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

Enter either the ID of an entry, or one or more words to find. The first match in each paragraph is shown; click on the line of text to see the full paragraph.

Currently only Chalmers’ Biographical Dictionary is indexed, terms are not stemmed, and diacritical marks are retained.

, an ancient grammarian of Padua who, it is generally supposed, was acquainted with Virgil. Yet Jerome

, an ancient grammarian of Padua who, it is generally supposed, was acquainted with Virgil. Yet Jerome says, that he flourished under the Vespasians, which is rather at too great a distance for one and the same man but Jerome’s account is rejected by more recent writers, who think that he lived under the empire of Augustus, and died under that of Nero, aged eighty-five. His “Enarrationes in Ciceronis Orationes,” were first published at Venice, in 1477, which is a veryscarce edition. They were afterwards published at Florence, 8vo, 1513, and have since been incorporated in the editions of Cicero, by Grnter, Gronovius, and Olivet. He had also written a life of Virgil, and another of Sallust, the loss of which may be regretted.

, a physician of Cremona, of the sixteenth century, was the first who discovered the lacteal veins in the mesentery, while he was

, a physician of Cremona, of the sixteenth century, was the first who discovered the lacteal veins in the mesentery, while he was dissecting for another purpose. He published a dissertation “De lacteis venis,” wherein his discovery is displayed, with plates in three colours. The first edition of this curious work is of Milan, 1627 but it was afterwards reprinted at Basle in 1628, 4to, and at Leyden, 1640. The author professed anatomy at Pavia, about 1620, with great success, and died there in 1626.

, an ingenious English writer and lawyer, who lived about the end of the seventeenth, and beginning of the

, an ingenious English writer and lawyer, who lived about the end of the seventeenth, and beginning of the eighteenth century. He was entered of the society of Lincoln’s inn, and having been recommended to Mr. Eyre, a very great lawyer, and one of the judges of the king’s bench, in the reign of king William, this gentleman gave him assistance in his studies. Under so able a master, he quickly acquired a competent knowledge of the laws, and was soon noticed as a rising man in his profession. He had an uncommon vein of wit and humour, of which he afforded the world sufficient evidence in two pamphlets; one intituled, “Several assertions proved, in order to create another species of money than gold and silver” the second, “An essay on a registry for titles of lands.” This last is written in a very humorous style.

nd, and a committee was appointed to examine it of this committee, Edward Harley, esq. was chairman, who made a report, that the book contained several blasphemous

