin; one to Velserus at Augsburg, which was dispersed into the cities of Germany, and another to the king “de Gaspare Scioppio.” These gave such satisfaction that the king entirely forgave sir Henry, declaring publicly, that “he had commuted sufficiently for a greater offence.”

After this embassy, he was sent twice more to Venice, once to the States of the United Provinces, twice to Charles Emanuel duke of Savoy, once to the united princes of Upper Germany; also to the archduke Leopold, to the duke of Wittemberg, to the imperial cities of Strasburgh and Ulm, and lastly to the emperor Ferdinand II. He returned to England the year before king James died; and brought with him many servants, of which some were German and Italian artists, and who became rather burthensome to him; for notwithstanding the many public services in which he had been employed, he had by no means improved his private fortune, which was also impaired by his liberality and want of ceconomy. As some recompense, which may at first appear rather a singular one for a man who had spent his days as a courtier and ambassador, he was in 1623 appointed provost of Eton-college. But in fact this situation was very agreeable to him, for he was now desirous of retiring from the bustle of life, and passing the evening of his days in studious pursuits. Whoever peruses his “Remains,” must perceive that he had much of the literary character, and finding now that the statutes of the college required the provost to be io holy orders, he was ordained deacon, and seemed to begin a new life. His usual course now was, after his customary public devotions, to retire into his study, and there daily spend some hours in reading the Bible, and works of divinity, closing those studies with a private prayer. His afternoons he spent partly in philosophical studies, and partly in conversation with his friends, or in some recreation, particularly angling. His sentiments and temper during his latter days will best appear by what he said, on one occasion, when visited by the learned John Hales, then a fellow of Eton. “I have in my passage to my grave met with most of those joys of which a discursive soul is capable and have been entertained with more inferior pleasures than the souls of men are usually made partakers of. Nevertheless, in this voyage I have not always floated on the calm sea of content; but have often met with cross winds and storms, and with many troubles of mind and temptations to evil. And yet though I have been, and am a man compassed about with human frailties, Almighty God has by his grace prevented me from making shipwreck of faith and a good conscience; the thought of which is now the joy of my heart, and I most humbly praise him for it. And I humbly acknowledge, that it was not myself, but he that hath kept me to this gr^at age, and let him take the glory of his great mercy. And, my dear friend, I now see that I draw near my harbour of death; that harbour will secure me from all the future storms and waves of this restless world; and I praise God I am willing to leave it, and expect a better; that world wherein dwelleth righteousness; and I long for it.”

He was a great enemy to wrangling and disputes about religion and used to cut inquiries short by witticisms. To one who asked him, “Whether a Papist may be saved” he replied, “You may be saved without knowing that look to yourself.” To another, who was railing at the papists with more zeal than knowledge, he gave this advice: “Pray, Sir, forbear, till you have studied the points better; for, the wise Italians have this proverb, c He that understands amiss concludes worse;' and beware of thinking, that, the farther you go from the church of Rome, the nearer you are to God.” One or two more of his bons mots are preserved. A pleasant priest of his acquaintance at Rome invited him one evening to hear their vespermusic, and seeing him standing in an obscure corner of the church, sent a boy to him with this question, writ upon a scrap of paper, “Where was your religion to be found before Luther?” To which sir Henry sent back underwritten, “Where yours is not to be found, in the written word of God.” Another evening, sir Henry sent a boy of the choir with this question to his friend: “Do you believe those many thousands of poor Christians damned who were excommunicated because the popeand the duke of Venice could not agree about their temporalities?” To which the priest underwrit in French, “Excusez moi, Monsieur.”

His works separately or collectively published were, I. “Epistola de Gaspare Scioppio,” Amberg, 1613, 8vo. 2. “Epistola ad Marcum Vc-lserum duuaivirum Augustas Vindelic. arm. 1612.” 3. “The Elements of Architecture,” Lond. 1624, 4to, a treatise still held in estimation. It was translated into Latin, and annexed to the works of Vitruvius, and to Freart’s “Parallel of the ancient architecture with the modern.” 4. “Plausus et Vota ad regem e Scotia reducem,” Lond. 1633, small folio, reprinted in Lamphire’s “Monarchia Britannica,” Oxtord, 1681, 8vo. 5. “Parallel bttween Robert earl of Essex and George late duke.,of Bucks,” London, 1641, 4to, not remarkable for the judgment displayed. There were scarcely any parallelisms in the two characters. 6, “Short View of the life and death of George Duke of Bucks,” London, 1642, 4to. 7. “Difference and disparity between the estates and conditions of George duke of Bucks and Robert earl of Essex.” 8. “Characters of, and observations on some kings of England.” 9. “The election of the new duke of Venice after the death of Giovanni Bembo.” 10. “Philosophical Survey of Education, or moral Architecture.” 11. “Aphorisms of Education.” 12. “The great Action between Pompey and Caesar extracted out of the Roman and Greek writers.” 13. “Meditations on the 22d chapter of Genesis.” 14. “Meditations on Christmas day.” 15. “Letters to and characters of certain personages.” 16. “Various Poems.” All or most of these pieces are published together in a volume entitled “Reliquiae Wotton ianae,” at London, 1651, 1654, 1672, and 1685, in 8vo. 17. “Letters to sir Edmund Bacon,” London, 1661, 8vo, reprinted with some editions of “Reliquiae Wottonianae.” 18. “Letters to the Lord Zouch,” printed at the end of “Reliquiae Wottonianae” in the edition of 1685, 19. “The State of Christendom; or a more exact and curious discovery of many secret passages and hidden mysteries of the times,” Loridon, 1657, folio, reprinted at London in 1667, folio, with this title; “The State of Christendom, giving a perfect and exact discovery of many political intrigues and secret mysteries of state practised in most of the courts of Europe, with an account of their several claims, interests, and pretensions.” 20. He hath also several letters to George duke of Bucks in the “Cabala, Mysteries of State,” London, 1654, 4to, and in “Cabala, or Scrinia sacra,” London, 1663, folio. 21. “Journal of his Embassies to Venice,” a manuscript fairly written, formerly in the library of Edward lord Conway. 22. “Three propositions to the Count d'Angosciola in matter of duel, comprehending (as it seems) the latitude of that subject;” a manuscript some time in the library of Ralph Sheldon, esq.; and since in that of the college of arms.

From France the dean is said to have written to the queen in 1553, on the following subject. He dreamed that his nephew Thomas Wotton was inclined to be a party in such a project, as, if he were not suddenly prevented, would turn out both to the loss of his life, and the ruin of his family. Accordingly he resolved to use such a preventive, as might be of no inconvenience either to himself or his nephew. He therefore wrote to Mary, requesting that his nephew might be sent for out of Kent, and that he might be interrogated by the lords of the council in some such feigned speeches, as would give a colour to his commitment to a favourable prison. He added, that he would acquaint her majesty with the true reason of his request, when he should next become so happy as to see and speak to her. It was accordingly done as he desired, but whether he gave her majesty “the true reason,” we are not informed. The subject dwelling much on the dean’s mind, he might have had a dream, yet the whole was probably an ingenious precaution to prevent his nephew from being involved in Wyat’s rebellion (which broke out soon after), and which he was afraid might be the case, from the ancient friendship that had subsisted between the families of Wotton and Wyat.

The last important service Wotton performed in the reign of queen Mary was in 1557, when he detected the rebellious plot of Thomas Stafford, the, consequence of which was Stafford’s defeat and execution, and a declaration of war against France. At the queen’s death he was acting as one of the commissioners to treat of a peace between England, Spain, and France, and in this station queen Elizabeth retained him (having also appointed him a privy-counsellor), and after much negociation peace was concluded at Chateaif-Camhresis April 2, 1559. He was afterwards commissioned with lord Howard and sir Nicholas Throgmorton to receive from the French king the confirmation of the treaty. This peace, however, was of short duration. The ambitious proceedings of the French court in 1559, and the success of their arms against the Scotch protestants, were sufficient to excite the vigilance of Elizabeth. Her indignation at the claim of Mary (queen of Scots) to the English crown, a claim which the French hoped to establish, and the declining affairs of the reformers who solicited her assistance, at length determined her to send a powerful force to Scotland. In the event of this quarrel the French were obliged to capitulate, and commissioners were appointed to treat of peace. Those on the part of England were dean Wotton and sir William Cecil; on that of France, Mouluc bishop of Valence, and the Sieur de Randan. The interests of the English and French courts were soon adjusted; but to a formal treaty with the Scots, the French ambassador considered it derogatory from the dignity of their sovereign to accede. The redress of their grievances was, however, granted in the name of Francis and Mary, and accepted by the Scots, as an act of royal indulgence. And whatever concessions they obtained, whether in respect to their personal safety, or their public demands, the French ambassadors agreed to insert in the treaty with Elizabeth; so that they were sanctioned, though not with the name, yet with all the security of the most solemn negociation. The treaty was signed at Edinburgh, July 6, 1560.

, an eminent artist of Holland, was born at Haerlem, in 1620, and was the son of Paul Wouvermans, a tolerable history-painter, of whom, however, he did not learn the principles of his art, but of John Wynants, an excellent painter of Haerlem. It does not appear that he ever was in Italy, or ever quitted the city of Haerlem; though no man deserved more the encouragement a-nd protection of some powerful prince than he did He is one instance, among a thousand, to prove that oftentimes the greatest merit remains without either recompence or honour. His works have all the excellences we can wish; high finishing, correctness, agreeable composition, and a taste for colouring, joined with a force that approaches to the Caracci’s . The pieces he painted in. his latter time have a grey or blueish cast; they are finished with too much labour, and his grounds look too much like velvet: but those he did in his prime are free from these faults, and equal in colouring and correctness to any thing Italy can produce. Wouvermans generally enriched his landscapes with huntings, halts, encampment of armies, and other subjects where horses naturally enter, which he designed better than any painter of his time: there are also some battles and attacks of villages by his hand. These beautiful works, which gained him great reputation, did not make him rich; on the contrary, being charged with a numerous family, and but indifferently paid for his work, he lived very meanly; and, though he painted very quick, and was very laborious, had much ado to maintain himself. The misery of his condition determined him not to bring up any of his children to painting. In his last hours, which happened at Haerlem in 1688, he burnt a box filled with his studies and designs; saying, I have been so ill-paid for my labours, that I would not have those designs engage my son in so miserable a profession." Different authors, however, ascribe the burning of his designs to different motives. Some say it proceeded from his dislike to his brother Peter, being unwilling that he should reap the product of his labours; others allege that he intended to compel his son (if he should follow th'e profession) to seek out the knowledge of nature from his own industry, and not indolently depend on copying those designs; and other writers assign a less honourable motive, which seems to be unworthy of the genius of Wouvermans, and equally unworthy of being perpetuated.

, a man of taste and learning, was born Nov. 28, 1701, in the parish of St. Botolph, Aldersgate. His father, sir Daniei Wray, was a London citizen, who resided in Little Britain, made a considerable fortune in trade (as a soap-boiler), and purchased an estate in Essex, near Ingatestone, which his son possessed aftr r him. Sir Daniel served the office of sheriff for that county, and was knighted in 1708 on presenting a loyal address to queen Anne. His son was educated at the Charter-house, and was supposed in 1783 to have been the oldest survivor of any person educated there. In 1718 he went to Queen’s college, Cambridge, as a fellow commoner. He took his degree of B. A. in 1722, after which he made the tour of Italy, accompanied by John, earl of Morton, and Mr. King, the son of lord chancellor King, who inherited his title. How long he remained abroad between 1722 and 1728 is not precisely ascertained, except by the fact that a cast in bronze, by Pozzo, was taken of his profile, in 1726, at Home. It had this inscription upon the reverse, “Nil actum reputans, si quid superesset agendum,” which line is said to have been a portrait of his character, as he was in all his pursuits a man of uncommon diligence and perseverance. After his return from his travels, he became M.A.-in 1728, and was already so distinguished in philosophical attainments, that he was chosen a fellow of the Royal Society in March 1728-9. He resided however generally at Cambridge, though emigrating occasionally^ to London, till 1739, or 1740, in which latter year, January 1740-41, he was elected F. S. A. and was more habitually a resident in town. In 1737 commenced his acquaintance and friendship with the noble family of Yorke; and in 1745, Mr. Yorke, afterwards earl of Hardwicke, as teller of the exchequer, appointed Mr.Wray his deputy teller, in which office he continued until 1782, when his great punctuality and exactness in any business he undertook made the constant attendance of the office troublesome to him. He was an excellent critic in the English language; an accomplished judge of polite literature, of virtft, and the fine arts; and deservedly a member of most of our learned societies; he was also an elected trustee of the British Museum. He was one of the writers of the “Athenian Letters” published by the earl of Hardwicke; and in the first volume of the Archaeologia, p. 128, are printed “Notes on the walls of antient Rome,” communicated by him in 1756; and “Extracts from different Letters from Rome, giving an Account of the Discovery of a most beautiful Statue of Venus, dug up there 1761.” He died Dec. 29, 1783, in his eighty. second year, much regretted by his surviving friends, to whose esteem he was entitled by the many worthy and ingenious qualities. which he possessed. Those of his heart were as distinguished as those of his mind; the rules of religion, of virtue, and morality, having regulated his conduct from the beginning to the end of his days. He was married to a lady of merit equal to his own, the daughter of Barrel, esq. of Richmond. This lady died at Richmond, where Mr.Wray had a house, in May 1803. Mr. Wray left his library at her disposal and she, knowing his attachment to the Charter-house, made the governors an offer of it, which was thankfully accepted and a room was fitted up for its reception, and it is placed under the care of the master, preacher, head schoolmaster, and a librarian. The public at large, and particularly the friends of Mr. Wray, will soon be gratified by a memoir of him written by the lare George Hardinge, esq. intended for insertion in Mr. Nichols’s “Illustrations of Literature.” This memoir, of which fifty copies have already been printed for private distribution, abounds with interesting anecdotes and traits of character, and copious extracts from Mr. Wray’s correspondence, and two portraits, besides an engraving of the cameo.

, eldest son of the preceding, was born Aug. 20, 1629, at Peter- house, Cambridge, ut which time his father was master of that college. His first education was in that university, heing admitted of St. Peter’s-college in 1642, whence he removed to Oxford, where he was a student, not in a college or hall, but in a private house, as he could not conform to the principles or practises of the persons who then had the government of the university. At the restoration' he was elected burgess of St. Michael in Cornwall, in the parliament which began May8, 1661, and was appointed secretary to the earl of Clarendon, lord high chancellor of England, who visiting the university of Oxford, of which he was chancellor, in Sept. 1661, Mr. Wren was there created master of arts. He was one of the first members of the Royal Society, when they began their weekly meetings at London, in 166O. After the fall of his patron, the earl of Clarendon, he became secretary to James duke of York, in whose service he continued till his death, June 11, 1672, in the fortythird year of his age. He was interred in the same vault with his father, in the chapel of Pembroke- hall, Cambridge. He wrote, 1. “Considerations on Mr. Harrington’s Commonwealth of Oceana, restrained to the first part of the preliminaries, London, 1657,” in 8vo. To this book is prefixed a long letter of our author to Dr. John Wilkins, warden of Wadham-college in Oxford, who had desired him to give his judgment concerning Mr. Harrington’s “Oceana.” Harrington answered this work in the first book of his “Prerogative of popular government,” 1658, 4to, in which he reflects on Mr. Wren as one of those virtuosi, who then met at Dr. Wilkins’ a lodgings at Wad ham- college, the seminary of the Royal Society, and describes them as an assembly of men who “had an excellent fcculty of mag^ nifying a louse, and diminishing a commonwealth.” Mr. Wren replied in 2, “Monarchy asserted; or, the State of Monarchical and Popular Government, in vindication of the considerations on Mr. Harrington’s * Oceana,' London, 1659,” in 8vo. Harrington’s rejoinder was an indecent piece of buffoonery, entitled “Politicaster i or, a Comical Discourse in^answer to Mr. Wren’s book, entitled ‘ Monarchy asserted, &c.’” 1659, 4to. Sir Edward Hyde, after^ wards earl of Clarendon, in a letter to Dr. John Barwick, dated at Brussels the 25th of July, 1659, and printed in the appendix to the doctor’s “Life,” was very solicitous, that Mr. Wren should undertake a confutation of Hobbes’s “Leviathan:” “I hope,” says he, “it is only modesty in Mr. Wren, that makes hirn pause upon undertaking the work you have recommended to him; for I dare swear, by what I have seen of him, he is very equal to answer every part of it: I mean, every part that requires an answer. Nor is there need of a professed divine to vindicate the Creator from making man a verier beast than any of those of the field, or to vindicate scripture from his licentious interpretation. I dare say, he will find somewhat in Mr. Hobbes himself, I mean, in his former books, that contradicts what he sets forth in this, in that part in which he takes himself to be most exact, his beloved philosophy. And sure there is somewhat due to Aristotle and Tuily, and to our universities, to free them from his reproaches; and it is high time, if what I hear be true, that some tutors read his Leviathan, instead of the others, to their pupils. Mr. Hobbes is my old friend, yet I cannot absolve him from the mischiefs he hath done to the king, the church, the laws, and the nation; and surely there should be enough to be said to the politics of that man, who, having resolved all religion, wisdom, and honesty, into an implicit obedience to the laws established, writes a book of policy, which, I may be bold to say, must be, by the established laws of any kingdom or province in Europe, condemned for impious and seditious: and therefore it will be very hard if the fundamentals of it be not overthrown. But I must ask both yours and Mr. Wren’s pardon for enlarging so much, and antedating those animadversions he will make upon it.”

Among his other eminent accomplishments, he had gained so considerable a skill in architecture, that he was sent for the same year from Oxford, by order of Charles II. to assist sir John Denham, surveyor-general of his majesty’s works. In 1663, he was chosen 'fellow of the Royal Society; being one of those who were first appointed by the council after the grant of their charter. Not long after, it being expected that the king would make the society a visit, the lord Brounker, president, by a letter desired the advice of Dr. Wren, who was then at Oxford, concerning the experiments which might be most proper for his majesty’s entertainment: to whom the doctor recommended principally the Torricellian experiment, and the weatherneedle, as being not bare amusements, but useful, and likewise neat in the operation, and attended with little incumbrance. Dr. Wren did great honour to this illustrious body, by many curious and useful discoveries in astronomy, natural philosophy, and other sciences, related in the “History of the Royal Society” where the author Sprat, who was a member of it, has inserted them from the registers and other books of the society to 1665. Among other of his productions there enumerated is a lunar globe, representing not only the spots and various degrees of whiteness upon the surface, but the hills, eminences, and cavities; and not only so, but it is turned to the light, shewing all the lunar phases, with the various appearances that happen from the shadows of the mountains and valleys; The lunar globe was formed, not merely at the request of the Royal Society, but likewise by the command of Charles II. whose pleasure, for the prosecuting and perfecting of it was signified by a letter under the joint hands of sir Robert Moray and sir Paul Neile, dated from Whitehall, the 17th of May, 1661, and directed to Dr. Wren, Savilian professor at Oxford. His majesty received the globe with satisfaction, and ordered it to be placed among the curiosities of his cabinet. Another of these productions is a tract on the doctrine of motion that arises from the impact between two bodies, illustrated by experiments. And a third is, the history of the seasons, as to the temperature, weather, productions, diseases, &c. &c. For which purpose he contrived many curious machines, several of which kept their own registers, tracing out the lines of variations, so that a person might know what changes the weather had undergone in his absence: as wind-gages, thermometers, barometers, hygrometers, rain- gages, &c. &c. He made also great additions to the new discoveries on pendulums; and among other things shewed, that there may be produced a natural standard for measure from the pendulum for common use. He invented many ways to make astronomical observations more easy and accurate, He fitted and hung quadrants, sextants, and radii more commodiously than formerly: he made two telescopes to open with a joint like a sector, by which observers may infallibly take a distance to half minutes, &c. He made many sorts of retes, screws, and other devices, for improving telescopes to take small distances, and apparent diameters, to seconds. He made apertures for taking in more or less light, as the observer pleases, by opening and shutting, the better to fit glasses for crepusculine observations. He added much to the theory of dioptrics; much to the manufacture of grinding good glasses. He attempted, and not without success, the making of glasses of other forms than spherical. He exactly measured and delineated the spheres of the hamoura of the eye, the proportions of which to one another were only guessed at before: a discussion shewing the reasons why we see objects erect, and that reflection conduces as much to vision as refraction. He displayed a natural and easy theory of refractions, which exactly answered every experiment. He fully demonstrated all dioptrics in a few propositions, shewing not only, as in Kepler’s Dioptrics, the common properties of glasses, but the proportions by which the individual rays cut the axis, and each other, upon which the charges of the telescopes, or the proportion of the eye-glasses and apertures, are demonstrably discovered. He made constant observations on Saturn, and a true theory of that planet, before the printed discourse by Huygens, on that subject, appeared. He made maps of the Pleiades and other telescopic stars: and proposed methods to determine the great question as to the earth’s motion or rest, by the small stars about the pole to be seen in large telescopes. In navigation he made many improvements. He framed a magnetical terella, which he placed in the midst of a plane board with a hole, into which the terella is half immersed, till it be like a globe with the poles in the horizon the plane is then dusted over with steel filings from a sieve the dust, by the magnetical virtue, becomes immediately figured intofurrows that. bend like a sort of helix, proceeding as it were out at one pole, and returning in it by the other; the whole plane becoming figured like the circles of a planisphere. It being a question in his time among the problems of navigation, to what mechanical powers sailing against the wind was reducible; he shewed it to be a wedge: and he demonstrated, how a transient force upon an oblique plane would cause the motion of the plane against the first mover: and he made an instrument mechanically producing the same effect, and shewed the reason of sailing on all winds. The geometrical mechanism of rowing, he shewed to be a lever on a moving or cedent fulcrum: for this end, he made instruments and experiments, to find the resistance to motion in a liquid medium; with other things that are the necessary elements for laying down the geometry of sailing, swimming, rowing, flying, and constructing of ships. He invented a very speedy and curious way of etching. He started many things towards the emendation of waterworks. He likewise made some instruments for respiration, and for straining the breath from fuliginous vapours, to try whether the same breath, so purified, will serve again. He was the first inventor of drawing pictures by microscopical glasses. He found out perpetual, or at least long-lived lamps, for keeping a perpetual regular heat, in order to various uses, as hatching of eggs and insects, production of plants, chemical preparations, imitating nature in producing fossils anji minerals, keeping the motion of watches equal, for the longitude and astronomical uses. He was the first author of the anatomical experiment of injecting liquor into the veins of animals. By this operation, divers creatures were immediately purged, vomited, intoxicated, killed, or revived, according to the quality of the liquor injected. Hence arose many other new experiments, particularly that of transfusing blood, which has been prosecuted in sundry curious instances. Such is a short account of the principal discoveries which Dr. Wren presented, or suggested, to the Royal Society, or were improved by him. We now return to his progress as an architect.

Upon the decease of sir John Denham, in March 1688, he succeeded him in the office of surveyor-general of his majesty’s works. The theatre at Oxford will be a lasting monument of his great abilities as an architect; which curious work was finished by him in 1669. As in this structure the admirable contrivance of the flat roof, being eighty feet over one way, and seventy the other, without any arched work or pillars to support it, is particularly remarkable, it has been both largely described, and likewise delineated, by the ingenious Dr. Plott, in his “Natural History of Oxfordshire.” But the conflagration of the city of London gave him many opportunities afterwards of employing his genius in that way; when, besides the works of the crown, which continued under his care, the cathedral of St. Paul, the parochial churches, and other public structures, which had been destroyed by that dreadful calamity, were rebuilt from his designs, and under his direction; in the management of which affair he was assisted in the measurements and laying out of private property by the ingenious Mr. Robert Hooke. The variety of business in which he was by this means engaged requiring his constant attendance and concern, he resigned his Savilian professorship at Oxford in 1673; and the year following he, received from the king the honour of knighthood. He was one of the commissioners who, at the motion of sir Jonas Moore, surveyor-general of the ordnance, had been appointed by his majesty to find a proper place for erecting a royal observatory; and he proposed Greenwich, which was approved of. On Aug. 10, 1675, the foundation of the building was laid; which, when finished under the direction of sir Jonas, with the advice and assistance of sir Christopher, was furnished with the best instruments for making astronomical observations; aud Mr. Flamsted was constituted his majesty’s first professor there.

About this time he married the daughter of sir Thomas Coghill, of Belchington, in Oxfordshire, by whom he had one son of his own name; and, she dying soon after, he married, a daughter of William lord Fitzwilliam, baron of Lifford in Ireland, by whom he had a son and a daughter In 1680, he was chosen president of the Royal Society; afterwards appointed architect and commissioner of Chelsea-college; and, in 1684, principal officer or comptroller of the works in the castle of Windsor. He sat twice in parliament, as a representative for two different boroughs; first, for Piympton in Devonshire in 1685, and again in 1700 for Melcomb-Regis in Dorsetshire. He was employed in erecting a great variety of churches and public edifices, when the country met with an indelible disgrace in a court intrigue, in consequence of which, in April 1718, his patent for royal works was superseded, when this venerable and illustrious man had reached his eighty- sixth year, after half a century spent in a continued, active, and laborious service to the crown and the public. Walpole has well said that “the length of his life enriched the reigns of several princes, and disgraced the last of them.” Until this time he lived in a house in Scotland-yard, adjoining to Whitehall; but, after his removal from that place in 1718, he dwelt occasionally in St. James’s-street, Westminster. He died Feb. 25, 1723, aged ninety -one, and was interred with great solemnity in St Paul’s cathedral, in the vault under the south wing of the choir, near the east end. Upon a flat stone, covering the single vault, which contains his body, is a plain English inscription and another inscription upon the side of a pillar, in these terms

As to his person, he was of low stature, and thin; but, by temperance and skilful management, for he was not unacquainted with anatomy and physic, he enjoyed a good state of health to a very unusual length of life. He was modest, devout, strictly virtuous, and very communicative of what he knew. Besides his peculiar eminence as an architect, his learning and knowledge were very extensive in all the arts and sciences, and especially in the mathematics. Mr. Hooke, who was intimately acquainted with him, and very able to make a just estimate of his abilities, has comprised his character in these few but comprehensive words: “I must affirm,” says he, “that since the time of Archimedes, there scarcely ever has met in one man, in so great a perfection, such a mechanical hand, and so philosophical a mind.” And a greater than Hooke, even the illustrious and immortal Newton, whose signet stamps an indelible character, speaks thus of him, with other eminent men: “D. Christophorus Wrennus, Eques Auratus, Johannes Wallisius, S. T. D. et D. Christianus Hugenius, hujus aetatis Geometrarum facile principes.” Mr. Evelyn, in the dedication referred to above, tells him, that “he inscribed his book with his name, partly through an ambition of publickly declaring the great esteem I have ever had,” says he, “of your virtues and accomplishments, not only in the art of building, but through all the learned cycle of the most useful knowledge and abstruser sciences, as well as of the most polite and shining; all which is so justly to be allowed you, that you need no panegyric, or other history, to eternize them, than the greatest city of the universe, which you have rebuilt and beautified, and are still improving: witness the churches, the royal courts, stately halls, magazines, palaces, and other public structures; besides that you have built of great and magnificent in both the universities, at Chelsea, and in the country; and are now advancing of the royal Marine-hospital at Greenwich: all of them so many trophies of your skill and industry, and conducted with that success, that, if the whole art of building were lost, it might be recovered and found again in St. Paul’s, the historical pillar, and those other monuments of your happy talent and extraordinary genius.”

Among the many public buildings erected by him in the city of London, the church of St. Stephen in Waibroke, that of St. Mary-le-Bow, the Monument, and the cathedral of St. Paul, have more especially drawn the attention of foreign connoisseurs. “The church of Waibroke,” says the author of the ‘ Critical Review of the public buildings, &c. of London,’ “so little known among us, is famous all over Europe, and is justly reputed the master-piece of the celebrated sir Christopher Wren. Perhaps Italy itself can produce no modern building that can vie with this in taste or proportion. There is not a beauty which the plan would admit of, that is not to be found here In its greatest perfectjon; and foreigners very justly call our judgment in question, for understanding its graces no better, and allowing it. ho higher a degree of fame.” The steeple of St. Mary-le-Bow, which is particularly grand and beautiful, stands upon an old Roman causey, that lies eighteen feet below the level of the present street; and the body of the church on the walls of a Roman temple. The Monument is a pillar of the Doric order, the pedestal of which is forty feet high and twentyone square, the diameter of the column fifteen feet, and the altitude of the whole 202; which is a fourth part higher than that of the emperor Trajan at Rome. It was begun in 167 1, and finished in 1677. But St. Paul’s will probably be considered as the greatest monument of sir Christopher’s genius. He died, says Waipole, at the age of ninety-one, having lived to see the completion of St. Paul’s; a fabric and an event, which one

In Sept. 1637, and 1639, betook deacon’s and priest’s orders, and was so much admired as an eloquent preacher as to be frequently called upon to preach at St. Mary’s, St. Paul’s, London, &c, In 1645 he became vicar of Okeham in Rutlandshire, by the interest of his patron Jnxon, now bishop of London, and received institution, but refused induction, because in that case he must have taken the covenant, which was altogether repugnant to his principles, and therefore a nonconformist was placed in his living, one Benjamin King. Mr. Wright then went to London, and lived retired till after the death of the king, when he was hospitably received into the family of sir George Grime or Graham at Peckham, and while here he instructed sir George’s sons in Latin and Greek, and read the Commonprayer on all Sundays and holidays, and preached and administered the sacrament. About 1655 he returned to London, on being chosen by the parishioners of St. Olave, Silver-street, to be their minister. In this office he remained for four years, and was in fact rector, but would not take possession on account of the republican oaths and obligations necessary. He performed all his duties, however, according to the forms of the Church of England, although at some risk. On the restoration Benjamin King, who had been put into his living at Okeham, resigned, by his hand and seal, all title to it, and Mr. Wright took possession and retained it to his dying day, refusing some other preferments. He lived here to a very advanced age, and died May 9, 1690, and was buried in Okeham church. Besides the “Delitiae paetarum” already mentioned, he published 1. “Five Sermons in five several stiles or ways of preaching,” Lond. 1656, 8vo. The object of this curious collection is to exhibit the advantages of education in fitting for the ministry, as well as the different styles of some eminent men of that period, viz. bishop Andrews, bishop Hall, Dr. Mayne, and Mr. Cartwright. Dr. Birch is mistaken in calling this an imitation of different stjles; it is a selection from the works of the respective authors, 2. “A practical commentary, or exposition on the hook of Psalms,” Lond. 1661, fol. 3. “Practical Commentary on the Pentateuch,” ibid. fol. 4. “Parnassus biceps, or several choice pieces of poetry, composed by the best wits that were in both the universities before their dissolution,” ibid. 1656, 8vo. He wrote some other works which have not been printed.

, a noted English mathematician, who flourished in the latter part of the sixteenth century and beginning of the seventeenth, is thus characterised in a Latin paper in the library of Gonvile and Caius college, Cambridge: “This year (1615) died at London, Edward Wright, of Garveston, in Norfolk, formerly a fellow of this college; a man respected by all for the integrity and simplicity of his manners, and also famous for his skill in the mathematical sciences; so that he was not undeservedly styled a most excellent mathematician by Richard Hackluyt, the author of an original treatise of our English navigations. What knowledge he had acquired in the science of mechanics, and how usefully he employed that knowledge to ths public as well as to private advantage, abundantly appear both from the writings he published, and from the many mechanical operations still extant, which are standing monuments of his great industry and ingenuity. He was the first undertaker of that difficult but useful work, by which a little river is brought from the town of Ware in apew canal, to supply the city of London with water but by the tricks of others he was hindered from completing the work he had begun. He was excellent both in contrivance and execution, nor was he inferior to the most ingenious mechanic in the making of instruments, either of brass or any other matter. To his invention is owing whatever advantage Hondius’s geographical charts have above others; for it was Wright who taught Jodocus Horn dius the method of constructing them, which wa.s till then unknown; but the ungrateful Hondius concealed the name of the true author, and arrogated the glory of the invention to hjmself. Of this fraudulent practice the good man could nqt help complaining, and justly enough, in the preface to his treati.se of the” Correction of Errors in the art of Navigation;“which he composed with excellent judgment and after long experience, to the great advancement of naval affairsi For the improvement of this art he was appointed mathematical lecturer by the East India company, and read lectures in the house of that worthy knight sir Thomas Smith, for which he had a yearly salary of fifty pounds, This office he discharged with great reputation, and much to the satisfaction of his hearers. He published in English a book on the doctrine of the sphere, and another concerning the construction of sun-dials. He also prefixed an ingenious preface to the learned Gilbert’s book on the loadstone. By these and other his writings, he has transmitted his fame to latest posterity. While he was yet a fellow of this college, he could not be concealed in his private study, but was called forth to the public business of the nation by the queen, about 1593. He was ordered to attend the earl of Cumberland in some maritime expeditions. One of these he has given a faithful account of, in the manner of a journal or ephemeris, to which he has prefixed an elegant hydrographical chart of his own contrivance. A little before his death he employed himself about an English translation of the book of logarithms, then lately discovered by lord Napier, a Scotchman, who had a great affection for him. This posthumous work of his- was published soon after by his only son Samuel Wright, who was also a scholar of this college. He had formed many other useful designs, but was hindered by death from bringing them to perfection. Of him it may truly be said, that he studied more to serve the public than himself; and though he was rich in fame, and in the promises of the great, yet he died poor, to tfie scandal of an ungrateful age.” So far the memoir; other particulars concerning him are as follow:

At length, in 1599, Mr. Wright himself printed his celebrated treatise entitled “The Correction of certain Errors in Navigation,” which had been written many years before; where he shews the reason of this division of the meridian, the manner of constructing his table, and its uses in navigation, with other improvements. In 1610 a second edition of Mr. Wright’s book was published, and dedicated to his royal pupil* prince Henry; in which the author inserted farther improvements; particularly he proposed an excellent way of determining the magnitude of the earth; at the same time recommending, very judiciously, the making our common measures in some certain proportion to that of a degree on its surface, that they might not depend on the uncertain length of a barley corn. Some of his other improvements were the table of latitudes for dividing the meridian, computed as far as to minutes: an instrument, he calls the sea-rings, by which the variation of the compass, the altitude of the sun, and the time of the day, may be readily determined at once in any place, provided the latitude be known; the correcting of the errors arising from the eccentricity of the eye in observing by the cross-staff; a total amendment in the tables of the declinations and places of the sun and stars, from his own observations, made with a six-foot quadrant, in 1594, 95, 96, 97; a sea-quadrant, to take altitudes by a forward or backward observation; having also a contrivance for the ready finding the latitude by the height of the polar-star, when not upon the meridian. And that this book might be the better understood by beginners, to this edition is subjoined a translation of Zamorano’s Compendium; and added a large table of the variation of the compass as observed in very different parts of the world, to shew it is not occasioned by any magrietical pole. The work has gone through several other editions since. And, beside the books above mentioned, he wrote another on navigation, entitled “^he Haven-finding Art.” Some accounts of him say also, that it was in 1589 that he first began to attend the earl of Cumberland in his voyages. It is also said that he made for his pupil, prince Henry, a large sphere with curious movements, which, by the help of springwork, not only represented the motions of the whole celestial sphere, but shewed likewise the particular systems of the sun and moon, and their circular motions, together with their places and possibilities of eclipsing each other: there is in it a work for a motion of 17,100 years, if it should not be stopped, or the materials fail. This sphere, though thus made at a great expence of money and ingenious industry, was afterwards in the time of the civil wars cast aside, among dust and rubbish, where it was found in 1646, by sir Jonas Moore, wh.o at his own expence restored it to its first state of perfection, and deposited it at his own house in the Tower, among his other mathematical instruments and curiosities.

During his abode in Italy he had an opportunity of seeing a very memorable eruption of Vesuvius, which fe^­kindled his inclination for painting extraordinary effects of light; and his different pictures of this sublime event stood decidedly chef d* ceuvres in that line of painting; for who but Wright ever succeeded in fire or moonlights? His later pictures were chiefly landscapes, in which we are at a loss, whether most to admire the elegance of his outline, his judicious management of light and shade, or the truth and delicacy of his colouring; but of those, the greatest part have never been exhibited, as they were always purchased from the easel by amateurs who knew how to appreciate their value: a large landscape (his last work) now at Derby, being a view of the head of Ullswater, may be considered amongst the finest of his works, and deservedly ranks with the most valued productions of Wilson, or even Claude himself.

In the historical line, the Dead Soldier, which is now known by Heath’s admirable print, would alone establish his -fame, if his Edwin (in the possession of J. Milnes, esq. of Wakefield, who has also his Destruction of the Floating Batteries off Gibraltar, and some of his best landscapes), the two pictures of Hero and Leander, Lady in Comus, Indian Widow, and other historical subjects, had not already ascertained his excellence. His attachment to his native town, added to his natural modesty, and his severe application both to the theory and practice of painting, prevented his mixing with promiscuous society, or establishing his reputation by arts which he would never descend to practise. His friends long urged him to reside in London; but his family attachments, and love of retirement and study were invincible, and he fell a victim to his unwearied attention to his profession. He died of a decline, Aug. 29, 1797;

, an eminent dissenting clergyman, was born Jan. 30, 1682-3, being eldest son of Mr. James Wright, a nonconformist minister at Retford, in the county of Nottingham, by Mrs. Eleanor Cotton, daughter of Mr Cotton, a gentleman of Yorkshire, and sister to the rev. Mr. Thomas Cotton of Westminster, whose funeral-sermon his nephew preached and published. At eleven years old he lost his father, being then at school at Attercliffe, in Yorkshire, whence he removed to Darton, in the same county, under the care of his grandmother, and his uncle Cotton. At sixteen he studied under the care of the rev. Mr. Jollie, at Attercliffe, whom about the age of twentyone he quitted, and went to his uncle’s house at the Haigh, >!vhere he officiated as his chaplain and after his death he came to London, having preached only three or four sermons in the country. He lived a little while in his uncle’s family at St. Giles’s, and thence went to be chaplain to Jady Susannah Lort, at Turnham-green, and was chosen 10 preach the Sunday evening-lecture at Mr. Cotton’s, at St. Giles’s. Being soon after invited to assist Dr. Grosvenor at Crosby-square meeting, he quitted lady Lort and St. Giles’s, and was soon after chosen to carry on the evening-lecture in Southwark, in conjunction with the rev. Mr. Haman Hood, who soon quitting it, it devolved on Mr. Wright, then only twenty-three. On the death of Mr. Matthew Sylvester, 1708, he was chosen pastor of the congregation at Blackfriars, which increased considerably Under his care, and where he continued many years, till he removed to Carter- lane, which meeting-house was built for him, and opened by him Dec. 5, 1734, with a sermon on 2 Chron. vi. 40. His sermons, printed singly, amount to near forty. But his most considerable work was iris? “Treatise on the New Birth, or, the being born again, without which it is impossible to enter into the kingdom of God,” which had gone through fifteen editions before his death. Dr. Wright is traditionally understood to have been the author of the song, “Happy Hours, all Hours excelling.” He was remarkable for the melody of his voice and the beauty of his elocution. Archbishop Herring, when a young man, frequently attended him as a model of delivery, not openly in the meeting house, but in a large porch belonging to the old place in Blackfriars. He married, in 1710, the widow of his predecessor, Mr. Sylvester, daughter of the rev. Mr. Obadiah Hughes, minister of the dissenting congregation at Enfield, aunt to the late Dr. Obadiah Hughes, by whom he had one son, since dead, a tradesman in the city, and one daughter, married to a citizen in Newgate-street, a most accomplished woman, but who became the victim of her own imprudence. He died April 3, 1746, at Newington-green, which was his residence. His funeral -sermon was preached at Carter-lane meeting by Dr. Milner and another at the same place, by Dr. Obadiah Hughes, who wrote his epitaph.

, an eminent modern architect, was born at Burton, in the county of Stafford, about 1743, of a respectable family, which is now become perfectly patriarchal in its numerous and extensive branches. His education, till the age of fourteen, was such as a country town afforded, but having at that period, exhibited a fondness for architectural design, though in humble and rude atlempts, his friends had the happiness to succeed in introducing him into the suite of lord Bagot, then about to depart for Rome as the ambassador of Great Britain at the Ecclesiastical States. That genius which first budded spontaneously in its own obscure, native territory, could hardly fail to shoot forth in strength and beauty when transplanted to the classic and congenial soil of Italy. Amid the architectural glories of the West, the fallen temples of the World’s fallen mistress, our young student stored up that transcendant knowledge of the rules of his profession, and that exquisite taste for the developement of those rules, which, in after-years, placed him without a professional rival in his own country. Brilliant, quick, and intuitive, a2 was his genius, he was never remiss in investigating and making himself master of the details and practical causes by which the great effective results of architecture are produced. He has been heard frequently to state that he measured with his own hand every part of the dome of St. Peter’s, and this too at the imminent danger of his life, being under the necessity of lying on his back on a ladder slung horizontally, without cradle or side-rail, over a frightful void of 300 feet. From Rome he departed for Venice, where he remained above two years a pupil of the celebrated Viscentini, an architect and painter. Under this master he acquired a very unusual perfection in architectural painting; and he has executed a few, and but a few, paintings in that line, which equal any by Panini. At the unripe age of twenty, when few young men have even commenced their pupilage to a profession of so much science and taste, Mr. Wyatt arrived in London with a taste formed by the finest models of ancient Rome, and the instruction of the best living masters in Italy. To him then nothing was wanting but an opportunity to call forth his powers into action, nor was that long withheld. He was employed to build the Pantheon in Oxford-street, a specimen of architecture which attracted the attention and commanded the admiration of all persons of taste in Europe, by its grandeur of symmetry, and its lavish but tasteful richness of decoration. Never, perhaps, was so high a reputation in the arts obtained by a first effort. Applications now poured in upon Mr. Wyatt, not only from all parts of England, Ireland, and Scotland, but also from the Continent. The empress of Russia, that investigator and patron of talent in all departments, desirous to possess the architect of the Pantheon, and to exercise his genius in a projected palace, offered him (through her ambassador at London) a carte blanche, as to remuneration, if he would settle at St. Petersburg; but he was recommended by his friends to decline the offer of the munificent Catherine. From this period it may well be supposed that he ranked foremost in his profession, and executed most of the important and costly works of architecture which were undertaken. On the death of sir William Chambers he received the most flattering and substantial proof of the king’s great estimation, by being appointed surveyor-general to the Board of Works, which was followed by appointments to almost all the important offices connected with his profession in the government departments; and a dispute having arisen in the Royal Academy, which induced Mr. West to relinquish the president’s chair, Mr. Wyatt was elected, and reluctantly obeyed his majesty’s command to accept the vacant office, which he restored to Mr. West the ensuing year. From the building of the Pantheon to the period of his death, this classical architect erected or embellished some of the most considerable mansions, palaces, and other buildings, in the United Kingdom; among which are, the palace at Kew, Fonthili abbey, Hanworth church, House of Lords, Henry the Seventh’s chapel, Windsor castle, Buistrode, Doddington hall, Cashiobury, Ashridge hall, &c. &c. The writer of his life says, that although Mr. Wyatt was educated a Roman architect, and made his grand and successful debut in England in that character, yet his genius was not to be bounded in a single sphere, and it afterwards revived in this country the long- forgotten beauties of Gothic architecture. It is, however, a more general opinion that Mr. Wyatt was far from successful either in his original attempts, or in his restorations of the pure Gothic.