In the year 1698, Mr. Asgill published a treatise on the possibility of avoiding death, intitled “An argument, proving that, according to the covenant of eternal life, revealed in the scriptures, man may be translated from hence into that eternal life without passing through death, although the human nature of Christ himself could not thus be translated till he had passed through death,” printed originally in 1700, and reprinted several years since. This raised a considerable clamour, and Dr. Sacheverell mentioned it among other blasphemous writings, which induced him to think the church in danger. In 1699, an act being passed for resuming forfeited estates in Ireland, commissioners were appointed to settle claims and Mr. Asgill being at this time somewhat embarrassed in his circumstances, resolved to go over to Ireland. On his arrival there, the favour of the commissioners, and his own merit, procured him great practice, the whole nation almost being then engaged in law-suits, and among these there were few considerable, in which Mr. Asgill was not retained on one side or other, so that in a very short space of time he acquired a considerable fortune. He purchased a large estate in Ireland and the influence this purchase gave him, occasioned his being elected a member of the House of Commons in that kingdom. He was in Munster when the session began and, before he could reach Dublin, he was informed, that, upon a complaint, the House had voted the last-mentioned book of his to be a blasphemous libel, and had ordered it to be burnt however, he took his seat in the house, where he sat only four days, before he was expelled for this performance, and being about the same time involved in a number of law-suits, his affairs soon grew much embarrassed in Ireland, so that he resolved to return to England, where, in 1705, he was chosen member for the borough of Bramber, in the county of Sussex, and sat for several years but in the interval of privilege in 1707, being taken in execution at the suit of Mr. Holland, he was committed to the Fleet. The houses meeting in November, Mr. Asgill applied and on the 16th of December was demanded out of custpdy by a serjeant at arms with the mace, and the next day took his seat in the house. Between his application and his discharge, complaint was made to the house of the treatise for which he had been expelled in Ireland, and a committee was appointed to examine it of this committee, Edward Harley, esq. was chairman, who made a report, that the book contained several blasphemous expressions, and seemed to be intended to ridicule the scriptures. Thursday, the 18th of September 1707, was appointed for him to make his defence, which he did with considerable spirit, but as he still continued to maintain the assertions he had laid down in that treatise, he was expelled. From this time, Mr. Asgill’s affairs grew more desperate, and he was obliged to retire, first to the Mint, and then became a prisoner in the King’s Bench, but removed himself thence to the Fleet, and in the rules of one or other of these prisons continued thirty years, during which time he published a multitude of mall political tracts, most of which were well received. He also drew bills and answers, and did other business in his profession till his death, which happened some time in November 1738, when he was upwards of fourscore, or, as some thought, upwards of an hundred years of age. The most considerable of his works are. 1. “De jure divino; or, an assertion, that the title of the house of Hanover to the succession of the British monarchy (on failure of issue of her present majesty), is a title hereditary, and of divine institution,1710, 8vo. 2. His “Defence on his Expulsion to which is added, an Introduction and Postscript,1712, 8vo. Of the first pamphlet there were several editions; and, not long after it was published, he sent abroad another treatise, under the title of “Mr. Asgill’s Apology for an omission in his late publication, in which are contained summaries of all the acts made for strengthening the protestant succession.” 3. a The Pretender’s declaration abstracted from two anonymous pamphlets, the one entitled Jus sacrum the other. Memoirs of the chevalier de St. George; with memoirs of two other chevaliers in the reign of Henry VII.“1713, 8vo. 4.” The succession of the house of Hanover vindicated, against the Pretender’s second declaration, in folio, entitled, The hereditary right of the crown of England asserted, &c.“1714, 8vo. This was in answer to Mr. Bedford’s famous book. 5.” The Pretender’s declaration from Plombiers, 1714, Englished; with a postscript before it in relation to Dr. Lesley’s letter sent after it,“1715, 8vo. Besides these, hewrotean” Essay for the Press,“the” Metamorphoses of Man,“”A question upon Divorce,“1717,” A treatise against Woolston," and several other pieces.

ducted into the living of Stansfield, in Suffolk, owing to the favour of Dr. Ross, bishop of Exeter, who, entirely unsolicited, gave him a valuable portion of the vicarage

, an English divine and antiquary, was born Dec. 5, 1724, in Red Lion street, Glerkenwell, and educated at Croydon, Westminster, and Eton schools. In October 1740, he was admitted of St. John’s college, Cambridge, and took his degrees, B. A. 1744, M. A. 1748, B.D. 1756. He was presented by a relation to the rectory of Hungerton, and in 1759 to that of Twyford, both in Leicestershire, but resigned the former in 1767, and the latter in 1769. In 1774 he was elected F. 8. A. and the same year accepted the college rectory of Barrow, in Suffolk, where he constantly resided for thirty-four years. In Oct. 1780, he was inducted into the living of Stansfield, in Suffolk, owing to the favour of Dr. Ross, bishop of Exeter, who, entirely unsolicited, gave him a valuable portion of the vicarage of Bampton, in Oxfordshire but this being out of distance from his college living, he procured an exchange of it for Stansfield. Dr. Ross’s friendship for him began early in college, and continued uniformly steady through all changes of place and situation. In 1793, he gradually lost his sight, but retained, amidst so severe a privation to a man of literary research, his accustomed chearfulness. In his latter days he had repeated paralytic attacks, of one of which he died, June 12, 1808, in the eighty-fourth year of his age. Mr. Ashby published nothing himself, but was an able and obliging contributor to many literary undertakings. In the Archaeologia, vol. III. is a dissertation, from his pen, on a singular coin of Nerva, found at Colchester. The Historian of Leicestershire has repeatedly acknowledged his obligations to Mr. Ashby, particularly for his dissertation on the Leicester milliary. His services have been also amply acknowledged by Mr. Nichols for assistance in the life of Bowyer by Mr. Harmeij in the preface to his “Observations on Scripture”; and by Dames Barrington, in his work on the Statutes, p. 212 but both the last without mentioning his name. The late bishop Percy, Mr. Granger, and Mr. Gough, have acknowledged his contributions more pointedly. His valuable library and manuscripts were sold by Mr. Deck, bookseller at Bury, by a priced catalogue.