A man who walked foremost in the ranks of a lucrative profession (in a country filled with a rich and liberal aristocracy) for near 48 years, a considerable portion of which he was honoured with the royal favour, might naturally be supposed to have amassed a fortune almost princely; but, Mr. Wyatt bequeathed to his family little more than a name universally beloved and regretted, and a reputation which will live as long as the liberal arts continue to embellish and ennoble human life. To account for this, says his biographer, it is only necessary to observe, that, if to superior and all-powerful genius were added conduct and prudence equivalent, every individual so gifted would become a Napoleon or a Wellington the destroyer or the saviour of nations: but infinite wisdom having ordained that such instances should be most rare, and that the mass of mankind should live in a great degree equalized in power, we commonly find that genius and great parts are paralyzed by an inattention to the minor considerations and details of calculating prudence, while a slow and dull intellect is often compensated by industry and worldly caution. Mr. Wyatt' s genius achieved for him greatness at an early age, without the humbler aids last alluded to, and those discreet handmaids to wealth and permanent prosperity were never afterwards found in his train. He died Sept. 5, 1813, aged about seventy. He was proceeding to London with Mr. Codrington, in that gentleman’s carriage, when it was overturned near Marlborongh. The suddenness and violence of this accident was fatal to Mr. Wyatt: it is supposed to have produced a concussion of the brain. His death was instantaneous. The suavity of manners, the kind and obliging disposition, and the intelligent mind of Mr. Wyatt, attracted and retained the notice and friendship of some of the most v illustrious persons in. this kingdom; among whom are to be ranked the sovereign, and almost every branch of the royal family. No one, indeed, ever obtained more friends, or created fewer enemies. Mr. Wyatt left a widow and four sons, the eldest of whc-m, Mr. Benjamin Dean Wyatt, already has attained great fame in the profession of architecture.

, a statesman and poet, the only son and heir of sir Henry Wyat of Allington-castle, in Kent, was born in 1503. His mother was the daughter of John Skinner, of the county of Surrey. His father was imprisoned in the Tower in the reign of Richard III. when he is said to have been preserved by a cat which fed him while in that place, for which reason he was always pictured with acat in hisarms, or beside him. On the accession of Henry VIL be had great marks of favour shewn him, among which w0,s the honour of knighthood, and a seat in the privy-council. One of the last services in which he was employed by that king, was conducting to the Tower the unfortunate earl of Suffolk, who was afterwards beheaded by Henry VIII. He was also a member of Henry VIII.'s privy-council, master of the jewel-office, and of the vanguard of the army, commanded by the king in person, which fought the memorable battle of the Spurs. He died in 1533.

The honours of educating sir Thomas has been claimed for both universities; by Carter for St. John’s college, Cambridge, and by Anthony Wood for Oxford, because he resided for sometime on the establishment of cardinal Wolsey’s new college, now Christ-church. He then set out on his travels according to the custom of that age, and returned after some years, a gentleman of high accomplishments and elegant manners, and of such conversation talents both as to sense and wit as to have attracted the admiration of all ranks, and particularly of his sovereign, who bestowed on him the order of knighthood, and employed him in various embassies. Mr. Warton appears offended with Wood for saying that “the king was in a high manner delighted with his witty jests,” while he allows that Henry was probably as much pleased with his repartees as his politics. Lloyd, whom Mr. Gray and lord Orford have adopted as an authority, reports enough of his wit, to convince us that he might delight a monarch of Henry’s fickleness and passionate temper. Persons of this character are often more easily directed or diverted by a striking expression, than by a train of argument.

His poems were first published by Tottel, along wit^h Surrey’s and the collection by uncertain authors. The authenticity of Surrey’s and Wyat’s poems seems to be confirmed by this care of Tottel to distinguish what he knew from what he did not know, and what, from the ignorance of an editor of so riiuch taste, we apprehend were not generally known. Mr, Warton has favoured us with a very elaborate and elegant criticism on Wyat, but has found it impossible to revive his poetical fame. He contributed but little to the refinement of English poetry, and his versification and language are deficient in harmony and pei> spicuity. From a close study of the Italian poets, his imagination dwells too often on puerile conceits and contrarieties, which, however, to some are so pleasing that they are not to this day totally excluded from our poetry. As a lover, his addresses are stately, and pedantic, with very little mixture of feeling or passion, and although detached beauties may be pointed out in a few of his sonnets, his genius was ill adapted to that species of poetry. In all respects he is inferior to his friend Surrey, and claims a place in the English series chiefly as being the first moral satirist, and as having represented the vices and follies of his time in the true spirit of the didactic muse.

Lord Surrey, we have seen, praises his version of David’s Psalms, a work about the existence of which bibliographers are not agreed. No copy is known to be extant, nor is it noticed in any history of the English press, nor in any library printed or manuscript. In 1549, were published “Certayne Psalms,” a transcript of which appeared in the last edition of the “English poets,” without, perhaps, adding much to the author’s reputation. Mr. Warton observes that the pious Thomas Sternhold and John Hopkins are the only immortal translators of David’s Psalms. But indifferent as they are now thought, there is nothing to be found of a superior kind before their time. In the library of Bene't college, Cambridge, is a manuscript translation of the Psalms into Scotch metre of the fourteenth century.

, an English comic poet, eldest son of Daniel Wycherley, of Cleve, in Shropshire, esq. was born about 1640. At fifteen years. of age he was sent to France, in the western parts of which he resided, upon the banks of the Charante, where he was often admitted to the conversation of one of the most accomplished ladies of the court of France, madame de Montausier, celebrated by Voiture in his “Letters.” A little before the restoration of Charles II. he became a gentleman-commoner of Queen’s-college in Oxford, where he lived in the provost’s lodge, and was entered in the public library, under the title of “Philosophic Studiosus,” in July 1660. He left the university without being matriculated, or any degree conferred on him; having, according to Wood, been by Dr. Barlow, reconciled to the Protestant Religion, which he bad a little before deserted in his travels. He afterwards entered himself of the Middle Temple; but, making his first appearance in town in a reign when wit and gaiety were the favourite distinctions, he soon quitted the dry study of the law, and pursued things more agreeable to his own genius, as well as to the taste of the age. As nothing was likely to succeed better than dramatic performances, especially comedies, he applied himself to the writing of these and in about the space of ten years published four: “Love in a Wood, or St. James’s Park,” in 1672; “The Gentleman-Dancing-Master,” 1673; “Plain Dealer,” in 1678; and “Country-Wife,” in 1683. These were collected and printed together in 1712, 8vo.

Wycherley, however, soon lost the favour of the king and of the courtiers. Dennis relates, that, immediately after he had received the preceding offer from the king, he went down to Tunbridge, to take either the benefit of the waters, or the diversions of the place when, walking one day upon the Wells- walk with his friend Mr. Fairbard, of Gray’s-Inn, just as he came up to the bookseller’s the countess of Drogheda, a young widow, rich, noble, and beautiful, came to the bookseller, and inquired for “The Plain Dealer.” “Madam,” says Mr. Fairbeard, “since you are for `The Plain Dealer,' there he is for you,” pushing Wycherley towards her. “Yes,” says Wycherley, “this lady can bear plain dealing; for she appears to be so accomplished, that what would be compliment said to others, spoken to her would be plain dealing.” “No truly, sir,” said the countess, “I am not without my faults, any more than the rest of my sex and yet I love plain dealing, and am never more fond of it than when it tells me of them.” “Then, madam,” says Mr. Fairbeard, “you and the Plain Dealer seem designed by heaven for each other.” In short, Wycherley walked with the countess upon the walks, waited upon her home, visited her daily at her lodgings while she was at Tunbridge, and at her lodgings in Hatton-garden, after she went to London; where, in a little time, he got her consent to marry her, which he did without acquainting the king.

But this match, so promising in appearance both to his fortunes and to his happiness, was the actual ruin of both. As soon as the news of it came to court, it was looked upon as an affront to the king, and a contempt of his majesty’s orders; and Wycherley’s conduct after marriage occasioned this to be resented more heinously; for he seldom or never went near the fiourt, which made him be thought ungrateful. But the true cause of his absence was not known: in short, the lady was jealous of him to distraction; jealous to that degree, that she could not endure him to be one moment out of her sight. Their lodgings were in Bowstreet, Covent-garden, over against a tavern, whither if he at any time went with friends, he was obliged to leave the windows open, that his lady might see there was no woman in company; or she would immediately put on the airs of a frantic woman. At last she died, and settled her fortune on him; but his title being disputed after her death, the expence of the law and other incumbrances so far reduced him, that, not being able to satisfy the importunity of his creditors, he was thrown into prison.

The works of this gallant and learned nobleman were (with the exception of a ballad in Percy’s collection) translations, published in the infancy of English printing by Caxton: 1 “The Dictes and Sayinges of the Philosophers, translated out of Latyn into Frenshe by a worshipful man called Messire Jehan de Teonville, sometyme provost of Parys,” and thence rendered into English by lord Rivers. It is supposed to have been the second book ever printed in England by Caxton. The date is Nov. 18, 1477. 2. “The morale Proverbes of Christyne of Pyse.” 3. “The boke named Cordyale or Memorare novissima,” a third translation from the French, the original author not named, dated 1480. Caxton says that lord Rivers “made divers babdesayenst the seven dedely synnes.” All these curiosities will be found amply described in Mr. Dibdin’s “Typographical Antiquities.” Hume says that earl Rivers “first introduced the noble art of printing into England,” but this is evidently a mistake. He did indeed countenance and employ Caxton, and appears to have introduced him to Edward IV.; and both he and Tiptoft, earl of Worcester (See Tiptoft), contributed very much, by their example and patronage, to the restoration of learning in this kingdom. From various causes, however, England was long behind other nations on the continent in real learning, or a wish for it; and we have no great pleasure or pride in contemplating the productions of our first printers.

, the illustrious founder of New college, Oxford, was born at Wykeham in Hampshire in 1324. Whether Wykeham was his family name, seems doubtful. He mentions his father and mother only by their Christian names, John and Sybil), or Sybilla. Some of his biographers are inclined to think that his father’s name was Long, and others Perrot, but there is no direct evidence for either, and we know by many other instances that nothing was more uncertain at the period of his birth than the state of family names.

His parent’s were of good reputation and character, but in mean circumstances when he was born; yet from the number of his contemporary relations, whose names and situations are upon record, it is probable that the family was not of mean extraction. Of their poverty there is less reason to doubt the report, as they could not afford to give their son a liberal education. He soon, however, found a patron, supposed to be Nicholas Uvedale, lord of the manor of Wykeham, and governor of Winchester castle, who must have discovered some talents worth improving, since he maintained him at Winchester school, where he was instructed in grammatical learning, and where he gave early proofs of piety and diligence, employing his leisure hours in acquiring a knowledge of arithmetic, mathematics, logic, divinity, and the canon and civil law. He was afterwards employed by his patron, in quality of secretary, and either by him, or by Edyngdon, bishop of Winchester, or by both) was recommended to the notice of Edward III.

He was about twenty-two, or twenty-three years of age' when first introduced at court, but in what employment has not been ascertained, although it was probably of the same nature with those which he afterwards so ably filled, There is" every reason to think that his skill in drawing recommended him to a sovereign who was bent on adding to his country the ornament and utility of magnificent and durable structures. The first office he held, or the first of which we read, had evidently a reference to this object, In May 1356, he was appointed clerk of all the king’s works at the castle, and in the park of Windsor. It was by his advice that the king was induced to pull down great part of this castle, and by his skill that it was rebuilt nearly in the manner in which we find it. His other great work was Queenborough castle; and although in these military structures he had little scope for the genius displayed afterwards at Oxford and Winchester, they would have been sufficient to prove that he had already reached that degree of architectural skill which modern art can but poorly imitate.

With a sovereign of Edward III.'s magnificent taste, it was but natural that Wykeham should now become a favourite, and accordingly we find that his majesty wished to distinguish him by many marks of royal favour. In order to facilitate this, it was necessary he should take orders, as ecclesiastical promotion was more particularly within his majesty’s pjwer, where the pope did not think proper to interfere; but this part of Wykeham’s* history is not so clearly detailed as could be wished. There is, on the contrary, some reason to think that he was in the church before he had given proof of his talents at Windsor and Queenborough. In all the patents for the offices he held, he is styled Clericus, but, as his biographer supposes, he had as yet only the clerical tonsure, or some of the lower orders, while the historian of Winchester thinks he was ordained priest by bishop Edyngdon. The first preferment bestowed on him was the rectory of Pulham in Norfolk, in 1357, and as the court of Rome threw some obstacles in the way which kept him for a time out of that living, the king, in 1359, granted him two hundred' pounds a year over and above all his former appointments, until he should get quiet possession of Pulham, or some other benefice, to the value of one hundred marks. But the disproportion between the worth of the living, and the compensation for delay, is so very striking as to incline us to think, either that Dr. Lowth has by mistake inserted 200l. for 20l. or that the king took this opportunity to shew a special mark of his favour, for which the loss of the living should be the ostensible motive. In the mean time he was presented to the prebend of Flixton in the church of Lichfieid, which he afterwards exchanged for some other benefice, and in 1359 he was constituted chief warden and surveyor of the king’s castles of Windsor, Leedes, Dover, and Hadlam; and of the manors of old and new Windsor, Wichenier, and several other castles, manors, and houses, and of the parks belonging to them. In 1360, the king granted him the deanery of the royal free chapel, or collegiate church of St. Martin le Grand, London, which he held about three years; during which he rebuilt, at his own expense, the cloister of the Chapter-house, and the body of the church. This is the first instance on record in which he is noticed as a public benefactor. In 1361 he was quietly settled in the rectory of Pulham, and in less than two years received many other ecclesiastical preferments, specified by Dr. Lowth. The annual value of his livings, for some years before he became bishop of Winchester, amounted to 842l. but “he only received the revenues of the church with one hand, to expend them in her service with the other.”

His advancement to the bishopric was followed by his being appointed chancellor of England. In his speeches to parliament, it has been observed that he innovated on the practice of his clerical predecessors whose oratory savoured more of the pulpit than the bench, by introducing a style and manner wholly* political. In 1371, when the parliament, become jealous of churchmen, requested that secular men only should be appointed to offices of state, Wykeham resigned the seal, but without any loss of favour on the part of the king, the commons, or the public at large. The king was obliged to comply wiih the request to dismiss churchmen from the high offices of state, but soon found it necessary to have recourse to the only persons of that age whose education and talents seemed to fit them for such preferments. Soon after his being settled in the bishopric of Winchester, he began to employ his architectural skill in the repairs of the cathedral, the whole expense of which was defrayed by himself, but his more enlarged designs for this edifice were delayed to a more distant period. The care he bestowed on other parts of his episcopal duty, in reforming abuses, and establishing discipline, was not less exemplary, and in the case of his visitation of the Hospital of St. Cross, involved him in a long and troublesome dispute, which ended greatly to the benefit of that institution, and clearly to the honour of his firmness, judgment, and integrity. His mind appears now to have been deeply impressed by sentiments of enlarged liberality, and wholly influenced by those motives which determined him to become a benefactor to his country upon a most munificent scale.

The foundation of a college, or of some institution for the education of youth, had probably been revolved for a considerable time. About two years after he entered on the bishopric of Winchester, he began to make purchases in the city of Oxford with that view, and he connected with it the plan of a college at Winchester, which should be a nursery for that of Oxford. As early as 1373 he established a school at Winchester, in which he placed certain poor scholars who were to be instructed in grammatical learning, by one Richard de Herton, with an assistant. But the progress of this generous plan was for some time impeded by the intrigues of a party, headed by the duke of Lancaster, in the last year of the reign of Wykeham’s friend and master Edward III. An accusation, branching into eight articles, was brought against him, but upon a fair trial, seven were found destitute of proof, and the eighth only was laid hold of, as a pretext for seizing into the king’s hands the temporalities of the bishopric of Winchester, excluding the bishop from parliament, and removing him from court. A measure so violent, and justified upon such slight grounds, was not to be overlooked even in those days of popular acquiescence. At the ensuing convocation, the bishop of London, William Courtney, had the spirit to oppose any subsidy to the king until satisfaction should be made for the injury done to the whole body of the clergy, in the person of the bishop of Winchester; and he was so firmly supported by the convocation, that the archbishop of Canterbury, though a warm partizan of the duke of Lancaster, was obliged to admit Wykeham into their assembly, where he was received by every member with all possible marks of respect. Nor was he less a favourite with the people, who, when they rose in the affair of Wickliffe, demanded that the duke of Lancaster should allow the bishop to be brought to a fair trial. Wykeham was soon after restored to his temporalities, but with the ungracious condition, that he should fit out three ships of war for a certain time, or if they were not wanted, pay the amount of the probable expense to the king that king who had formerly heaped so many marks of favour on him, but who, although in some measure reconciled to him, was now too much enslaved by a party to act with his wonted liberality.

Edward III. died June 21, 1377; and on the accession of Richard II. Wykeham was released from all his difficulties, and by a solemn declaration of the privy council, most honourably acquitted of the accusations formerly preferred against him by the Lancaster party. This new reign, however, was a period of turbulence, faction, and bloodshed, and it required all the wisdom and circumspection of his steady mind to preserve the favour of the king, and the confidence of the people. Yet in both he was in a considerable degree successful. It was not long before the parliament appointed him one of the commissioners to inquire into the abuses of the former reign, and in their other proceedings they appear to have looked up to him as a statesman of inflexible integrity; nor was he less consulted in all matters of difficulty by the king and council. But notwithstanding such encouragement, the part he had to act was extremely arduous: the new reign was distracted by contending factions, and in the conflict of factions men or independent minds can seldom be safe; but what rendered the danger greater was, that the king, as he grew up, listened more to flatterers and favourites, than to the legitimate advisers of the crown.

In 1379, having completed the several purchases of land necessary for the scite of the college, he obtained the king’s patent or licenceto found, dated June 3.0, of that year; and likewise the pope’s bull to the same effect. In his charter of foundation which he published on November 26 following, his college is entitled Seinte Marie College of Wynchestre in Oxenford. But it is raxher remarkable that the name of New college, which was then given in common speech without much impropriety, should be by-some means continued until the present day, when it is in reality the oldest as to its principal buildings, and the seventh in the order of foundation. The foundation-stone was laid March 5, 1380, and the whole completed in six years; and on April 14, 1386, the society took possession by a public entrance accompanied with much solemnity.

According to the statutes, the society consisted of a warden and seventy poor scholars , clerks, students in theology, canon and civil law, and philosophy; twenty were appointed to the study of laws, ten of them to that of the canon, and ten to that of the civil law; the remaining fifty were to apply themselves to philosophy, or arts, and theology; two to the study of medicine, and two to astronomy; all of whom were obliged to be in priest’s orders within a certain time, except in case of lawful impediment. Besides these there were ten priests, three clerks, and sixteen boys or choristers, to minister in the service of the chapel. The body of statutes, wb-ich was entirely of his composition, underwent many revisions and corrections, the result of experience and profound thinking on a subject which appears to have engrossed his whole mind, and although some of the latter revisions left an opening for irregularities which the society have not always been able to prevent, these statutes upon the whole are considered as highly judicious and complete, and have been very closely copied by succeeding founders .

During the progress of the building, he established in form that society at Winchester which was to supply New college with its members. The charter of foundation is dated Oct. 20, 1382, and the college named Seinee Marie College of Wynchestrea. The year after New college was finished he began this other upon the scite where stood the school at which he received his early education. This, likewise, was completed in six years, with a magnificence scarcely inferior to that of New college, and was opened for the reception of its intended inhabitants, March 28, 1393. The society resembles that of his other institution, consisting of a warden, seventy scholars, to be instructed in grammatical learning, ten secular priests, perpetual fellows, three priests, chaplains, three clerks, and sixteen choristers: and for the instruction of the scholars, a schoolmaster, and an undermaster or usher. The founder of Queen’s college, by his twelve fellows, and seventy scholars, intended to allude to the apostles and disciples. The historian of Winchester informs us that the same design entered into the contemplation of Wykeham. The warden and ten priests represented the apostles, with the omission of Judas. The head master and second master, with the seventy scholars, denoted the seventy-two disciples, as in the vulgate, for the English bible, which is translated from the Greek, has only seventy the three chaplains, and three inferior clerks marked the six faithful deacons Nicholas; one of the number, having apostatized, has therefore no representative; and the sixteen choristers represented the four greater, and the twelve minor prophets.

Among the special privileges secured by the founder to New college, one was, that the fellows should be admitted to all degrees in the university without asking any grace of the congregation of masters, or undergoing any examination for them in the public schools, provided they were examined in their own college according to the form of the university, and had their graces given them in the same manner by the government of the house. In 1608 this was disputed; but archbishop Bancroft, then chancellor of the university, dcided in favour of the college.

, an eminent statesman, chancellor of the exchequer in the reign of queen Anne, was descended from a very ancient family, which derives its descent from Ailwardus, an eminent Saxon, in the county of Norfolk, soon after the Norman conquest, who being possessed of lands in Wymondham, or Wyndham, in that county, assumed his surname thence. Sir John Wyndham, who was knighted at the coronation of king Edward VI. had the estate of Orchard, in the county of Somerset, in right of his wife, Elizabeth, daughter and co-heir of John Sydenham, of Orchard, esq. His great grandson John married Catharine, daughter of Robert Hopton, esq. sister and co-heir to Ralph lord Hopton, by whom he had issue sir William Wyndham, advanced to the dignity of a baronet by king Charles II. whose eldest son, Edward, married Catharine, daughter of sir William Levison Gower, bart. and by that lady had one daughter, Jane, wife of sir Richard Grosvenor, of Eton, in Cheshire, bart. and an only son, the subject of this article, who was born about 1687; and upon the decease of his father, while he was very young, succeeded to the title and estate. He was educated at first at Eton school, and thence removed to Christ Church, Oxford, where his excellent genius soon discovered itself, and afterwards received great advantage from his travels into foreign countries. Upon his return to England he was chosen knight of the shire for the county of Somerset, in which station he served in the three last parliaments of queen Anne, and all the subsequent ones till his death. This public scene of action soon called forth his eminent abilities, and placed him in so conspicuous a point of light, that, after the change of the ministry under that queen in the latter end of 1710, he was first appointed master of her majesty’s hart and buck hounds, then secretary at war, and at last, about August 1713, was advanced to the important post of chancellor of the exchequer. In this station he had an opportunity of appearing in his judicial capacity in a cause of Dr/Hooper, bishop of Bath and Wells, in which he gave sentence, and at the same time explained the grounds of it with a perspicuity, force of reasoning, and extent of knowledge worthy the most experienced judge. In May the year following he brought into the House of Commons, and carried successfully through it, the “Bvll to prevent tae growth of schism, and for the future security of the Church of England,” &c. and was appointed to carry it up to the House of Lords, where also it passed. Upon the breach between the earl of Oxford, lord high treasurer, and lord Bolidgbroke, secretary of state, in July 1714, sir William adhered to the interests of the latter.

After he had regained his liberty he continued his opposition to the several administrations under which he lived, though he is believed to have altered his opinion with respect to government itself, from the Jacobite notions which he might formerly have espoused, to a more large and popular system; and that upon this ground he afterwards formed his whole Apolitical conduct. Jt was universally allowed that he possessed all the qualifications requisite to form an able senator; sagacity, to discern the strength or weakness of every question, and eloquence, to enforce the one and expose the other; skill and address, to seize every advantage in the course of a debate, without affording any; and a proper degree of warmth and vivacity in speaking, necessary to secure the attention of the audience, without such an excess of it as might embarrass himself, and expose him to the cooler observation of his antagonists. And if we descend to the consideration of him in the more familiar light of his private conversation, we shall find it equally distinguished by an unaffected civility and politeness, enlivened by an easy flow of elegant wit, and supported by a various and extensive fund of useful knowledge. To so imperfect a character of him, it will be but justice to subjoin that which has been given by Pope, with whom he lived in great intimacy.

In 1774 Mr. Wynne published (but like the former, without his name.) “Eunornus, or Dialogues concerning the Law and Constitution of England. With an Essay on Dialogue,” 4 vols. 8vo. This scientific work, says Mr. Bridgman, would probably have been held in higher estimation had it been better known; but having been written before, and published after the commentaries of sir William Blackstone, its acknowledged merits have been obscured, though not totally eclipsed by the splendour of that great performance: it is, however, highly valued, as having very much illustrated the principles of our laws and constitution, and given an instructive and rational account of the several branches into which the practice of the law is divided, and as having recommended, with much learning, a liberal and enlarged method of study in that science, pointing out its necessary connexion with the other branches of literature. Mr. Hargrave has further observed, that this work treats incidentally of the character and authority of the several law xvriters, and more professedly on the origin and progress of the most important subjects and branches of the law, and their connexion with the history and constitution of England. A second edition of this work appeared after the author’s death, in 1785, but without any alteration.

, a man of some original genius, but whose works will not entitle him to any very Jjigh rank in literature, was descended from a very respectable family in South Wales, where he was born in 1743. At what time he arrived in London, is not known, but for some time he gained his bread in the printing business, with which he became disgusted, and had interest enough to obtain an appointment in a regiment about to go abroad. Such was the perverseness of his temper while on shipboard vyith liis brother officers, that they refused to associate with him, and actually left him behind when the ship arrived at its first place of destination. From thence he contrived to return to England, where he married a young woman of some property. This was probably soon spent, as about this time he commenced author by profession, but either his works or his employers were of the lowest order, for it was with difficulty he could procure the necessaries of life by his labours. In 1770, however, he began to aim at higher fame, and published “A General History of theJBritish Empire in America: including all the countries in North America and the West-Indies ceded by the peace of Paris, 2 vols. 8vo. This as a compilation did him no discredit.In 1771 he published the” Prostitute, a Poem,“4to; in 1772” Choice Emblems, natural, historical, fabulous, moral, and divine, for the improvement of youth; in verse and prose/* 12mo. The same year appeared his principal work, “A general History of Ireland, from the earliest accounts to the present time,” 2 vols. 8vo., This was more popular, from the nature of the subject, than his History of America, but far enough removed from the merit that would enrol him among historians. Next year he published “tables of Flowers for the Female Sex,” “Evelina, a poem;” and “The Four Seasons, a poem.” In poetry he was ill -qualified to excel, although there are passages in some of his pieces that indicate superior talents, had he cultivated them at leisure, and been possessed of a mind better regulated. In 1787 he published a novel called “The Child of Chance;” and at different periods of his life supplied the magazines and newspapers with essays, poems, &c. generally with his name. All these were written to supply immediate wants, which they did but imperfectly. He died Dec. 2, 1788. It is mentioned to his honour that through a long life of poverty, he abhorred and avoided every mean and dishonest expedient to improve his finances, and was even so extravagant in his notions of independence that to do him an act of kindness unsolicited, was to incur his bitterest reproaches.

, an ancient Scottish chronicler, was most probably born during the reign of David II. king of Scotland, which commenced in 1309, and terminated in 1370. He was a canon regular of St. Andrew’s, and prior of the monastery of St. Serf, situated in the inch or island of Lochleven in the county of Kinross. In the chartulary of the priory of St. Andrew’s, there are several public instruments of Andrevr Wynton as prior of Lochleven, dated between the years 1395 and 1413. He was therefore contemporary with Barboiir; to whose merit he has on various occasions paid a due tribute of applause. His “Orygynale Cronykil of Scotland”' was undertaken at the request of sir John Wemyss, the ancestor of the present noble family of that name. Wynton’s life must have been prolonged at least till 1420, for he mentions the death of Robert, duke of Albany, which happened in the course of that year.

whereas the information contained in all the other histories of Scotland preceding the middle of the seventeenth century, if we except the brief chronicle subjoined to some manuscripts of Wyntown, and the translations of Ballenden and Read, was effectually concealed from the unlearned part of mankind under the veil of a dead or a foreign language. In Wyntbwn’s Chronicle the historian may find what, for want of more ancient records, which have long ago perished, we must now consider as the original accounts of many transactions, and also many events related from his own knowledge or the reports of eye-witnesses. His faithful adherence to his authorities appears from comparing his accounts with unquestionable vouchers, such as the Fcedera Anglise, and the existing remains of the Register of the priory of St. Andrew’s, that venerable monument of ancient Scottish history and antiquities, generally coaeval with the facts recorded in it, whence he has given large extracts, almost literally translated. All these we have hitherto been obliged to take at second or third hand in copies by Bower and others, with such additions and embellishments as they were pleased to make to Wyntown’s simple and genuine narrative. An ecclesiastical historian of Scotland can no where find so good an account of the bishops of St. Andrew’s, with occasional notices concerning the other sees, as from Wyntown, who in describing the churches, their buildings and paraphernalia, shews himself quite at home. The compiler of a Scottish peerage may obtain from Wyntown more true information concerning the ancient noble families of Scotland, than is to be found in any work extant, except the accurate and elaborate research made by the late lord Hailes in the celebrated Sutherland case, wherein he has repeatedly had recourse to our author for proofs of the laws and customs of succession. In this view the lawyer will also find the Chronicle of Wyntown an useful addition to his library, and may consult it with advantage, when called upon to adjust a disputed inheritance in an ancient family. Mr. Ellis, who allows that Wynton is highly valuable as a historian, adds that his versification is easy, his language pure, and his style often animated.

, Rouge-Croix pursuivant, was son of Augustine of Wyrley, of Nether Seile, in the county of Leicester, by Mary his wife, daughter of William Charnells of Snareston, in that county, esq. which Augustine was second son of William Wyrley, of Handsworth, in Staffordshire, esq. of an ancient family in that county, which of late years expired in an heiress married into the family of Birch, of Birch, in Lancashire, who have since sold their ancient paternal estate in that county, and reside at the Wyrley seat in Staffordshire, having assumed the name and arms of that family. In early life he was noticed by the antiquary Sampson Erdeswick, of Sandon, who took him into his house; t and Wyrley having for many years laboured in the study of heraldry, was, upon the 15th of May, 1604, appointed Rouge-Croix pursuivant of arms, which office he held, without higher promotion, till the beginning of February 1617-18, when he died in the Heralds’ college, and was buried in the burial-place belonging to that corporation in the church of St. Bene't, Paul’s Wharf, London. In 1592, he published a book, intituled, “The true Use of Armory shewed by History, and plainly proved by example. London,” 4to; but the fame derivable from this work was somewhat injured by Erdeswick, in his dotage, laying claim to the authorship of it. Wyrley also made many collections for a history of his native county of Leicester, which Burton made use of. In 1569 he began to survey the churches there. His original ms. written by himself, containing also many churches in Warwickshire, is now in the library of the Heralds’ college, bearing the mark V. 197. It appears also, that he afterwards accompanied Burton in his survey of the churches there, in the years 1603, 1608, &c. In V. No. 127, in the same library, is a fair and beautiful copy of their labours in this way, with the arms, monuments, and antiquities, well drawn. At the end of his “True Use of Armory” are two dull creeping metrical narratives, one on the life and death of lord Chandos, the other on Sir John de Gralhy, Capitall de Buz; but it seems doubtful whether these were the production of Erdeswick or of Wyrley. It is certain they are not worth contending for.

, commonly called the Apostle of the Indies, was born April 7, 1506, in Navarre, at the castle of Xavier. His father, Don John de Jasso, was one of the chief counsellors of state to John III. king of Navarre. Among their numerous family of children, of which Francis was the youngest, those that were elder bore the surname of Azpilcueta, the younger that of Xavier. Francis was sent to the university of Paris, in the eighteenth year of his age. He was afterwards admitted master of arts, and tauglit philosophy in the college of Beauvais, with an intention of entering the society of the Sorbonne; but having formed a friendship with Ignatius Loyola, he renounced all establishments, and became one of his first disciples. Xavier then went to Italy, where he attended the sick at the hospital of incurables at Venice, and was ordained priest. Some time after, John III. king of Portugal, having applied to St. Ignatius for some missionaries to preach the gospel in the East Indies, Xavier was chosen for that purpose, who, embarking at Lisbon, April 7, 1541, arrived at Goa, May 6, 1542. In a short time he spread the knowledge of the Christian religion, or, to speak more properly, of the Romish system, over a great part of the continent, and in several of the islands of that remote region. Thence in 1549 he passed into Japan, and laid there, with amazing rapidity, the foundation 'of the famous church which flourished during so many years in that vast empire. His indefatigable zeal prompted him to attempt the conversion of the Chinese, and with this view he embarked for that extensive and powerful kingdom, but died on an island in sight of China, Dec. 2, 1552. The body of this missionary lies interred at Goa, where it is worshipped with the highest marks of devotion. There is also a magnificent church at Cotati dedicated to Xavier, to whom the inhabitants of the Portuguese settlements pay the most devout tribute of veneration and worship. In 1747, the late king of Portugal obtained for Xavier, or rather for his memory, the title of protector of the Indies, from Benedict XIV. There are two lives of this saint, the one by Tursellinus, and the other by Bouhours, but the latter is little more than a translation from Latin into French of the former, dressed out in a more elegant manner. They both contain the miracles ascribed to this saint, which are among the most absurd and incredible in the annals of superstition. For this, however, Xavier, who appears to have been only a zealous enthusiast, ought not to be censured. He claims no miracles for himself, nor were any such heard of for many years after his death; on the contrary, in his correspondence with his friends, during his mission, he not only makes no mention of miracles, but disclaims all supernatural assistance. For the miracles, therefore, his biographers must be accountable, and we know of no evidence they have produced in confirmation of them. The life of Xavier is not unknown in this country. No less a person than our celebrated poet Dryden published a translation of Bouhours’s Life of Xavier, in 1688, in consequence qf the queen of James II. having, when she solicited a son, recommended herself to Xavier as her patron saint. Besides this, a Wesleyan preacher published, in 1764, anabridgment of Bouhours, as if he had intended to assist bishop Lavington in proving the alliance between the enthusiasm of the methodists and papists. Xavier’s Letters were published at Paris, 1631, 8vo, with some lesser works ascribed to him.

, one of the most celebrated philosophers of ancient Greece, was born at Chalcedon, B. C. 400. He at first attached himself to Æschines, but afterwards became the disciple of Plato, and always retained a high degree of respect and attachment for that great man, whom he accompanied in a voyage to Sicily. When Dionysius the tyrant threatened Plato one day, saying, “that some person should behead him;” “Nobody shall do that,” said Xenocrates, “till they have first beheaded me.” This philosopher studied under Plato at the same time with Aristotle, but did not possess equal talents: for he had a slow genius and dull apprehension, while Aristotle’s genius was quick and penetrating, whence their master observed of them, “that one wanted a spur, and the other a bridle.” But however inferior Xenocrates might be to Aristotle in genius, he greatly excelled him in the practice of moral philosophy. He was grave, sober, austere, and of a disposition so serious, and so far removed from the Athenian politeness, that Plato frequently exhorted him to “sacrifice to the graces.” He always bore his master’s reproofs with great patience, and when persuaded to defend himself, replied, “He treats me thus only for my good.” Xenocrates is particularly celebrated for chastity, and is said to have acquired so great a command over his passions, that Phryne, the most beautiful courtezan of Greece, who had laid a wager that she would seduce him, could not effect her purpose. Being afterwards laughed at, and the wager demanded, she replied, “I have not lost it; for I undertook to seduce a man, and not a statue.” The conduct of Xenocrates exhibited an equal example of temperance in every other respect. He cared neither for pleasures, wealth, or fame; and was so moderate in his dietj that he often found it necessary to throw away his provisions because they were grown stale and mouldy; whence the proverb among the Grecians, of Xenocrates* s cheese, when they would describe any thing which lasted a long time. This philosopher succeeded Speusippus, who was Plato’s immediate successor in the' academy at Athens, in 339 B. C. He required his disciples to understand mathematics before they placed themselves under his care; and sent back a youth who was ignorant of that science, saying, “that he had not the key of philosophy.” So great was his reputation fqr sincerity and probity, that the magistrates accepted his testimony without an oath; a favour granted to him alone. Polemo, a rich young man, but so debauched, that his wife had begun a prosecution against him for his infamoqs conduct, rambling through the streets, one day, with his dissolute companions, after they had drank freely, entered our philosopher’s school, with an intention to ridicule and insult him. The audience were highly offended at this behaviour; but Xenocrates Continued perfectly calm, and immediately turning his discourse upon temperance, spoke of that virtue in terms so forcible, lofty, and elevated, that the young libertine made a sudden resolution to renounce his licentiousness, and devote himself to wisdom. From that moment, Polemo became the pupil of virtue, and a model of temperance, and at length succeeded Xenocrates in the philosophical chair. Hia conversion made much noise, and so increased the public veneration for Xenocrates, that when he appeared in the streets, no dissolute youths dared to remain there, but turned aside that they might avoid meeting him. The Athenians sent this philosopher on an embassy to Philip, king of Macedon, and, a considerable time after, to Antipater; neither of whom could corrupt him by their presents, which circumstance made him doubly honoured. Alexander the Great so highly esteemed Xenocrates, that he sent him fifty talents, a large sum then; and when his messengers arrived at Athens, Xenocrates invited them to eat with him, but gaVe them only his common farel Upon their inquiring, next morning, to whom they should pay the fifty talents, he replied, “Has not lak night’s supper convinced you that I want no money?” intimating that he was contented with a little, and that money was necessary to kings, not to philosophers. But at the earnest entreaties of Alexander’s messengers, he accepted a small part of the sum, lest he should appear deficient in respect to that great monarch. It is astonishing that ‘the Athenians should suffer a philosopher of such exalted merit to be so ill treated by the collectors and receivers of their taxes 5 for though they were once fined for attempting to imprison Xenocrates, because he had not paid a certain tax imposed on foreigners, yet it is certain that the same collectors and receivers sold him at another time, because he had not enough to pay them. But Demetrius Phalereus, detesting so base an action; purchased Xenocrates’, gave hirri his freedom immediately, and discharged his debt to the Athenians. This philosopher died about 314 B.C. aged eighty-two, in consequence ’of falling in the dark into a reservoir of water. He 1 wrote, at the request of Alexander, *a small tract on the Art of Reigning; six books on Nature; MX books oh Philosophy one on Riches, &c, but none of these have come down to us. There is a tract on Death, under his name, in 'the Jamblicus of Aldus, 1497, folio. Xenocrates used to say, “That we often repent of having spoken, b,ut never of having kept silence; that true philosophers are the only persons who do willingly, and by their own choice, what others are constrained to do by fear of the laws; that it is as great a crime to look into our neighbour’s house as to enter it privately J that there was more necessity for putting iron-plates over the ears of children, to defend and preserve them from hearing vicious discourse, than of gladiators, to guard them from blows,” c. As to his philosophical system, it was truly Platonic; but in his’ method of teaching he made use of the language of the Pythagoreans. He made Unity and Diversity principles in nature, or gods; the former of whom he represented as the father, and the latter as the mother, of the universe. He taught, that the heavens are divine, and the stars celestial gods; and that besides these divinities, there are terrestrial daemons, of a middle order between the gods and man, which partake of the nature both of mind and body, and are therefore, like human beings, capable of passions, and liable to diversity of character. After Plato, he probably conceived the superior divinities to be the Ideas, or intelligible forms, which immediately proceeded from the supreme Deity, and the inferior gods or daemons, to be derived from the soul of the world, and therefore, like that principle, to be compounded of a simple and a divisible substance, or of that which always remains the same, and that which is liable to change.

, an eminent philosopher, was author of the Eleatic sect, so cabled because three of its most celebrated members, Parmenides, Zeno, and Leucippus, were natives of Elea, or Velia, a town in Magna Graecia. Xenopharies was a native of Colophon, and born probably about 556 B.C. He early left his country, and went to Sicily, where he supported himself by reciting verses against the theogonies of Hesiod and Homer. Thence he passed over into Magna Graecia, where he took up the profession 6f philosophy, and became a celebrated preceptor in the Pythagorean school. Indulging, however, a greater freedom of thought than was usual among the disciples of Pythagoras, he ventured to introduce new opinions of his Own, and in many particulars to oppose the doctrines of Epimenides, Thales, and Pythagoras. This gave occasion to Timon, who was a severe satirist, to introduce him in ridicule as one of the characters in his dialogues, Xenophanes possessed the Pythagorean chair of philosophy about seventy years, and lived tp the extreme age of an hundred years, that is, according to Eusebius, till the eighty-first Olympiad, or B C. 456.

In metaphysics, Xenophanes taught, that if ever there had been a time when nothing existed, nothing could ever have existed. That whatever is, always has been from eternity, without deriving its existence from any prior principle; that nature is one and without limit; that what is one is similar in all its parts, else it would be many; that the one infinite, eternal, and homogeneous universe, is immutable and incapable of change; that God is one incorporeal eternal Being, and, like the universe, spherical in form; that he is of the same nature with the universe, comprehending all things within himself; is intelligent, and pervades all things; bat bears no resemblance to human nature either in body or mind.