ained the age of sixteen he was taken into the family of James Paget, esq. a baron of the exchequer, who had married his mother’s sister, and as his father died in 1634,

, an eminent philosopher, chemist, and antiquary, of the seventeenth century, and founder of the noble museum at Oxford, which still bears his name, was the only son of Mr. Simon Ashmole, of the city of Litchfield, in Staffordshire, sadler, by Anne, the daughter of Mr. Anthony Boyer, of Coventry, in Warwickshire, woollen-draper. He was born May 23, 1617, and during his early r education in grammar, was taught music, in which he made such proficiency as to become a chorister in the cathedral at Litchfield. When he had attained the age of sixteen he was taken into the family of James Paget, esq. a baron of the exchequer, who had married his mother’s sister, and as his father died in 1634, leaving little provision for him, he continued for some years in the Paget family, during which time he made considerable progress in the law, and spent his leisure hours in perfecting himself in music and other polite accomplishments. In March 1638, he married Eleanor, daughter of Mr. Peter Manwaring, of Smallwood, in the county Palatine of Chester, and in Michaelmas term the same year, became a solicitor in Chancery. On February 11, 1641, he was sworn an attorney of the court of common pleas, and on December 5th, in the same year, his wife died suddenly, of whom he has left us a very natural and affectionate memorial. The rebellion coming on, he retired from London, being always a zealous and steady loyalist, and on May 9, 1645, became one of the gentlemen of the ordnance in the garrison at Oxford, whence he removed to Worcester, where he was commissioner, receiver, and register of the excise, and soon after captain in the lord Ashley’s regiment, and comptroller of the ordnance. In the midst of all this business he entered himself of Brazen-Nose college, in Oxford, and applied himself vigorously to the sciences, but especially natural philosophy, mathematics, and astronomy; and his intimate acquaintance with Mr. (afterwards sir George) Wharton, seduced him into the absurd mysteries of astrology, which was in those days in great credit. In the month of July, 1646, he lost his mother, who had always been a kind parent to him, and for whom he had a very pious regard. On October 16th, the same year, be was elected a brother of the ancient and honourable society of Free and Accepted Masons, which he looked upon as a high honour, and has therefore given us a particular account of the lodge established at Warrington in Lancashire and in some of his manuscripts, there are very valuable collections relating to the history of the free masons. The king’s affairs being now grown desperate, Mr. Ashmole withdrew himself, after the surrender of the garrison of Worcester, into Cheshire, where he continued till the end of October, and then came up to London, where he became acquainted with Mr. (afterwards sir Jonas) Moore, William Lilly, and John Booker, esteemed the greatest astrologers in 'the world, by whom he was caressed, instructed, and received into their fraternity, which then made a very considerable figure, as appeared by the great resort of persons of distinction to their annual feast, of which Mr. Ashmole was afterwards elected steward. Jn 1647 he retired to Englefield, in Berkshire, where he pursued his studies very closely, and having so fair an opportunity, and the advantage of some very able masters, he cultivated the science of botany. Here, as appears from his own remarks, he enjoyed in privacy the sweetest moments of his life, the sensation of which perhaps was quickened, by his just idea of the melancholy state of the times. It was in this retreat that he became acquainted with Mary, sole daughter of sir William Forster, of Aldermarston, in the county of Berks, bart. who was first married to sir Edward Stafford, then to one Mr. Hamlyn, and lastly to sir Thomas Mainwaring, knt recorder of Reading, and one of the masters in chancery and an attachment took place but Mr. Humphrey Stafford, her second son, had such a dislike to the measure, that when Mr. Ashmole happened to be very ill, he broke into his chamber, and if not prevented, would have murdered him. In the latter end of 1648, lady Mainwaring conveyed to him her estate at Bradfield, which was soon after sequestered on account of Mr. Ashmole’s loyalty but the interest he had with William Lilly, and some others of that party, enabled him to get that sequestration taken off. On the sixteenth of November, 1649, he married lady Mainwaring, and settled in London, where his house became the receptacle of the most learned and ingenious persons that flourished at that time. It was by their conversation, that Mr. Ashmole, who hud been more fortunate in worldly affairs than most scholars are, and who had been always a curious collector of manuscripts, was induced to publish a treatise written by Dr. Arthur Dee, relating to the Philosopher’s stone, together with another tract on the same subject, by an unknown author. These accordingly appeared in the year following but Mr. Ashmole was so cautious, or rather modest, as to publish them by a fictitious name. He at the same time addressed himself to a work of greater consequence, a