In physics, he taught, that there are innumerable worlds; 'that there is in nature no real production, decay, or change; that there are four elements, and that the earth is the basis of all things; that the stars arise from vapours, which are extinguished by day, and ignited by night; that the sun consists of fiery particles collected by humid exhalations, and daily renewed; that the course of the sun is rectilinear, and only appears curvilinear from its great distance; that there are as many suns as there are different climates of the earth; that the moon is an inhabited world; that the earth, as appears from marine shells, which are found at the tops of mountains, and in caverns, far from the sea, was once a general mass of waters; and that it will at length return into the same state, and pass through an endless series of similar revolutions.

The doctrine of Xenophanes concerning nature is so imperfectly preserved, and obscurely expressed, that it is no wonder that it has been differently represented by different writers. Some have confounded it with the moden impiety of Spinoza, who supposed all the appearances in nature to be only modifications of one material substance. Others have endeavoured to accommodate it to the ancient system of emanation; and others, to the Pythagoric and Stoic notions of the soul of the world. But none of these explanations accord with the terms, in which the tenets of Xenophanes are expressed. Perhaps the truth is, that he held the universe to be one in nature and substance, but distinguished in his conception between the matter of which all things consist, and that latent divine force, which, though not a distinct substance, but an attribute, is necessarily inherent in the universe; and this is the cause of all its perfection. What Xenophanes maintained concerning the immobility and immutability of nature is to be understood of the universe considered as one whole, and not of its several parts, which his physical tenets supposed liable to change. If he asserted, that there is no motion in nature, he probably understood the term motion metaphysically, and only meant that there is no such thing in nature as passing from nonentity to entity, or the reverse, perhaps the disputes among the ancients concerning motion, like many other metaphysical contests, were mere combats in the dark, for want of settling previously the meaning of terms. Brucker thinks that the notion ascribed to Xenophanes concerning the nature and origin of the celestial bodies, as meteors daily renewed, is so absurd as perhaps to have been defectively or unfairly stated; and he is inclined likewise to suppose, that many of the fancies, ascribed to philosophers, are nothing more than the misconceptions of ignorant or careless biographers.

, an illustrious philosopher, soldier, and historian, was an Athenian, the son of Gryllus, a person of high rank, and was born in the third year of the eightysecond Olympiad, or B. C. 450. Few particulars of his early life are known. Laertius tells us, that meeting Socrates in a narrow lane, after he was pretty well grown up, he stopped the philosopher with his staff; and asked him, “Where all kinds of meats were to be sold ?” To which Socrates made a serious answer: and then demanded of him, “Where it was that men were made good and virtuous?” At which Xenophon pausing, “Follow me, then,” said Socrates, “and learn:” from which time he became the disciple of that father of ancient wisdom.

Xenophon, being extremely old, died at Corinth in the firstyear of the 105th Olympiad, or B. C. 360 leaving behind him many excellent works, of which a fine collection are happily come down to us. The principal of these are, the “Cyropeedia,” or the life, and discipline, and actions, of the elder Cyrus seven books of the “Expedition of the younger Cyrus into Persia, and of the retreat of the ten thousand Greeks under himself;” seven books of the “Grecian History” four books of the “Memorabilia” of Socrates, with the “Apologia Socratis.” Cicero tells us, probably grounding his opinion upon what he had read in the third book of Plato “de legibus,” that the “Cyropaedia” is not a real history, but only a moral fable; in which Xenophon meant to draw the picture of a great prince, without confining himself to truth, except in two or three great events, as the taking of Babylon, and the captivity of Croesus: and in this he has been pretty generally followed, though some have thought otherwise. The “Hellenica,” or seven books of Grecian history, are a continuation of Thucydides to forty-eight years farther; and here is recorded an instance of Xenophon’s integrity, who freely gave the public the writings of Thucydides, which he might either have suppressed, or made to pass as his own. The smaller pieces of Xenophon are, “Agesilaus;” of which piece Cicero says, “that it alone surpasses all images and pictures in his praise;” “Oeeonomics” with which Cu cero was so delighted, that in his younger years he translated it, and when he was grown old, gave an honourable testimony of it. The other writings of Xenophon arej “The Republic of the Lacedemonians,” and “The Republic of the Athenians” “Symposium” “Hiero, or, of a Kingdom” *< Accounts of the Revenues, of Horses, of Horsemanship;“and” Epistles."

Xenophon strictly adhered to the principles of his master in action as well as opinion, and employed philosophy, not to furnish with the means of ostentation, but to qualify him for the offices of public and private life; and his integrity, piety, and moderation, proved how much he had profited by the precepU of his master. His whole military conduct discovered an admirable union of wisdom and valour; and his writings, at the same time that they have afforded, to all succeeding ages, one of the most perfect models of purity, simplicity, and harmony of language, abound with sentiments truly Socratic. Of all the disciples of Socrates, he is said, by a recent critic, to be the only one who had the good faith and good sense to report his master’s opinions accurately without addition or disguise. When he teaches, Xenophon is the most delightful of instructors; when he narrates, the most fascinating of all narrators. When he invents, he seasons his fictions with so much of his great master’s genuine philosophy, and so much of his own exquisite taste, that it becomes impossible to decide, whether they are more instructive or more delightful when he speculates as a politician, it is with a good sense and sagacity, which soar above the prejudices of his fellow citizens, and distinguish with correctness, the institutions which lead to virtue and happiness, from those which allow and encourage depravity. The most imperfect of his works, the “Hellenica,” has yet many of the merits peculiar to the writer, and is, at the present day, an invaluable treasure.

, usually mentioned with the epithet Ephesius, from the place of his birth, to distinguish him from the above Xenophon Socraticus, is the author of five books “Of the loves of Habrocomes and Anthia,” which are entitled “Ephesiaca,” although they have no more to do with the town of Ephesus than the “Ethiopics of Heliodorus,” which is a love-romance also, have with the affairs of Ethiopia. His late editor thinks that Xenophon lived about the end of the second, or the beginning of the third century of the Christian jera. It is at least very probable that he is one of the most ancient of the Authores Erotici, from the purity and simplicity of his style, in which there is little of those affected ornaments so common in writers of a later period. The only Mss. in which the history of Habrocomes and Anthia has been transmitted to posterity, is preserved in the Benedictine abbey of Monte Cassino, at Florence, and is written in so small a character, that the whole work is comprised in no more than nine leaves, 4to. The first person who copied it was Salvini, who likewise, in 1723, translated this romance into the Italian language. Of the Greek text itself, the first edition was prepared by the celebrated physician Anthony Cocchi, and published at London in 1726, 4to, although his late editor baron Locellst asserts that London was put in the title instead of Florence. But the fact was that it was printed at London by Bowyer, as is proved in Mr. Nichols’s life of that celebrated printer. Two other editions, of 1781 and 1793, have likewise appeared, but they are all incorrect. At length in 1796 the work was rendered not unworthy of the classical scholar, by baron Locella, a gentleman, not a philologist by profession, but a man of business, who dedicated the leisure of his declining years to the Greek muses. His edition, which was elegantly printed at Vienna, 4to, is entided, “Xenophontis Ephesii de Anthia et Habrooome Ephesiacorum libri quinque, Gr. et Lat. Recensuit et supplevit, emendavit, Latine vertit, ad notationibus aliorum et suis illustravit, indicibus instruxit Aloys. Emerie. Liber Baro Locella, S. C. R. A. M. a cons, aulae.”

Politian is said to have been so much pleased with this author, that he made no scruple to rank him with the Athenian Xenophou for sweetness and purity of style and manner. Fabricius speaks of him nearly in as high terms, and his style is certainly his chief merit. In regard to antiquities, little can be learnt from him, and his geographical knowledge is very limited. The admirers of the Greek language will think themselves greatly indebted to baron Locella, since, in the earlier editions, nothing had been done either to improve or illustrate the text; nor had any proper use hitherto been made of the criticisms on this work, by Hemsterhuis and Abresch, contained in the “Observat. Miscellan.” He had also access to the valuable collections of the learned Dorville, who was preparing an edition for the press.

Many anecdotes are related of the peculiar temper and virtues of this celebrated cardinal, by his, biographers M. FJechier and M. Marsollier, each of whom published a life of him in 2 vols. 12mo, and there is a third by Gomez in folio. His family is generally represented to have been in a low situation; yet he is said, in the midst of his greatness, to have gone one summer to the village where he was born, to have visited his kindred, and to have treated them with all the marks of kindness and affection. His humility upon this head was very unaffected, and appeared sometimes very unexpectedly. He was present once when doctor Nicolas de Pax was explaining the philosophy of Raymund Lully; and, in speaking to the question, whether that famous man had the philosopher’s stone or not, he took notice of a passage in the Psalms which has been thought to look that way: “he raiseth up the poor out of the dust, and lifteth the needy out of the dunghill, that he may set him with the princes, even with the princes of his people.” That portion of scripture, said the cardinal, may be much more naturally interpreted, for instance, in my own case; and then ran out in a long detail of his own meanness, and the wonderful manner in which he had been exalted.

The great object of his care was the revenue of his archbishopric; with which, however great, he did such things as could scarcely be expected from it, especially as one half of it was constantly distributed in alms, about which he was so circumspect, that no fraud could be committed. He was very plain in his habit and in his furniture; but he knew the value of fine things, and would sometimes admire them. He once looked upon a rich jewel, and asked its price. The merchant told him. “It is a very fine thing,” said he, “and worth the money; but the army is just disbanded; there are many poor soldiers; and with the value or' it I can send two hundred of them home, with each a piece of gold in his pocket.” All his foundations, and other acts of generosity, were out of the other moiety. His regulations must have cost him at least as much thought as his buildings and endowments. He saw clearly that ignorance was the bane of religion, and the only thing that made the inquisition necessary; for, if men understood the Christian religion, there could be no need to fear either Judaism or Mohammedism. Upon the whole, we have great reason to believe that he spoke truth upon his deathbed, when he said, that, to the best of his knowledge, he had not misapplied a single crown of his revenue. Philip IV. was at great pains to have procured his canonization with the popes Innocent X. and Alexander Vij. but we know not why be did not succeed.

, a patriarch of Constantinople in the eleventh century, was a native of Trebisond. He distinguished himself by his learning and piety, and was raised to the see of Constantinople in 1064. He died Aug. 2, 1075. There is a sermon of his in the Bibl. Patrum. Andrew Scottus and Vossius erroneously imagined him to be the abridger of Dion Cassius: but it was a nephew of his name, as that nephew says himself in the history of Augustus. This nephew made, about the end of the eleventh century, a compendium of the last forty-five books of Dion, which contain the history of the emperors to the time of Alexander son of Mammea. It is probable he did not abridge the first five and thirty books, since there remains no trace or testimony of it: and, besides, he assures us, that even in his time there wanted something of the history of Dion. As to what remains, he has been very exact and faithful in following the sense, and often the very words of his author, as may appear by comparing the abridgment with the original. It has been printed sometimes with Dion Cassius, and sometimes separately, particularly at Paris, 1592, fol.

, a divine and poet, the sixth son of Mr. John Yalden, of Sussex, was born at Exeter in 1671. Having been educated in the grammar-school belonging to Magdalen college, Oxford, he was, in 1690, at the age of nineteen, admitted commoner of Magdalen Hall, under the tuition of Josiah Pullen, a man whose name is still remembered in the university. He became next year one of the scholars of Magdalen college, where he was distinguished by a declamation, which Dr. Hough, the president, happening to attend, thought too good to be the speaker’s. Some time after, the doctor, finding him a little irregularly busy in the library, set him an exercise, for punishment; and, that he might not be deceived by any artifice, locked the door. Yalden, as it happened, had been latelyreading on the subject given, and produced with little difficulty a composition which so pleased the president that he told him his former suspicions, and promised to favour him. Among his contemporaries in the college were Addison and Sacheverell, men who were in those times friends, and who both adopted Yalden to their intimacy. Yalden continued throughout his life to think, as probably he thought at first, yet did not lose the friendship of Addison. When Namur was taken by king William, Yalden made an ode . He wrote another poem, on the death of the duke of Gloucester. In 1700 he became fellow of the college, and next year entering into orders, was presented by the society with the living of Willoughby, in Warwickshire, consistent with his fellowship, and chosen lecturer of moral philosophy, a very honourable office. On the accession of queen Anne he wrote another poem; and is said, by the author of the “Biographia,” to have declared himself one of the party who had the distinction of high-churchmen. In 1706 he was received into the family of the duke of Beaufort. Next year he became D. D. and soon after he resigned his fellowship and lecture; and, as a token of his gratitude, gave the college a picture of their founder. The duke made him rector of Chalton and Cleanville, two adjoining towns and benefices in Hertfordshire; and he had the prebends, or sinecures, of Deans, Hains, and Pendles, in Devonshire. In 1713 he was chosen preacher of Bridewell Hospital, upon the resignation of Dr. Atterbury. From this time he seems to have led a quiet and inoffensive life, till the clamour was raised about Atterbury’s plot. Every loyal eye was on the watch for abettors or partakers of the horrid conspiracy; and Dr. Yalden, having some acquaintance with the bishop, and being familiarly conversant with Kelly his secretary, fell under suspicion, and was taken into custody. Upon his examination he was charged with a dangerous correspondence with Kelly. The correspondence he acknowledged; but maintained that it had no treasonable tendency. His papers were seized; but nothing was found that could fix a crime upon him, except two words in his pocket-book, f< thorough- paced doctrine.“This expression the imagination of his examiners had impregnated with treason; and the doctor was enjoined to explain them. Thus pressed, he told them that the words had lain unheeded in his pocket-book from the time of queen Anne, and 'that he was ashamed to give an account of them; but the truth was, that he had gratified his curiosity one day by hearing Daniel Burgess in the pulpit, and these words were a memorial hint of a remarkable sentence by which he warned his congregation to” beware of thorough-paced doctrine, that doctrine, which, coming in at one ear, paces through the head, and goes out at the other.“Nothing worse than this appearing in his papers, and no evidence arising against him, he was set at liberty. It will not be supposed that a man of this character attained high dignities in the church; but he still retained the friendship, and frequented the conversation of a very numerous and splendid body of acquaintance. He died July 16, 1736, in the sixty-sixth year of his age. Of his poems which have been admitted into Dr. Johnson’s collection, his” Hymn to Darkness“seems to be his best performance, and is, for the most part, imagined with great vigour, and expressed with great propriety. His” Hymn to Light" is not equal to the other. On his other poems it is sufficient to say that they deserve perusal, though they are not always exactly polished, though the rhymes are sometimes very ill sorted, and though his faults seem rather the omissions of idleness than the negligences of enthusiasm.

, an eminent lawyer, was the son of Philip Yorke, an attorney, and was born at Dover, in Kent, December 1, 1690; and educated under Mr. Samuel Morland, of Bethnal Green, in classical and general learning, which he ever cultivated amidst his highest employments. He studied the law in the Middle Temple under the instruction of an eminent conveyancer of the name of Salkeld; and, being called to the bar in 1714, he soon became very eminent in his profession. In 1718 he sat in parliament as member for Lewes, in Sussex; and, in the two successive parliaments, for Seaford. In March 1719-20, he was promoted to the office of solicitorgeneral by the recommendation of the lord-chancellor Parker; an obligation he never forgot, returning it by every possible mark of personal regard and affection. He received also about the same time the honour of knighthood. The trial of Mr. Layer at the king’s bench for high. treason, gave him, in Nov. 1722, an opportunity of shewiug his abilities; his reply, in which he summed up late at night the evidence against the prisoner, and answered all the topics of defence, being justly admired as one of the ablest performances of that kind extant. About the same time, he gained much reputation in parliament by opening the bill against Kelly, who had been principally concerned in bishop Atterbury’s plot, as his secretary. la February 1723-4, he was appointed attorney-general, in the execution of which important office he was remarkable for his candour and lenity. As an advocate for the crown, he spoke with the veracity of a witness and a judge; and, though his zeal for justice and the due course of law was strong, yet his tenderness to the subject,- in the court of exchequer, was so distinguished, that upon a particular occasion in 1733, the House of Commons assented to it with a general applause. He was unmoved by fear or favour in what he thought right and legal; and often debated and voted against the court in matters relating to the South-Sea company, when he was solicitor; and,‘ in the affair of lord Derwentwater’s estate, when he was attorneygeneral. Upon the resignation of the great seal by Peter lord King, in October 1733, sir Philip Yorke was appointed lord chief-justice of the king^s bench. He was soon after raised to the dignity of a baron of this kingdom, with the title of lord Hardwicke, baron of Hardwicke, in the county of Gloucester, and called to the cabinet council. The salary of chief-justice of the king’s bench being thought not adequate to the weight and dignity of that high office, was raised on the advancement of lord Hardwicke to it, from 2000l. to 4000l. per ann. to the chiefjustice and his successors; but his lordship refused to accept the augmentation of it; and the adjustment of the two vacancies of the chancery and king’s bench (which happened at the same time) between his lordship and lord Talbot, upon terms honourable and satisfactory to both, was thought to do as much credit to the wisdom of the crown in those days, as the harmony and friendship, with which they co-operated in’the public service, did honour to themselves. In the midst of the general approbation with which he discharged his office there, he was called to that of lord high chancellor, on the decease of lord Talbot, February 17, 1736-7.

After he had executed the high office of lord high chancellor about seventeen years, in times and circumstances of accumulated difficulty and danger, he was, in April 1754, advanced to the rank of an earl of Great Britain, with the titles of viscount Royston, and earl of Hardwicke. This favour was conferred unasked, by his sovereign, who treated him through the whole of his reign with particular esteem and confidence, and always spoke of him in a manner which shewed that he set as high a value on the man as on the minister. His resignation of the great seal, in November 1756, gave ah universal concern to the nation, however divided at that time in other respects. But he still continued to serve the public in a more private station; at council, at the House of Lords, and upon every occasion where the course of public business required it, with the same assiduity as when he rilled one of the highest offices in the kingdom. He always felt and expressed the truest affection and reverence for the laws and constitution of his country: this rendered him as tender of the just prerogatives invested in the crown, for the benefit of the whole, as watchful to prevent the least incroachment upon the liberty of the subject. The part which he acted in planning, introducing, and supporting, the “Bill for abolishing the heritable Jurisdictions in Scotland,” and the share which he took, beyond what his department required of him, in framing and promoting the other bills relating to that country, arose from his zeal to the Protestant succession, his concern for the general happiness and improvement of the kingdom, and for the preservation of this equal and limited monarchy which were the governing principles of his public conduct through life. And these, and other bills which might be mentioned, were strong proofs of his talents as a legislator. In judicature, his firmness and dignity were evidently derived from his consummate knowledge and talents; and the mildness and humanity with which he tempered it, from the most amiable disposition. He was wonderfully happy in his manner of debating causes upon the bench. His extraordinary dispatch of the business of the court of chancery, increased as it was in his time beyond what had been known in any former, was an advantage to the suitor, inferior only to that arising from the acknowledged equity, perspicuity, and precision, of his decrees. The manner in which he presided in the House of Lords added order and dignity to that assembly, and expedition to the business transacted there. His talents as a speaker in the senate as well as on the bench, were universally admired: he spoke with a natural and manly eloquence, without false ornaments or personal invectives; and, when he argued, his reasons were supported and strengthened by the most apposite cases and examples which the subject would allow. His manner was graceful and affecting; modest, yet commanding his voice peculiarly clear and harmonious, and even loud and strong, for the greater part of his time. With these talents for public speaking r the integrity of his character gave a lustre to his eloquence, which those who opposed him felt in the debate, and which operated most powerfully on the minds of those who heard him with a view to information and convictions, is<

, earl of Hardwicke, the eldest son of the preceding, was born Dec. 20, 1720. At the school of Dr. Newcome, at Hackney, he received the first rudiments of his education, and from that seminary, on 26th May, 1737, was removed to Bene'c college, Cambridge, under the tuition of the Rev. Dr. Salter. In the year following ha was appointed one of the tellers of the exchequer, in the room of sir Charles Turner, bart. deceased. In 1740 he. left college, and soon after married lady Jemima Campbel, only daughter of John lord viscount Glenorchy, by the lady Amabel Grey, eldest daughter of Henry duke -of Kent, at whose decease she succeeded to the title of marchioness Grey and baroness Lucas of Crudwell. By this marriage he became possessed of a large part of the duke’s estate, together with his seat of Wrest-house, near Silsoe, in Bedfordshire. He early engaged as a legislator. In 1741 he was chosen member for Ryegate, in Surrey, and in 1747 one of the representatives for the county of Cambridge, as he was also in 1754 and 1761. At the installation of the duke of Newcastle, as chancellor of the university of Cambridge, in 1749, he had the degree of LL.D. conferred upon him. In 1764 he succeeded his father in his title and estate; and after a strong contention for the office of lord high steward of the university, he obtained that honour against Lord Sandwich. The infirm state of his lordship’s health, combined with his attachment to literary pursuits, prevented him from attending to, or joining in, the politics of the day. He had the honour, however, of a seat in the cabinet during the existence of that short-lived administration in 1765, of which lord Rockingham was the head, but without any salary or official situation which, though repeatedly offered to- him, he never would accept. He died May 16, 1790.