complete collection of the works of such English chemists, as had till then remained in ms. which cost him a great deal of labour, and for the embellishment of which he spared no expence, causing the cuts that were necessary, to be engraved at his own house in Black-Friars, by Mr. Vaughan, who was then the most eminent artist in that department in England. He imbibed this affection for chemistry from his intimate acquaintance with Mr. William Backhouse, of Swallowfield in the county of Berks, who was reputed an adept, and whom, from his free communication of chemical secrets, Mr. Ashmole was wont to call father, agreeably to the custom which had long prevailed among the lovers of that art, improperly, however, called chemistry for it really was the old superstition of alchemy. He likewise employed a part of his time in acquiring the art of engraving seuls, casting in sand, and the mystery of a working goldsmith. But all this time, his great work of publishing the ancient English writers in chemistry went on and finding that a competent knowlege of the Hebrew was absolutely necessary for understanding and explaining such authors as had written on the Hermetic science, he had recourse to rabbi Solomon Frank, by whom he was taught the rudiments of Hebrew, which he found very useful to him in his studies. At length, towards the close of the year 1652, his “Theatrum Chymicum Britannicum” appeared, which gained him great reputation in the learned world, as it shewed him to be a man of a most studious disposition, indefatigable application, and of wonderful accuracy in his compositions. It served also to extend his acquaintance considerably, and among others the celebrated Mr. Seiden took notice of him in the year 1653, encouraged his studies, and lived in great friendship with him to the day of his death. He was likewise very intimate with Mr. Oughtred, the mathematician, and with Dr. Wharton, a physician of great racter and experience. His marriage with lady -Main-waring, however, involved him in abundance of law-suits with other people, and at last produced a dispute between themselves, which came to a hearing on October 8, 1657, in the court of chancery, where serjeant Maynard having observed, that in eight hundred sheets of depositions taken on the part of the lady, there was not so much as a bad word proved against Mr. Ashrnole, her bill was dismissed, and she delivered back to her husband. He had now for some time addicted himself to the study of antiquity and records, which recommended him to the intimate acquaintance of Mr. (afterwards sir William) Dugdale, whom about this time he attended in his survey of the Fens, and was very useful to him in 'that excellent undertaking. Mr. Ashmole himself soon after took the pains to trace the Roman road, which in Antoninus’s Itinerary is called Bennevanna, from Weeden to Litchfield, of which he gave Mr. Dugdale an account, in a letter addressed to him upon that subject. It is very probable, that after his studies had thus taken a new turn, he lost somewhat of his relish for chemistry, since he discontinued the Theatrum Chemicum, which, according to his first design, was to have consisted of several volumes yet he still retained such a remembrance of it, as induced him to part civilly with the sons of art, by publishing a treatise in prose on the philosopher’s stone, to which he prefixed an admirable preface, in which he wishes to apologize for taking leave of these fooleries. In the spring of the year 1658, our author began to collect materials for his history of the order of the garter, which he afterwards lived to finish, and thereby rendered both the order and himself immortal, the just reward of the prodigious pains he took in searching records in the Tower, and elsewhere, comparing them with each other, and obtaining such lights as were requisite to render so perplexed a subject clear, and to reduce all the circumstances of such a vast body of history into their proper order. In September following he made a journey to Oxford, where he was extremely well received, and where he undertook to make a full and distinct description of the coins given to the public library by archbishop Laud, which was of great use to him in the works which he afterwards composed. He had lodged and boarded sometimes at a house in South Lambeth, kept by Mr. John Tradescant, whose father and himself hud been physic-gardeners there for many years, and had collected avast number of curiosities, which, after mature deliberation, Mr. Tradescant and his wife determined to bestow on Mr. Ashmole, and accordingly sealed and delivered a deed of gift for that purpose, on December 16, 1659. On the restoration of king Charles II. Mr. Ashmole was Dearly introduced into the presence and favour of his majesty, and on June 18, 1660, which was the second time he had the honour of discoursing with the king, he graciously bestowed upon him the place of Windsor herald. A few days after, he was appointed by the king to make a description of his medals, and had them delivered into his hands, and king Henry VHIth’s closet assigned for his use, being also allowed his diet at court. On August 21st, in the same year, he presented the three books which he had published, to his majesty, who, as he both loved and understood