His lordship through life was attentive to literature, and produced several useful works, besides the assistance which he rendered on various occasions to authors who have acknowledged their obligations to him. On the death of queen Caroline, in 1738, he inserted a poem amongst the Cambridge verses printed on that occasion. Whilst a member of the university of Cambridge, he engaged with several friends in a work similar to the celebrated Travels of Anacharsis into Greece, by Monsieur Barthelemi. It was entitled “Athenian Letters; or the Epistolary Correspondence of an Agent of the Kin r of Persia residing at Athens during the Peloponnesian War,” and consisted of letters supposed to have been written by contemporaries of Socrates, Pericles, and Plato. A few copies were printed in 1741 by Bettenbam, and in 1782 a hundred copies were reprinted; but still the work was unknown to the public at large. At length, an elegant, correct, and authenticated edition, under the auspices of the present earl of Hardwicke, was published in 1798, in two volumes, 4to, and an advertisement prefixed to the first volume, attributes its having been so long kept from the public to an ingenuous diffidence which forbad the authors of it, most of them extremely young, to obtrude on the notice of the world what they had considered merely as a preparatory trial of their strength, and as the best method of imprinting on their own minds some of the immediate subjects of their academical studies. The friends who assisted in this publication were, the hon. Charles Yorke, afterwards baron Morden, who died in 1770; Dr. Rooke, master of Christ’s college, Cambridge; Dr. Green, afterwards bishop of Lincoln; Daniel Wray, esq., the rev. Mr. Heaton, of Bene't college; Dr. Heberden, Henry Coventry, esq., the rev. Mr. Laury, Mrs. Catherine Talbot, Dr. Birch, and Dr. Salter.

Though a good classical scholar, yet the object to which Lord Hardwicke, from his early youth, particularly directed his attention, was modern history. Accordingly he printed, in 4to. a small impression (not for sale) of the Correspondence of sir Dudley Carlton, Ambassador to the States General during the reign of James I. and prefixed to it an historical preface, containing an account of the many important negociations that were carried on during that interesting period. A second impression of fifty copies only was printed in 1775. In 1781 he is said to have printed for private distribution, “Walpoliana, or a few anecdotes of sir Robert Walpole,”

The last publication of lord Hardwicke was entitled “Miscellaneous State Papers from 1501 to 1726,” in two volumes, 4to, containing a number of select papers, such “as mark most strongly the characters of celebrated Princes and their Ministers, and illustrate some memorable a^ra or remarkable series of events.” Collections of this kind have been frequently given to the public, but generally overladen with papers both tedious and trifling. The present avoids the errors of its predecessors, all the papers it contains being curious and important.

His first poetical flight was when queen Anne added twelve to the number of peers in one day. In order to reconcile the people to one at least of the new lords, Young published in 1712 “An Epistle to the Right Hon. George Lord Lansdowne.” in which his intentions are said to have been of the ambitious kind; but, whatever its intentions or merits, it is one of those of which he afterwards became ashamed, and rejected it from the collected edition of his works, He also declined republishing the recommendatory verses which he prefixed to Addison’s “Cato” in 1713. In the same' year appeared Young’s “Poem on the Last Day,” which is said to have been finished as early as 1710, before he was thirty, for. part of it is printed in the “Tatler.” It was inscribed to the queen, in a dedication, the complexion of which being political, he might have his reasons for dropping it in the subsequent edition of his works. From some lines of Swift’s it has been thought that Young was at this time a pensioned writer at court:

To flatter knaves, or lose his pension."

and we have seen already, that either prudence, or more mature consideration, induced him to suppress a considerable part of what he had published. Before the queen’s death appeared his “Force of Religion or,Vanquished Love,” a poem founded on the execution of lady Jane Grey and her husband lord Guilford, This was ushered in by a flattering dedication to the countess of Salisbury, which he afterwards omitted, as he did soon after his extravagant panegyric on king George I.

As his connection with the proBigate duke of Wbarton has been thought a very objectionable part of his history, it is at least necessary to explain how it arose. His father had been well acquainted with lady Anne Wharton, the first wife of the marquis of Wharton, and she, who was celebrated by Burnet and Waller for her poetical talents, added some verses to dean Young’s visitation sermon. Wharton, after the dean’s death, was kind to Young, but died in 1715. Next year the young marquis, afterwards duke, began his travels, and the year following went to Ireland, and it is conjectured that our poet went with him. Whether this was the case or not, it is certain that he looked up to him afterwards as his patron.

In 1719, Dr. Young published ^A paraphrase on part of the book of Job,“prefixed by a dedication to the lord chancellor Parker, which he omitted afterwards, and of whom, says his biographer, he clearly appears to have had no kind of knowledge. Of his” Satires“it is not easy to fix the dates. They probably came out between 1725 and 1728, and were afterwards published collectively under the title of” The Universal Passion.“In his preface he says that he prefers laughing at vice and folly, a different temper than that in which he wrote his melancholy” Night Thoughts.“These satires were followed by” The Installment,“addressed to sir Robert Walpote, but afterwards suppressed: and by” Ocean, an Ode,“accompanied by an” Ode to the King, pater patria“an” Essay on Lyric Poetry,“both afterwards omittedby him. Perhaps no writer ever rejected so many of his own performances, nor were the>e juvenile effusions, for he was now forty-six or forty-seven years old; and at this age, he entered into orders, April 1728, and was soon after appointed chaplain to king George II. It is said by one of the biographers of Pope, but the story is scarcely credible, that when he determined on the church, he did not address himself to any eminent divine for instructions in theology, but to Pope, who jocularly advised the diligent perusal of Thomas Aquinas, and this, Ruffhead says, had almost brought on an irretrievable derangement. But as we have seen that Young had once refused two livings in the gift of All Souls, it is surely not improbable that he had then studied in the theological faculty, although at the duke of Wharton’s persuasion, he had been induced to think of political life. One thing, after taking orders, he thought becoming his new character. He withdrew his tragedy of” The Brothers," which was already in rehearsal, and when at last it was performed in 1753, he made up the profits to the sum of iOOO/. and gave the money to the society for the propagation of the gospel in foreign parts. We know not that that society has been so honoured since, and it certainly never was so before.

Not long after he took orders, he published in prose, tf A true Estimate of Human Life,“and a sermon preached before the House of Commons on Jan. 30, 1729, entitled” An Apology for Princes, or the reverence due to government.“He soon became a very popular preacher, and was very much followed for the grace and animation of his delivery. According to his life in the” Biographia," he was pnce in his life deserted by his oratorical talents. As he was preaching in his turn at St James’s, he plainly perceived it was out of his power to command the attention ef his audience. This so affected his feelings, that he sat back in the pulpit, and burst into tears.

In 1786, when the professorship of philosophy in Trinity college became vacant, he had attained so high reputation in that branch of science, that he was elected to the office without opposition. His “Essay on Sounds” had been published two years, and it was known that he was engaged in the arduous task of illustrating the “Principia” of Newton. He now devoted himself to the duties of his professorship: and the college having been enriched with the excellent apparatus of Mr. Atwood, Dr. Young improved the occasion of carrying his lectures to a degree of perfection unknown in the university of Dublin, and never perhaps exceeded in any other. He proceeded in the mean time in his great work, “The method of Prime and Ultimate Ratios, illustrated by a commentary on the first two books of the Principia,” and had nearly completed it in English, when he was advised by his friends to publish it in Latin. He readily acquiesced, and thus had an opportunity, while translating it, of revising the whole, and rendering it fuller and more perfect. It was finished a year or two before his promotion to the see of Clonfert, at which time he was engaged in preparing it for the press. The^circumstances of this promotion reflect equal honour on himself and on the lord lieutenant (earl Cornwallis) who conferred it. It was a favour as unsolicited as unexpected, unless the report made to his excellency by his principal secretary, on being consulted as to the properest person to fill the vacant see, may be called solicitation. His report was, that “he believed Dr. Young to be the most distinguished literary character in the kingdom.”

, an eminent scholar, was descended of an ancient Scotch family, and was born Aug. 29, 1584, at Seaton, in Lothian, then the residence of his father, sir Peter Young, knt. who, among other honourable offices, had been assistant tutor, with the celebrated Buchanan, to king James VI. At the age of fifteen Mr. Young was sent to the university of St. Andrew’s, where having completed the usual course of academical study, he received the degree of M. A. in 1603. Soon after he accompanied his father to England, and being recommended to Dr. Lloyd, bishop of Chester, the latter assisted him in the study of divinity, as he was destined for the church. He continued about a year with the bishop, and then went to Oxford, and his merit having strongly recommended him to some of the heads of houses, he was incorporated M. A. in July 1605. He then took deacon’s orders, and was chosen chaplain of New college, which office he held for three years, and during that time he employed himself chiefly in the study of ecclesiastical history, and in cultivating the Greek language, of which he at length acquired a profound knowledge. Leaving Oxford, he went to London, where his object seems to have been advancement at court, and where his father, still living, had considerable interest. The first patron he acquired was Montague, bishop of Bath and Wells, by whose recommendation the king granted him a pension of' 50l. Having succeeded thus far, his next wish was to be appointed librarian to prince Henry, who had a very fine collection of books, and a museum of other curiosities; and although he failed in this, he succeeded in obtaining the care of the royal library newly founded by the king, chiefly by the interest of his friend and patron, bishop Montague. He had already drawn up a catalogue of the books by the king’s express command, and after he obtained the place he employed himself in forming them into classes, as well as in making additions by purchases which he recommended to the king, particularly of Isaac Casaubon’s books. With the same view he took journeys to Francfort, Holland, Paris, &c. In the mean time his partiality to the Greek language induced him to invite some of the natives of that country to England, and he contributed by himself or friends, to thenmaintenance and education here. Such was his zeal in this species of learned patronage, that bishop Montague used to call him the “patriarch of the Greeks.” He also cultivated the Latin language, which he wrote elegantly, and assisted Mr. Thomas Rhead, or Read, in translating king James’s works into that language. This volume appeared in 1619, and by his majesty’s special command Mr. Young was sent with a presentation copy to Oxford and Cambridge.

That in his several employments he acquitted himself with great application and industry,' appears from the catalogue of his works, which consist of “Regiae Bibliothecae Matritensis codices Graeci Mss. Joan Yriarte ejusdem custos excussit, recensuit, notis, indicibus, auecdotis pluribus evulgatis illustravit,” 1769, folio, vol. I.; vol II. hr left in manuscript “Regiae Mat. Bibl. Geographica & Chronologica,” 1729; “R. M. Bibl. Mathematical 1730; corrections and improvements of Antonio’s” Bibliotheca Hispana,“and Don Miguel Casiri’s” Bibl. Arabieo-Hispana-­Escurial;“” Palseographia Graeca,“a ms. 4to; his collection of Spanish treaties of peace; near 600 articles intended for a Castilian Dictionary; a treatise on the orthography and grammar of the Castdian idiom; his immense collections of materials for a general alphabetical library, in many folios, of all the authors who have treated of the geography, history, politics, literature, biography, trade, &c. of Spain and for a history of the Canary islands, which was 10 consist of six quarto volumes at least. He wrote also a great number of articles inserted in the” Diario de los literatos,“a critical journal. In 1774, his” Select Works“were published in 2 vols. 4to,” for the benefit of literature, at the expence of several noblemen, lovers of genius and merit.“This collection,” Obras Sueltas,“contains some works of imagination, his sacred and prophane Latin poems, or translations; and his Latin translations of a number of Castilian proverbs, and of some oratorical and critical discourses. Juan de Yriarte was probably related to Don Tomas de Yriarte, whose ingenious” Literary Fables“were published at Madrid in 1782, and were lately well translated into English verse by John Belfour, esq; but of this Don Tomas we have not found any biographical memoir. His poem” La Musica" has gone through many editions, and is much admired in Spain.

In 1768, he repaired to Rome, and was soon appointed librarian to the college of Jesus, and historiographer of the society for the literary department. Here a new field was open to his exertions. He became the champion of the holy see against the prevailing philosophy of the age, and against the encroachment of the secular powers on the church, for which he was rewarded with a pension by the then reigning and unfortunate pontiff Clement Alii. He did not long enjoy either this gift of fortune or his own tranquillity, as in 1773, by the dissolution of his order, after repeated risks of being confined in the castle of St. Angelo, he received a perpetual injunction not to go out of the gates of Rome without a licence from the magistrates. Pope Ganganelli esteemed and lamented him, though he could not restrain these violent measures. He had better days under the new pontificate, when Pius VI. not only restored liberty to Mr. Zaccaria, but increased the pension which had been formerly granted to him. He also appointed him governor to the newly established academy of noble clergymen, with a liberal salary; and as he had been, before that period, professor of ecclesiastical history in the Roman university, better known by the name of Sapienza, the pope gave him for the remainder of his life the dignity of ex-professor in that school, with the enjoyment of the same salaries as if he had retained the official post. In this situation he remained till his death, which took place October 10, 1795, in the eighty-second year of his age.

The mere list of the various works either written or edited by Zaccaria is sufficient to give him the character. of an extraordinary man. Comprehensiveness of mincf^ depth of erudition, JaboriousnesS of research, and celerity of execution, were happily combined in all his performances. In the earlier part of his life, he had entered the lists with the immortal Muratori and the illustrious Lamb Afterwards he had a great polemic dispute, on the pope’s supremacy, with the celebrated German bishop, John Nicholas Hontheim, better known under the name of Justin us Febronius. In the latter part of his life, he corresponded with many sovereigns and princes, with many Italian academies, and many literary characters, on this side the Alps, among whom were the celebrated Stilting, a Bollandist; Mr. de Courcelles, editor of the Foreign Journal in Paris; the proprietors of the Literary Journal of Italy, published in Amsterdam; and that of the Eneyelopedian Journal of Liege.

, an eminent Spanish physician, was born at Lisbon in 1575, and is usually called Lusitanus. He studied both philosophy and medicine at Salamanca and Coimbra, and took his degree of doctor in 1594 at Saguntum, now called Morvedre, a famous university in Spain. After this, he practised physic at Lisbon till 1624; when, by an edict of Philip IV. who governed Spain with a high hand, the whole race of Jews were interdicted the kingdom. Zacutus, being a Jew, retired into Holland, practising chiefly at Amsterdam and the Hague; at the former of which places he died, in 1641 or 1642, aged about sixtysix or seven. His works, written in Latin, were printed at Lyons in France, in 1649, 2 vols. fojio. Before the second is placed what he calls “Introitus ad Praxin; or, An Introduction rto Practice;” in which be displays the qualities of a physician, morale as well as intellectual; and shews, not only what are the qualifications necessary to the art, but also what are the duties necessary to the man.

, the founder of the Stoic sect (a branch from the Cynic, ad a far as respected morals, differing from it in words more than in reality), was a native of Cittius, a maritime town of Cyprus, and as this place was originally peopled by a colony of Phenicians, he is sometimes called a Phenician. His father, a merchant, encouraged him in the study of philosophy, and bought for him several of the writings of v the most eminent Socratic philosophers, which he read with great avidity and when he was about thirty years of age, determined to take a voyage to Athens, which was so celebrated both as a mart of trade and of science. Whether this voyage was in part mercantile, or wholly undertaken for the sake of conversing with those philosophers whose writings Zeno had long admired, is uncertain. If it be true, as some writers relate, that he brought with him a valuable cargo of Phenician purple, which was lost by shipwreck upon the coast of Pira3us, this circumstance will account for the facility with which he at first attached himself to a sect whose leading principle was the contempt of riches. Upon his first arrival in Athens, going accidentally into the shop of a bookseller, he took up a volume of the Commentaries of Xenophon, and formed so high an idea of the author, that he asked the bookseller, where he might meet with such men. Crates, the Cynic philosopher, happening at that instant to be passing by, the bookseller pointed to him, and said, “Follow that man,” which he did, and was so well pleased with his doctrine, that he became one of his disciples. But though he highly admired the general principles and spirit of the Cynic school, he could not easily reconcile himself to their peculiar manners; nor would his inquisitive turn of mind allow him to adopt their indifference to scientific inquiry. He therefore attended upon other masters, who professed to instruct their disciples in the nature and causes of things, and when Crates, displeased at this, attempted to drag him by force out of the school of Stilpo, Zeno said to him, “You may seize my body, but Stilpo has laid hold of my mind.” After continuing to attend upon the lectures of Stilpo several years, he passed over to other schools, particularly those of Xenocrates and Diodorus Cronus. By the latter he was instructed in dialectics; and at last, after attending almost every other master, he offered himself as a disciple of Polemo, who suspected that his design was to collect materials for a new system: nor was he mistaken. The place which Zeno chose for his school was called 2/rea, or the Porch, and hence the name of Stoics. Zeno had advantages as the founder of a new sect; he excelled in that kind of subtle reasoning which was at that time popular, and while he taught a system of moral doctrine, his own morals were unexceptionable. He therefore soon became much followed, and on account of his integrity the Athenians deposited the keys of their citadel in his hands, and honoured him with a golden crown and a statue of brass. In his person Zeno was tall and slender; his aspect was severe, and his brow contracted. His constitution was feeble; but he preserved his health by great abstemiousness. The supplies of his table consisted of figs, bread, and honey; notwithstanding which, he was frequently honoured with the company of great men. It was a singular proof of, his moderation, mixed indeed with that high spirit of independence which afterwards distinguished his sect, that when Democharis, son of Laches, offered to procure him some gratuity from* Antigonus, he was so offended, that from that time he declined all intercourse with him. In public company, to avoid every appearance of an assuming temper, he commonly took the lowest place. Indeed, so great was his modesty, that he seldom chose to mingle with a crowd, or wished for the company of more than two or three friends at once. He paid more attention to neatness and decorum in external appearance, than the Cynic philosophers. In his dress indeed he was plain, and in all his expences frugal, which arose from a contempt of external magnificence. He showed as much respect to the poor as to the rich; and conversed freely with persons of the meanest occupations. He had only one servant, or, according to Seneca, none. Yet with all these virtues, several philosophers of great ability and eloquence employed their talents against him, and Arcesilaus and Carneades, the founders of the middle and new academy, were his professed opponents. Towards the latter end of his life he found another powerful adversary in Epicurus, whose temper and doctrines were alike inimical to the severe gravity and philosophical pride of the Stoic sect. Hence mutual invectives passed between the Stoics and other sects, to which little credit is due. At least it may be fairly presumed that Zeno, whose personal character was so exemplary, never countenanced gross immorality in his doctrine.

Zeno lived to the extreme age of ninety-eight, and at last, in consequence of an accident, voluntarily put an end to his life. As he was walking out of his school he fell down, and in the fall broke one of his fingers; upon which he was so affected with a consciousness of infirmity, that, striking the earth, he said, “Why am I thus importuned? I obey thy summons;” and immediately went home and strangled himself. He died in the first year of the hundred and twenty-ninth Olympiad, or B. C. 264. The Athenians, at the request of Antigonus, erected a monument to his memory in the Ceramicum.

From the particulars which have been related concerning Zeno, it will not be difficult to perceive what kind of influence his circumstances and character must have had upon his philosophical system. If his doctrines be diligently compared with the history of his life, it will appear that he compiled, out of various contemporary tenets, an heterogeneous system, on the credit of which he assumed to himself the title of the founder of a new sect; and, indeed, when he resolved, for the sake of establishing a school, to desert the philosophy of Pythagoras and Plato, it became necessary, either to invent opinions entirely new, or to give an air of novelty to old systems by the introduction of new terms and definitions. Of these two undertakings Zeno prudently made choice of the easier. Cicero says, concerning Zeno, that he had little reason for deserting his masters, especially those of the Platonic school, and that he was not so much an inventor of new opinions, as of new terms. In morals, the principal difference between the Cynics and Stoics was, that the former disdained the cultivation of nature, the latter affected to rise above it.

, called the Eleatic, to distinguish from the preceding, and 'from others, flourished about 463 B.C. He was a zealous friend of civil liberty, and is celebrated for his courageous and successful opposition to tyrants; but the inconsistency of the stories related by different writers concerning him, in a great measure destroys their credit. He chose to reside in his small native city of Elea, rather than at Athens, because it afforded freer scope to his independent and generous spirit, which could not easily submit to the restraints of authority. It is related that he vindicated the warmth with which he resented reproach, by saying, “If I were indifferent to censure, I should also be indifferent to praise.” The invention of the dialecticart has been improperly ascribed to Zeno; but there can be no doubt that this philosopher, and other metaphysical disputants in the Eleatic sect, employed much ingenuity and subtlety in exhibiting examples of most of the logical arts which were afterwards reduced to rule by Aristotle and others. According to Aristotle, Zeno of Elea taught that nothing fcan be produced either from that which is similar or dissimilar; that there is only one being, and that is God; that this being is eternal, homogeneous, and spherical, neither finite nor infinite, neither quiescent nor moveable; % that there are many worlds; that there is in nature no vacuum; that all bodies are composed of four elements, heat and moisture, cold and dryness; and that the body of man is from the earth, and his soul an equal mixture of these four elements. He argued with great subtlety against the possibility of motion. If Seneca’s account of this philosopher deserves credit, he reached the highest point of scepticism, and denied the real existence of external objects. The truth is, that after all that has been advanced by different writers, it is impossible to determine whether Zeno understood the term one, metaphysically, logically, or physically; or whether he admitted or denied a nature properly divine.

, a very famous painter of antiquity, flourished about 400 years before Christ, or about the 95th Olympiad. The particulars relating to his country are a little confused: for though Tully, Pliny, and ^lian, agree in affirming that he was of Heraclea, yet they have not, among the numerous cities of that name, told us the Heraclea in which Zeuxis was born. Pliny represents the art of painting, the rudiments of which had been discovered by Apollod'orus, to have been carried to considerable perfection by this painter. Some authors relate, that he found out the manner of disposing lights and shades; and he is allowed to have excelled in colouring, Aristotle censured this defect in- his paintings, that the manners or passions were not expressed in them yet Pliny asserts the contrary with regard to the picture of Penelope “in which Zeuxis,” says he, “seems to have painted the manners.”

This painter amassed immense riches; and he once made a shew of them at the Olympic games, where he appeared in a cloak embroidered with gold letters expressing his name. When he found himself thus rich, he would not sell his works any longer, but gave them away, because, he said, no price could be set upon them. His Helen was his most celebrated picture. He wrote underneath this picture the three verses of the Iliad, in which Homer represents Priam and the venerable sages of his council confessing that the Greeks and Trojans were not to blame for having exposed themselves to so many calamities for the love of Helen; her beauty equalling that of the goddesses. It cannot be very well determined, whether this Helen of Zeuxis be the same as that which was at Rome in Pliny’s time; or that which he painted for the inhabitants of Crotona, to be hung up in the temple of Juno. They had prevailed upon him to come among them, by giving him a large sum, in order to paint a great number of pictures, with which they intended to adorn this temple; and were not a little pleased when he told them, that he intended to draw the picture of Helen, as his chief excellence lay in painting womem This extraordinary picture he executed by combining the beauties of various living models; and this method of forming perfection he learned from Homer, whose mode of ideal composition was his rule.

, a learned philosopher, mathematician, and divine, of the sixteenth century, was born at Landshut, in Bavaria. He taught at Vienna for a considerable time, and resided afterwards near the bishop of Passau in Bavaria, where he died in 1549, leaving several works; which are different in their spirit, according as they were written before or after he quitted the Romish church. Among these, his notes on some select passages of the Holy Scriptures, Basil, 151?, folio, and his “Description of the Holy Land,” Strasburg, 1536, folio, are particularly esteemed. There is an excellent life of Ziegler in Scbelhorn’s “Amoenitates.”

After a few months spent in a tour to Holland and France he returned to Bern, in 1752. Here he published an account of Haller, in a short letter to a friend, inserted in the journal of Neufchatel, and written in French. Though his only work in that language, it has much elegance of style; and it was the basis of his life of Haller, in German, which was published at Zuric in 1755. While at Bern he married madam Stek, a widow, who was a relation of Haller’s, and a woman of a very amiable disposition and well-cultivated mind. Shortly after, he accepted the then vacant post of first physician to his native town. Here he earnestly devoted himself to the studies and duties of his profession; not neglecting, however, those literary pursuits which are necessary to fill up the time of a man of education, in a place which affords but few of the resources of suitable society. He amused himself occasionally with writing little pieces, which he sent to a journal published at Zuric under the title of “The Monitor.” As his pleasures were almost exclusively confined to his family and his study, he here contracted that real or supposed love for solitude, which gave such a colour to his writings if not to his life. It seems, however, to have been rather the splenetic resource of a man who was dissatisfied with an obscure situation, which was not adequate to his talents and reputation. In this place his years passed on usefully for the improvement of his mind; but, as it appears, not very happily. His natural sensibility, for want of objects to divert it, preyed upon itself; and he was rendered miserable by a thousand domestic cares and anxieties which he would have felt more lightly in the tumult of public life. He took, however, the best method in his power for relief, by employing his pen with assiduity on professional and literary topics. In 1754, he sent to the physico-medical society of Basil, a case of spasmodic quinsey, together with some observations on the hysteric tumours of Sydenham. In 1755, he composed a short poem, in German, on the earthquake at Lisbon, which was much esteemed by adequate judges, and placed him among the earliest improvers of his native language. In 1756, appeared his first “Essay on Solitude” a very short performance. Two years afterward, he began to enlarge its plan, and to coU lect materials for his more extended publication on this subject. He also formed the plan of his work on the “Experience of Medicine;” the first volume of which appeared in 1763. In 1758, he published his “Essay on National Pride;” which passed with rapidity through many editions, was translated into several foreign languages, and very much admired.

An epidemic fever, which reigned in Switzerland in 1763, 1764, and 1765, and which, in the latter year, changed into a dysentery, produced his “Treatise on the Dysentery,” which gained him great reputation. This was the last medical work that he composed, though he continued to write short treatises on occasional topics. It should not be omitted, that his friend Dr. Tissot, by addressing to him his own letters on the prevailing epidemic, contributed to extend his professional fame. Nor was he less attentive to his interest, although in some efforts to serve him he was disappointed. At length, however, the vacant pest of physician to the king of Great Britain at Hanover, which had been offered to Dr. Tissot, was, by his interest, procured for Zimmermann; and being accepted, he removed to Hanover in 1768. But this new situation was far from procuring the accession of happiness wbich was expected from it. A disorder which had commenced while he resided at Brugg (and which appears to have been a species of hernia), constantly increased, and was accompanied with acute pains, which sometimes rendered irksome the execution of his duty. Besides some incidental c\r t -> cumstances, which occasioned a number of those slight irritations he would not have felt when in health, but which the state of his nerves now rendered insupportable, he had the misfortune, in 1770, of losing his wifr-; a Deprivation which affected him very sensibly. His complaint growing worse, his friend Tissot advised him to seek the best cliirurgical assistance, and persuaded him, in 1771, to go to Berlin, and put himself under the care of the celebrated Meckel. He was received into this surgeon’s house, and underwent a, successful operation. The time of his convalescence was ope of the most agreeable in his life. He made a number of acquaintances among distinguished characters at Berlin, was presented to the king, and was honoured by him with particular notice. His reception on his return to Hanover was equally pleasing. He now again plunged into business, and again professional and domestic cares brought on hypochondriacal complaints. In 1775, by way of vacation, he made a journey to Lausanne, where his daughter was placed for education, and spent five weeks with Dr. Tissot. As this was the first time that these intimate friends, of twenty years standing, had seen each other, it will be pleasing to translate some of Tissot, his biographer’s, observations on this circumstance: “I had, at length, the pleasure of seeing him; I shall not say of knowing him. I found that I knew him already;‘ th’6 friend conversing reminded me every moment of the friend writing, and perfectly resembled the portrait which I had drawn of him. I saw the man of genius, who, with promptitude seizes an object under all its relations, and whose imagination knows how to present it under jhe most agreeable form. His conversation tfas instructive, brilliant, sprinkled with a number of interesting facts and pleasant narrations, and animated by an expressive countenance. He spoke of every thing with great precision. When medicine was our subject, as was frequently the case, I found his principles solid, and his notions clear. When I took him to see patients under severe indispositions, or read to him consultations on the mOst difficult cases, T always found in him the greatest sagacity in discovering Causes, and explaining symptoms, great justice in forming indications, and an exquisite judgment in the choice of remedies, of which he employed few, but all efficacious. In fine, on every occasion, I saw the man of sincerity, rec­”titude, a,nd virtue. His stay was much shorter than I could have wished."

Dr. Zimmermann was unhappy in the fate of his children. His amiable daughter, whom he most tenderly loved, fell in,to a lingering malady soon after she left Lausanne: it continued five years, and then carried her off. His son, who, from his infancy, was troubled with an acrid humour, after various vicissitudes of nervous affections, settled in perfect idiotcy in which state he remained at his father’s death. To alleviate these distresses^ a second marriage properly occurred to the mind of his friends, and they chose for him a most suitable companion, in the daughter of Dr. de Berger, king’s physician at Lunenberg. This union took place in 1782, and proyed the greatest charm and support of all his remaining life. Jiis l.ady was thirty years youngerthan he;but s,he perfectly Accommodated herself to his taste, and induced him to cultivate society abroad and at home more than he had hitherto done. About this time he employed himself in completing his favourite work on “Solitude,” which, at the distance of thirty years from the publication of the first essay on the subject, appeared in its new form in the years 178^ and 1786, in four volumes. His ideas of solitude had probably been softened by so long an intercourse with the world and as he now defined it, “that state of the soul in which it abandons itself freely to its reflections,” it was not necessary to become either a monk or an anchorite, in orderto partake of its benefits. Had it not been presented under such an accommodating form, a philosopher might have smiled at the circumstance of a recommendation of solitude from a court physician becoming t.he favourite wojrk of one of the most splendid and ambitious of crowned jbeads. The empress of Russia sent her express thanks to the author for the pleasure which she had derived from the work, accompanied with a magnificent present, and commenced with hjrri a regular correspondence, which subsisted, with great freedom onher part, till 1792, when she suddenly dropped it. She also gave him an invitation to settle at Petersburgh as her first physician; and, on his declining the offer, she requested his recommendation of medical practitioners for her towns and armies, and conferred on him the order of Wladomir. One of the most distinguished incidents of Zimmermann’s life was the summons which he received to attend the great Frederic in his last illness, in 1786. It was at once evident that there was no room for the exercise of his medical skill; but he improved the opportunity which he thus enjoyed of confidential intercourse with that illustrious character, whose mental faculties were pre-eminent to the last; and 'he derived from it the materials of an interesting narrative which he afterwards published. The partiality of this prince in his favour naturally disposed him to a reciprocal good opinion of the monarch; and, in 17S8, he published “A Defence of Frederic the Great against the count de Mirabeau” which, in 1790, was followed by “Fragments on Frederic the Great,” in 3 vols. 12mo. All his publications relative to this king gave offence to many individuals, and subjected him to severe criticism; which he felt with more sensibility than was consistent with his peace of mind. His religious and political opinions, likewise, in his latter years, began to be in wide contradiction to the principles that were assiduously propagated all over Europe; and this added perpetual fuel to his irritability. The society of the Illuminated, coalesced with that of Free-masons, rose about this time in Germany, and excited the most violent commotions among men of letters and reflection. It was sup­'posed to have in view nothing less than the abolition of Christianity, and the subversion of all constituted authorities; and, while its partizans expected from it the most beneficial reforms of every kind, its opponents dreaded from it every mischief that could possibly happen to mankind. Zimmerrnann was among the first that took alarm at this formidable accusation. His regard for religion and social order, and, perhaps, his connexions with crowned heads, made him see in the most obnoxious light all the principles of the new philosophers. He attacked them with vigour, formed counter associations with other men of letters, and, at length, addressed to the emperor Leopold a memoir, painting in the strongest colouring the pernicious maxims of the sect, and suggesting the means of suppressing -it; means which are said to have depended on the decisive interference of civil authority. Leopold, who was well inclined to such measures, received his memoir very graciously, and sent him a letter and splendid present in return; but his death, soon after, deprived the cause of its most powerful protection. Ziminermann, however, in conjunction with M. Hoffman of Vienna, who had instituted a periodical work on the old principles, did not relax in his zeal. They attacked, and were attacked in turn; and Zimrnermann embroiled himself with the courts of law by a paper published in Hoffman’s Journal, entitled “The Baron de Knigge unmasked as an Illuminate, Democrat, and Seducer of the People.” As this charge was in part founded on a work not openly avowed by the baron, 3, prosecution was instituted against Zimmermann as a libeller, and he was unable to exculpate himself. This state of warfare may well be imagined to have been extremely unfriendly to an irritable system of nerves; and, the agitation of the doctor’s mind was further increased by his personal fears on the approach of the French towards the electorate of Hanover in 1794; and his mancer of expressing his fears announced the greatest depression. “I saw therein,” says Tissot, “a mind whose springs began to fail, and which dared no longer say, as it could have justly done, `I carry every thing with me.‘ I neglected nothing in order to raise his spirits, and entreated him. to come to me with his wife, to a country that was his own, where he would have remained in the most perfect security, and enjoyed all the sweets of peace and friendship. He answered me in December, and one part of his letter resembled those of other times; but melancholy was still more strongly marked, and the illness of his wife, which he unfortunately thought more serious than it really was, evidently oppressed him: he had been obliged to take three days to write me details which at another time would not have occupied him an hour, and he concluded his letter with, 1I conjure you, perhaps for the last time, &c.’ The idea that he should write no more to his friend (and unfortunately the event justified him), the difficulty of writing a few pages, the still fixed idea of being forced to leave Hanover,although the face of affairs had entirely changed all, all indicated the loss I was about to sustain.” From the month of November he had lost his sleep, his appetite, his strength, and became sensibly thinner; and this stated of decline continued to increase. In January he was still able to make a few visits in his carriage; but he frequently fainted on the stairs: it was painful for him to write a prescription: he sometimes complained of a confusion in his head, and he at length gave over all business. This was at first taken for an effect of hypochondria, but it was soon perceived, that his deep melancholy had destroyed the chain of his ideas. What has happened to so many men of genius, befell him. One strong idea masters every other, and subdues the mind that is no longer able either to drive it away, or to lose sight of it. Preserving all his presence of mind, all his perspicuity, and justness of thought on other subjects, but no longer desirous of occupying himself with them, no longer capable of any business, nor of giving advice, but with pain^he had unceasingly before his eyes the enemy plundering his house, as Pascal always saw a globe of fire near him, Bonnet his friend robbing him, and Spinello the devil opposite to him, In February he commenced taking medicines, which were either prescribed by himself or by the physicians whom he consulted; at the beginning of March he desired Tissot' s advice; but he was no longer able himself to describe his disorder, and his wife wrote Tissot the account of it. Tissot answered her immediately; but there could be no great utility in the directions of an absent physician in a disorder whose progress was rapid, and with an interim of near a month between the advice asked, and the directions received. His health decayed so fast, that M. Wichman, who attended him, thought a journey and change of air would now be the best remedy. Eutin, a place in the dutchy of Holstein, was fixed upon for his residence. Ingoing through Luneburgh on his way thither, M. Lentin, one of the physicians Jn whom he placed most confidence, was consulted; but Zimmermann, who, though so often uneasy on account of health, had, notwithstanding, the wisdom to take few medicines, and who did not like them, always had a crowd of objections to make against the b.est advice, and did nothing. Arrived at Eutin, an old acquaintance and his family lavished on him all the caresses of friendship. This reception highly pleased him, and he grew rather better. M. Hensler came from Kiel to see him, and gave him his advice, which was probably very good, but became useless, as it was very irregularly followed. At last, after a residence of three months, he desired to return to Hanover, where he entered his house with the same idea with which he had left it; he thought it plundered, and imagined himself totally ruined. Tissot wrote to intreat him to go to Carlsbad;but he was no longer capable of bearing the journey. Disgust, want of sleep, and weakness, increased rapidly; he took scarcely jftiy nourishment, either on account of insurmountable Aversion, or because it was painful to him; or perhaps, as M. Wichman believed, because he imagined he had not a farthing left. Intense application, the troubles of his mind, his pains, want of sleep, and of sufficient nourishment, had on him all the effects of time, and hastened old age: at sixty -six he was in a state of complete decrepitude, and his body was become a perfect skeleton. He clearly foresaw the issue of his disorder: and above six weeks before his death be said to jthis same physician, “I shall die slowly, but very pain fu)ly;” and fourteen hours before he expired, he said, “Leave me alone, I am dying.” He expired Oct. 7, 1795. Most of the works mentioned above have been translated into English, and that on solitude particularly has acquired a considerable degree of popularity.

In 1737 he made a visit to his own country; and after his return, his eyes failing, he retired from business, about 1746, to South Lambeth, with a second wife, by whom he hacj three or four children. His first wife was a handsome woman, of whom he had been very fond; there is a print of him and her; he had a son by her, for whom he bought a place in the six clerks office, and a daughter, ic? lib died a little before he retired to Lambeth. After his quitting business, madanne Pompadour prevailed upon him to copy, in enamel, a picture of the king of France, which she sent over on purpose. He died in March 1767. Thus far from Walpole’s “Anecdotes.”What follows is from another authority. “When Zincke was in the greatest practice, he was in a very bad state of health; and being well respected by a number of the most celebrated physicians, had their assistance and advice. All of them pronounced that he was in a decline; but about the method of cure, they were not unanimous. Some prescribed one drug, and some another; and one of them recommended breast-milk. The drugs he swallowed; but the breast-milk he did not much relish the thought of. Finding himself grow rather worse than better; and being told that air and exercise were the best remedy for his complaint, he tasked himself to walk through the Park, and up Constitution-bill, every morning before breakfast. Tnis did Hot relieve him; but from habit rather than hope, he still continued his perambulations. One summer morning, a handsome young woman, very meanly clad, with a child about six weeks old in her arms, asked his charity. He gave her some pence, and asked her how she came into her present distressed situation. Her history was short she had been a servant she became partial to a footman in the same house, and married him they were both turned away the man had no other resource but to enlist he became a soldier; was sent abroad she had never heard from him since; had been delivered of the child now at her breast, for whose support and her own she should beg till her infant was a few months older, when she should try to get some more reputable employment. `Her frankness,' said Zincke, `pleased me; her face pleased me; her complexion pleased me; I gave her my direction she came to me I took her infant into my house I did bring myself to take her milk; it recovered me; I made inquiry after her husband, and found he was killed in the first engagement he was in, at the pillaging a village in Germany. I married her; and a better wife no man ever had/ With this woman he lived near twenty years. The soldier’s child he educated for the army, and promised to get him a commission when he was twenty-one; but the boy died at fourteen. By Zincke she had two children, each, of them were well provided for; and one of them was a very few years since alive, and well situated in a northern province.”

, count de, founder, or restorer of the sect of the Moravian brethren, was descended from an ancient and noble family in Austria; but directly sprung from that Lutheran branch of it which flourished in Misnia. He was born in 1700, and even in his childhood, had formed a resolution of becoming a minister of the gospel, designing to collects small society of Believers, who should altogether employ themselves in exercises of devotion, under his direction. Accordingly in 1721, when he became of age, he purchased the estate and village of Bertholsdorf, near Zittavv, in Upper Lusatia. Some time before this, in 1717, one Christian David visited the small remains of the church of the United Brethren, who had formed a society for religious exercises in a small village in Moravia, but finding their situation a precarious one, and them desirous of some more secure settlement, he recommended them to count Zinzendorf; and this scheme being perfectly compatible with the count’s original design, the Moravian emigrants were permitted to settle here.

From this period, in particular, when elders and wardens were chosen, and a union established between the brethren from Moravia, both among themselves, and with their Lutheran and Calvinistic brethren, the Moravian writers date the renewal of the “Unity of the Brethren.” The whole congregation was divided into classes, called choirs, and one of their own sex and station in life appointed to have the special care of each choir under the inspection of the elders. The ministers were appointed by lot, according to the apostolic practice, which they have continued ever since. They have adopted also other primitive practices, as the foot-washing, the kiss of charity, and the celebration of the agapæ, or love feasts. All matrimonial contracts were subject to the direction and approbation of the elders. Their worship is directed principally to Jesus Christ; and, in their religious services^ they admit of instrumental as well as vocal mtisic.

Some Moravian writers, however, while they effectually refuted the calumnies against the brethren as a community or sect, very candidly acknowledged that the extravagant expressions and practices of some individuals among them, were indeed indefensible. “It may not be improper to ob-> serve,” says Mr. LaTrobe, in the preface to his translation of Spangenberg’s Exposition of Christian doctrine, “that although the brethren have been very falsely traduced by their adversaries, and by misinformed people, who meant well, and that particularly the writings of the late count Zinzendorf have been used to prove, that the church, of which he was an eminent and the most distinguished minister, held the errors of the most fanatic, yea wicked heretics; and his writings have been, for this purpose, mutilated, falsely quoted, and translated; and, although the extravagant words and actions of individuals have been unjustly charged upon the whole body; yet it were t.o be wished that there had been no occasion given, at a certain period, to accuse the brethren of improprieties and extravagance in word or practice.” Again, speaking of count Zinzendorf, he says, " He commonly delivered two or three discourses in a day, either publicly or to his family, which was generally large; and what he then uttered, was attended with a striking effect upon those who heard him. He spoke in the strictest sense extempore; and according to the state of the times in which, and the persons to whom he spbke. These discourses were commonly taken -down as he uttered therri; and the love and admiration of his brethren were so great, that they urged the publication of these discourses. His avocations were such, that he did not spend time sufficient in the revision; some were not at all revised by him, and some very incorrectly and falsely printed. Hence doctrines, of which he never thought, were deduced from his writings, and some of his transient private opinions laid to the charge of the whole brethren’s church. 1 do not, and cannot, attempt to defend such publications, but relate the real state of the case.