chemistry, received them very graciously. On September 3, he had a warrant signed for the office of commissioner of the excise, in consequence of a letter written by his majesty’s express command, to the earl of Southampton, then lord high-treasurer, by Mr. Se^ cretary Morris. About this time, a commission was granted to him as incidental to the care of the king’s medals, to examine the famous, or rather infamous, Hugh Peters, about the contents of the royal library which had fallen into his hands, and which was very carefully and punctually executed, but to very little purpose. On November 2d, he was called to the bar in Middle-Temple hall, and January 15, 1661, he was admitted a fellow of the Royal Society. On February 9th following, the king signed a warrant for constituting him secretary of Surinam in the West Indies. In the beginning of the year 1662, he was appointed one of the commissioners for recovering the king’s goods, and about the same time he sent a set of services and anthems to the cathedral church of Litchfield, in memory of his having been once a chorister there, and he gave afterwards twenty pounds towards repairing the cathedral. On June 27, 1664, the White Office was opened, of which he was appointed a commissioner. On Feb. 17, 1665, sir Edward By she sealed his deputation for visiting Berkshire, which visitation he began on the llth of March following, and on June 9, 1668, he was appointed by the lords commissioners of the treasury, accomptant-general, and country accomptant in the excise. His second wife, lady Main waring, dying, April 1, in the same year, he soon after married Mrs. Elizabeth Dugdale, daughter to his good friend sir William Dugdale, kht. garter king at arms, in Lincoln’s-inn chapel, on Novembers. The university of Oxford, in consideration of the many favours they had received from Mr. Ashmole, created him doctor of physic by diploma, July 19, 1669, which was presented to him on the 3d of November following, by Dr. Yates, principal of Brazen-Nose college, in the name of the university. He was now courted and esteemed by the greatest people in the kingdom, both in point of title and merit, who frequently did him the honour to visit him at his chambers in the Temple, and whenever he went his summer progress, he had the same respect paid him in the country, especially at his 'native town of Litchfield, to which when he came, he was splendidly entertained by the corporation. On May 8, 1672, he presented his laborious work on the most noble order of the garter, to his most gracious master king Charles II. who not only received it with great civility and kindness, but soon after granted to our author, as a mark of his approbation of the work, and of his personal esteem for him, a privy seal for 400 pounds out of the custom of paper. This was his greatest undertaking, and had he published nothing else, would have preserved his memory, as it certainly is in its kind one of the most valuable books in our language. On January 29, 1675, he resigned his office of Windsor herald, which by his procurement, was bestowed on his brother Dugdale, It was with great reluctancy that the earl marshal parted with him, and it was not long after, that he bestowed on him the character of being the best officer in his office. On the death of sir Edward Walker, garter king at arms, Feb_ 20, 1677, the king and the duke of Norfolk, as earl marshal, contested the right of disposing of his place, on which Mr. Ashmole was consulted, who declared in favour of the king, but with so much prudence and discretion as not to give any umbrage to the earl marshal. He afterwards himself refused this high office, which was conferred on his father-in-law sir -William Dugdale, for whom he employed his utmost interest. About the close of 1677, a proposal was made to Mr. Ashmole to become a candidate for the city of Litchfield, but finding himself poorly supported by the very persons who would have encouraged him to stand, he withdrew his pretensions. On the 26th of January, 1679, about ten in the morning, a fire began in the Middle Temple, in the next chambers to Mr. Aslimole’s,- by which he lost a library he had been collecting thirty-three years; but his Mss. escaped, by their being at his house in South Lambeth. He likewise lost a collection of 9000 coins, ancient and modern but his more valuable collection of gold medals were likewise preserved by being at Lambeth his vast repository of seals, charters, and other antiquities and curiosities, perished also in the flames. In 1683, the university of Oxford having finished a noble repository near the theatre, Mr. Ashmole sent thither that great collection of rarities which he had received from the Tradescants before-mentioned, together with such additions as he had made to them; and to this valuable benefaction he afterwards added that of his Mss. and library, which still remain a monument of his generous love to learning in general, and to the university of Oxford in particular. In the beginning of the year 1685, he was invited by the magistrates, and by the dean of Litchfield, to represent that corporation in parliament but upon king James’s intimating to him, by the lord Dartmouth, that he would take it kindly if he would resign his interest to Mr. Levvson, he instantly complied.