“True it is, that at a certain time, particularly between 1747 and 1753, many of the brethren, in their public discourses, and in their hymns, which were published about that period, used expressions that were indefensible: the count himself laboured to correct both the theory and language; and he was successful^ and they are no more in use among the brethren. The brethren’s congregations do not take the writings of the count, or of any man, as their standard of doctrine; the Bible alone is their standard of truth, and they agree with the Augustan, or Augsburgh confession, as being conformable to it.” It is evident from this acknowledgment that the objectionable language of which their opponents accused them, was actually to be found in the writings attributed to Zinzendorf, and the indignation, therefore, which they excited was just Nor have they reason to regret the expression of that indignation, since it has produced a reformation which places the sect in a more unexceptionable light. “It is no more,” says Mr. Wilberforce, “than an act of justice explicitly to remark, that a body of Christians, which, from the peculiarly offensive grossnesses of language in use among them, had, not without reason, excited suspicions of the very worst nature, have since reclaimed their character, and have excelled all mankind in solid and unequivocal proofs of the love of Christ, and of the most ardent, and active, and patient zeal in his service. It is a zeal tempered with prudence, softened with meekness, soberly aiming at great ends by the gradual operation of well adapted means, supported by a courage which no danger can intimidate, and a quiet constancy which no hardships can exhaust.”

, an eminent German divine, was born at St. Gall, in Switzerland, August 5, 1730.- His father, a worthy practitioner of the law, withheld no expence in his education and, after the usual progress through the school of his native town, being designed for the church, he was sent first to Bremen, and thence to the university of Utrecht, where the divinity professors are said to have been in high repute. Zollikofer was not, however, says his biographer, one of those who adhere pertinaciously to every thing instilled into them in a lecture-room, and are incapable of advancing a stej> beyond the routine of opinions, to which, from custom or articles, the tutors themselves are bound to accede. He was obliged, indeed, to attend lectures, as he once mentioned to a friend, on a systematic theology, resting solely on “unproved formularies, sophisms, technical and scholastic terms of the compendiums at that time in general use, instead of a sound exposition of the Bible, in connection with a strict investigation of ecclesiastical history:” but his sermons and books of devotion did not receive the least taint from the theology into which he became thus initiated. “The little that I know,” said he, “I was obliged to teach myself chiefly after I was come to years of maturity; for I had but a miserable education.”

Zollikofer, from the time that he quitted the university, studied the best models of composition, and was particularly attached to Cicero. At the same time, no part of moral or political knowledge escaped hinij and to continual study and meditation on the scriptures, he added an intimate acquaintance with profane history. His social and domestic conduct corresponded with the doctrines he taught from the pulpit. Entirely free from affected gravity, he was easy of access to all. The poor and indigent beheld in him a father and a friend; and his bounty and his kindness were not confined within the limits of his own ohurch and his own sect; they were extended to all who stood in need of his assistance. Cheerfulness reigned in his heart; his conversation was animated and entertaining; and his raillery, in which he very rarely indulged, the mildest possible. Above all, he paid the strictest regard to veracity. “Whatever he said was true; every word he uttered might be relied on, as conveying the real sentiments of his heart, and never did he commend or approve from complaisance any thing that was contrary to the conviction of his mind, or that he saw could not be approved upon the strictest rules of morality.”

, a Greek historian, who lived about 1120, held some considerable posts at the court of the emperors of Constantinople. He afterwards entered the monastic order of St. Basil. He has left “Annals,” to the death of Alexius Comnenus, 1118; the best edition of them is the Louvre, 1686 and 1687, 2 vols. fol. which form part of the Byzantine history; but these “Annals,” although valuable for their information, are written with little accuracy or critical skill, and discover too much credulity. President Cousin has translated into French what relates to the Roman history. We have also some “Commentaries” by Zonaras, on the canons of the apostles and of the councils, Paris, 1618, folio; and some “Tracts.”

was an eminent philosopher, whose history is involved in much obscurity, nor is it certain whether the name belongs to one or many. Some have maintained that there was but one Zoroaster, and that he was a Persian. Others have said that there were six eminent founders of philosophy of th'is name. Ham, the son of Noah, Moses, Osiris, Mithras, and others, both gods and men, have by different writers been asserted to have been the same with Zoroaster. Many different opinions have also been advanced, concerning the time in which he flourished. Aristotle and Pliny fix his date at so remote a period as 6000 years before the death of Plato; Hermippus says that he lived 5000 years before the Trojan war: idle tales, which are, doubtless, to be classed with the report of the Chaldeans concerning the antiquity of their astronomical observations. According to Laertius, he flourished 600 years before the Trojan war; according to Suidas, 500. In the midst of so much uncertainty, the probability may be, that there was a Zoroaster, a Perso- Median, who flourished about the time of Darius Hystaspes, and that besides him there was another Zoroaster, who lived in a much more remote period among the Babylonians, and taught them astronomy. The Greek and Arabian writers are agreed concerning the existence of the Persian Zoroaster; and the ancients unanimously ascribe to a philosopher, whom they call Zoroaster, the origin of the Chaldean astronomy, which is certainly of much earlier date than the time of Hystaspes: it seems, therefore, necessary to suppose a Chaldean Zoroaster distinct from the Persian. Concerning this Zoroaster, however, nothing more is known than that he flourished towards the beginning of the Babylonish empire, and was the father of the Chaldean astrology and magic, which was probably nothing more than the performance of certain religious ceremonies, by means of which good daemons were supposed to be prevailed upon to communicate supernatural properties and powers to herbs, stones, and other natural bodies, or to afford assistance, in other miraculous ways, to those who invoked them. In this art the kings of Chaldea and Persia were instructed, as one of the most useful instruments of government, among a people, whose ignorance and credulity rendered them proper subjects of imposture. The Chaldean magic was then a very different thing from a knowledge of the real properties of bodies; and it cannot be inferred, either from their magical or astrological arts, that the Chaldeans were eminent masters in any branch of natural science. All the writings which have been ascribed to the Chaldean Zoroaster, are unquestionably spurious.

To Zardusht, or the Persian Zoroaster, many writings are ascribed. One of these, called the Zend, is said to be still remaining among the followers of Zoroaster, and is esteemed of sacred authority. It is written in the Persian language, and consists of two parts, one of which contains their forms of devotion and order of ceremonies; the other, the precepts of religion and morality. A portion of this book, or of a compendium of it, called the Sadder, is read to the people, on every sacred day, by their priests. There is, however, much reason to question, whether this book be of such ancient date as the time of Zoroaster: probably, it was written about the time when many Jews and Christians resided among the Persians, i. e. about the fourth or fifth century. Many other works have been attributed to Zoroaster, but they are all lost, and most of them were probably forgeries. Fragments of a work entitled “The Oracles” of Zoroaster are still extant. A small collection of them, consisting of only sixty verses, was published by Pletho, at Paris, 1538 and 1539, and at Amst. 1689. Patrizi afterwards made a much larger collection, containing 328 verses, with the commentaries of the Platonic philosophers. Several other editions of these verses have been published, and much pains has been taken by various writers to explain them. Stanley has subjoined to his account of “The Lives of Philosophers” a correct translation of them. They are quoted, with the highest respect, by all philosophers of the Alexandrian school, as genuine remains of Chaldean wisdom. But they abound so much in the ideas and language peculiar to that school, that it is probable they were written by some Platonist, about the beginning of the second century.

Hyde, Prideaux, and others, mention ancient books of Zoroaster, which are at this day extant among the Gheuri and other professors of the Zoroastriau superstition, and made use of in their sacred worship, copies from which have been brought over to England and France. A catalogue of these and other Persian Mss. lodged in the library of the king of France, was published by M. Anquetil du Perron, in his travels, and is copied in the Journal de Savans for July 1762. But these books, written partly in the Zendic or sacred, and partly in the vulgar Persian language, are, for the most part, a narrative of miracles and revelations, by which Zoroaster is said to have established his religion, or a collection of precepts for religious ceremonies. Some of them indeed treat of fundamental doctrines of theology, taught among the worshippers of fire: but it is probable, from the tenets contained in these books, many of which seem to have been borrowed from the Jews and Mahometans, from the entire silence of Greek authors who wrote after the time of Alexander concerning these books, and from other considerations, that they were writte-n at a later period, for the purpose of appeasing the resentment of their Mahometan persecutors.

, an ancient historian, who lived at the end of the fourth, and the beginning of the fifth, century, was a man of quality and place, having the title of count, and being advocate of the treasury. There are extant six books of history, in the first of which he runs over the Roman affairs in a very succinct and general manner, from Augustus to Dioclesian: the other five books are written more largely, especially when he comes to the time of Theodosius the Great, and of his children Arcadius and Honorius, with whom he was contemporary. Of the sixth book we have only the beginning, the rest being lost. Zosimus drew his narrative from historians now lost, viz. Dexippus, Eunapius, and Olympiodorus. His style is far superior to that of the writers of the age in which he lived, and he is an historian of authority for his account of the changes introduced by Constantine and Theodosius in the empire. He contains, however, many superstitious accounts, and being a zealous pagan, he must be read with caution as to what relates to the Christian princes. Photius says, “that he barks like a dog at those of the Christian religion:” and few Christian authors till Leunclavius, who translated his history into Latin, made any apology for him. “To say the truth,” says La Mothe le Vayer, “although this learned German defends him very pertinently in many things, shewing how wrong it would be to expect from a Pagan historian, like Zosimus, other sentiments than those he professed; or that he should refrain from discovering the vices of the first Christian emperors, since he has not concealed their virtues; yet it cannot be denied, that in very many places he has shewn more animosity than the laws of history permit. 7 ' Some have said that his history is a perpetual lampoon on the plausible appearances of great actions. The six books of his” History" have been published, with the Latin version of Leunclavius, at Frankfort, 1590, with other minor historians of Rome, in folio; at Oxford, 1679, in 8vo, and at Ciza the same year, under the care of Cellarius, in 8vo. This was dedicated to Graevius, and reprinted at Jena, 1714, in 8vo. But the best edition is that of Jo. Frid. Reitemeier, Gr. and Lat. with Heyne’s notes, published at Leipsic in 1784, 8vo. The prolegomena are particularly valuable.

His works were, 1. “The Dove, or certain passages of Cosmography,” Lond. 1613, 8vo, a poem composed in his youth but he was no great favourite of the muses. 2. “Elementa jurisprudent, definitionibus, regulis, et sententiisselectioribus juris civilis illustrata,” Oxon. 1629, 8vo, 1636, 4to, and reprinted both at Leyden and Amsterdam. 3. “Descriptio juris et judicii feudalis, secundum consuetudines Mediolanae et Normanniae, pro introductione ad jurisprudentiam Anglicanam,” Oxon. 1634, 1636, 8vo. 4. 4t Descriptio juris et judicii temporalis, secundum consuetudines feudales et Normannicos,“ibid. 1636, 4to. 5.” Descriptio juris et judicii ecclesiastici, secundum canones et consuetudines Anglicanas,“ibid. 1636, 4to. These two last were reprinted with Dr. Mockefs tract” De Politia Ecclesise Anglican*,“Lond. 1683, 8vo. 6.” Descriptiones juris et judicii sacri juris et judicii militaris, et juris et judicii maritimi,“Oxon* 1640, 4to, reprinted at Leyden and Amsterdam. 7.” Juris et judicii fecialis, sive juris inter gentes, &c. explicatio,“Oxon. 1650, 4to. 8.” Cases and questions resolved in civil law,“ibid. 1652, 8vo. 9.” Solutio questionis, &c.“already mentioned, Oxon. 1657, and Lond. 1717, 8vo. 10.” Eruditionis ingenuae specimina, scilicet artium, logicoe dialecticae,“&c. Oxon. 1657. 11.” Questionum juris civilis centuria, in decem classes distributa,“Oxon. 1660, 8vo, Lond. 1682, the third edition. After his death, Dr. Timothy Baldwin, fellow of All Souls, Oxford, published a posthumous work by Dr.Zouch, entitled” The Jurisdiction of the Admiralty asserted against sir Edward Coke’s Articuli Admiralitatis, in the 22d chapter of his jurisdiction of Courts,“Lond. 1663, 8vo. This went through several editions. There is also ascribed to Dr. Zouch an anonymous piece, entitled '” Specimen questionum juris civilis, cum designationeauthorum," Oxon. 1653, 4to.

, an eminent painter, and brother of the preceding, was born in 1543, and carried to the Jubilee at Rome in 1550; when he was placed under his brother Taddeo, then in high reputation. He afterwards set up for a master -painter* and finished many of his brother’s pieces. Pope Gregory XIII. employed him; when Zncchero, having a difference with some of his officers, drew a picture of Slander, afterwards engraved by Corneliu^ Cort, in which he represented those who had offended him with ass’s ears. He exposed it publicly over the door of St. Luke’s chnrch; but was obliged to leave Rome, in order to avoid the Pope’s indignation. He worked in France for the cardinal of Lorrain, and in the Escurial for Philip II. without giving content to either the one or the other. He was more fortunate in England, where he drew the picture of queen Elizabeth, and of some other great personages, which gave great satisfaction. At last, returning to Italy, and having worked some time in Venice, Pope Gregory recalled and pardoned him. Soon after, he set up the academy of painting, by virtue of a brief obtained from this pope; of which being chosen the first president himself, he built a noble apartment for their 4 meeting. Hewent afterwards to Venice, to print some books he had written on painting thence passed on to Savoy and, in a journey to Loretto, died at Ancona in 1616. He differed but little from his brother in his style and manner of painting; though in sculpture and architecture he was far more excellent.

, an able and zealous reformer of the church, who laid the foundation of a division from Rome in Switzerland, at the time that Luther did the same in Saxony, was born at Wildehausen in the county of Tockenburg (a distinct republic in alliance with the Switzers, or Helvetic body) in 1487. He was sent to school at Basil, early, and thence removed to Berne, where he learned the Greek and Hebrew tongues. He studied philosophy at Vienna, and divinity at Basil, where he was admitted doctor in 1505. He began to preach with good success in 1506, and was chosen minister of Glaris, a chief town in the canton of the same name, where he continued till 1516. Then he was invited to Zurich, to undertake the principal charge of that city, and to preach the word of God there, where his extensive learning and uncommon sagacity were accompanied with the most heroic intrepidity and resolution. From his early years he had been shocked at several of the superstitious practices of the church of Rome, and now began to explain the Scriptures to the people, and to censure, though with great prudence and moderation, the errors of a corrupt church. He might have no doubt been animated by the example and writings of Luther, afterwards; but it appears that even now, he entertained very extensive views of a general reformation, while Luther retained almost the whole system of popery, indulgences excepted.

In 1519 a Franciscan of Milan, being sent from Leo X. as general visitor of his order, came to publish indulgences at Zurich, and preached according to the usual manner; namely, “That the pope had granted an absolute pardon of sins to those who. purchased such indulgences with money, and that men might by this means deliver souls infallibly from purgatory.” Zuinglius declaimed powerfully not only against the preacher, but even against the indulgences, or at least the use that was made of them. Hugh, bishop of Constance, supposing that he was displeased only with th.e abuse of them, exhorted him to go on, aad promised him his patronage; but Zuinglius went farther, and solicited the bishop, and the pope’s legate in Switzerland, to favour the doctrine he was about to establish, and which he called evangelical truth. The bishop and the legate refusing to hearken to his proposals, he told them, that he would oppose the errors of the court of Rome, and propagate his own doctrines, in defiance of them; and thus continued to preach, from 1519 to 1523, not only against indulgences, but other articles of the catholic church.

Zuinglius made no less progress with the reformation in Switzerland than Luther did in Saxony, yet, though by four years preaching he had prepared the magistrates and people, and knew that they were disposed to cast off the doctrine and discipline of the church of Rome, and to receive his new opinions, he would not attempt to make any alterations in the external worship without the concurrence of the civil powers, and to that end caused an assembly to be called of the senate of Zurich in 1523, that the differences among- preachers in matters of religion might be composed. The senate, by their edict, invited all ecclesiastics of their canton, and gave the bishop of Constance notice of it, that he might either be present by himself or his deputies; and the assembly met at the day appointed. Here Zuinglius declared, “that the light of the gospel having been much obscured, and almost extiuguished by human traditions, several persons of late had endeavoured to restore it by preaching the word of God in its purity; that he himself was one of that number; and, though he had for five years past taught nothing but what was contained in holy scripture, yet he had been treated as a heretic and seducer; that it was for this reason he had desired to give an account of his doctrines before the senate of Zurich, and the bishop of Constance, or his deputies; and, that they might the more easily understand them, he had drawn them out into sixty-seven propositions.” The doctrine contained in these propositions may be reduced to the following articles: 1. “That the gospel is the only rule of faith.” 2. “That the church is the communion of saints.” 3. “That we ought to acknowledge no head of the church but Jesus Christ.” 4. “That all traditions are to be rejected.” 5. “That there is no other sacrifice but that of Jesus Christ.” 6. “That we have need of no other intercessor with God but Jesus Christ.” 7; “That all sorts of meat may be eaten at all times.” 8. 66 That the habits of monks partake of hypocrisy.“9.” That marriage is allowed to all the world, and no man obliged to make a vow of chastity and that priests are not at all debarred from the privilege of being married.“10.” That excommunication ought not to be inflicted by the bishop alone, but by the whole church and that only notorious offenders ought to be excommunicated.“11.” That the power which the pope and bishops assume to themselves, is errant pride, and hath no foundation in scripture.“12.” That none can forgive sins but God; and that confession of sins to a priest is only to beg his ghostly advice,“13,” That the scripture teaches no such place as purgatory.“14.” That the character which the sacraments are said to impress, is a modern invention.“15.” That the scripture acknowledges none for priests and bishops but such as preach the word of God."

He also offered to deliver his judgment respecting tithes, the revenues of the church, the condition of infants not baptised, and confirmation, if any person should be willing to dispute with him upon those points. John Faber, one of the three deputies whom the bishop of Constance had seait, and his chief vicar, answered, that he was not come to dispute about ceremonials and customs, which had for many ages been used in the church; nor did he think fit to debate about that affair then, but would refer it to the general council, which was to meet shortly, according to the constitution of the diet of Nuremberg. Zuinglius replied, “that they ought not to regard how long a thing has been or has not been in use, but to observe only, whether or not it be agreeable to truth, or the law of God, to which custom could not be opposed; and that there were learned men in the present assembly who could very well determine the matters in question, without referring them to a council, since even private Christians, enlightened by the spirit of God, could discern between those that did and did not^understand the Scripture.” The result of this conference was in favour of Zuinglius; for the senate ordained by an edict, “that he should go on to teach and preach the word of God, and the doctrine of the gospel, after the same manner that he had hitherto done; and that no pastors, either in the city or country, should teach any thing that could not be proved by the gospel, and should also abstain from accusations of heresy.”

After an edict so favourable, the doctrines of Zuinglius, which most of the pastors had before embraced, were preached under the name of Evangelical Truth in almost all the churches of the canton of Zurich; but, because the outward worship was contrary to their doctrines, images still remaining, and mass being celebrated, and they durst not abolish it without authority, Zuinglius, to complete his design, engaged the senate to call a new assembly in October the same year, when the bishops of Constance, Coine, and Basil, with the university of the latter city, and the twelve cantons of Switzerland, were invited to send their deputies. The senate assembled upon the day appointed, debates were held upon the points in question; and the result was an edict, by which the priests and monks were forbidden to make any public processions, to carry the holy sacrament, or to elevate it in the church, that it might be worshipped: reliques were taken out of the churches, and it was forbidden to play upon organs, to ring the bells, to bless palm-branches, salt, waters, or tapers, and to administer the supreme unction to the sick.

He was a man of acute parts and uncommon learning; and, in his character of Reformer, his zeal was tempered with a good degree of prudence. He held several notions peculiar to himself, and different from those of Luther, which produced no small misunderstanding between them; for Luther was riot at all well affected to Zuinglius; nor did Zuinglius pay much deference to Luther. Their principal disagreement, however, was concerning the manner in which the body and blood of Christ were present in the eucharist. Luther and his followers, though they had rejected the doctrine of the church of Rome with respect to the transubstantiation, were still of opinion, that the partakers of the Lord’s-supper received along with the bread and wjne, the real body and blood of Christ. Zuinglius’s doctrine, first maintained, although not so ably, by Carlostadt, who was Luther’s colleague, amounted to this, that the body and blood of Christ were not really present in the eucharist;' and that the bread and wine were no more than external signs or symbols, designed to excite in the minds of Christians the remembrance of the sufferings and death of the Saviour, and of the benefits which arise from it. This opinion was embraced by all the friends of the reformation in Switzerland, and by a considerable number of its votaries in Germany, who were termed Zuinglians, in contradistinction to the Lutherans.

Zuinglius also maintained doctrines respecting the divine decrees very opposite to those of some of his brethren, and had a system of his own concerning original sin, and contended for the salvation of infants dying without baptism, as well as of virtuous Pagans, both which points were rejected generally by the Protestants of his time. His works amounted to four volumes in folio, the greatest part of which were written in German, and afterwards were translated into Latin; they were printed at Basil in 1544, at Zurich in 1581, and at Basil again in 159.T. They consist of Commentaries on various books of the Old and New Testament, and of controversial or theological tracts. His commentaries are said to have great merit, and he was one of the first of the reformers who reduced theology to a certain kind of order in his book “Concerning true and false Religion,” which contains a brief exposition of the principal doctrines of Christianity. A few of his lesser pieces were translated into English, and published not many years after his death. His doctrines were afterwards spread into France, with some alterations by Calvin, Beza, and others, who were commonly called Calvinists; while the disciples of Zuinglius, who lived in Switzerland, retained the name of Zuinglians, or Sacramentarians.