ginning of March 1682, the collection was deposited and the articles arranged by Robert Plott, LL.D. who before had been intrusted with their custody. This museum was

On the death of his father-in-law, sir William Dugdale, Jan. 10, 1686, Mr. Ashmole declined a second time the office of garter king at arms, and recommended his brother Dugdale, in which, though he did not fully succeed, yet he procured him the place of Norroy. This was one of the last public acts of his life, the remainder of which was spent in an honourable retirement to the day of his demise, which happened on May 18, 1692, in the seventy-sixth year of his age. He was undoubtedly a great benefactor to, and patron of, learning. His love of chemistry led him to preserve many valuable Mss. relating to that science, besides those that he caused to be printed and published. He was deeply skilled in history and antiquities, as sufficiently appears by his learned and laborious works, both printed and manuscripts. He was likewise a generous encourager and protector of such ingenious and learned men as were less fortunate in the world than himself, as appears by his kindness to sir'George Wharton in the worst of times, his respect to the memory of his friend Mr. John Booker, and the care he took in the education of the late eminent Dr. George Smalridge. His corpse was interred in the church of Lambeth in Surrey, May 26 1692, and a black marble stone laid over his grave, with a Latin inscription, in which, though there is much to his honour, there is nothing which exceeds the truth. He may be considered as one of the first and most useful collectors of documents respecting English antiquities, but the frequent application of the epithet genius to him, in the Biographia Britannica, is surely gratuitous. His attachment to- the absurdities of astrology and alchemy, and his association with Lilly, Booker, and other quacks and impostors of his age, must ever prevent his being ranked among the learned wise, although he never appears to have been a confederate in the tricks of Lilly and his friends, and certainly accumulated a considerable portion of learning and information on various useful topics. His benefaction to the university of Oxford will ever secure respect for his memory. It was towards the latter end of October 1677, that he made an offer to that university, of bestowing on it all that valuable collection of the Tradescants, which was so well known to the learned world, and which had been exceedingly improved since it came into his possession, together with all the coins, medals, and manuscripts of his own collecting, provided they would erect a building fit to receive them to which proposition the university willingly assented. Accordingly, on Thursday the 15th of May 1679, the first stone of that stately fabric, afterwards called Ashmole’s Museum, was laid on the west side of the theatre, and being finished by the beginning of March 1682, the collection was deposited and the articles arranged by Robert Plott, LL.D. who before had been intrusted with their custody. This museum was first publicly viewed, on the 2 1st of May following, by his royal highness James duke of York, his royal consort Josepha Maria, princess Anne, and their attendants, and on the 24th of the same month, by the doctors and masters of the university. In a convocation held on the 4th of June following (1683) a Latin letter of thanks, penned by him who was then deputy orator, being publicly read, was sent to Mr. Ashmole at South Lambeth, In July 1690, he visited the university with his wife, and was received with all imaginable honour, and entertained at a noble dinner in his museum; on which occasion Mr. Edward Hannes, A. M. the chemical professor, afterwards an eminent physician, made an elegant oration to him. His benefaction to the university was very considerably enlarged at his death, by the addition of his library, which consisted of one thousand seven hundred and fifty-eight books, of which six hundred and twenty were manuscripts, and of them three hundred and eleven folios, relating chiefly to English History, Heraldry, Astronomy, and Chemiftry, with a great variety of pamphlets, part of which had been sorted by himself, and the rest are methodized since, and a double catalogue made one classical, according to their various subjects, and another alphabetical. He bequeathed also to the same place, two gold chains and a medal, the one a filigreen chain of ninety links, weighing twenty-two ounces, with a medal of the elector of Brandenburg, upon which is the effigies of that elector, and on the reverse, a iHew of Straelsund, struck upon the surrender of that important city; a collar of S. S. with a medal of the king of Denmark; and a gold medal of the elector Palatine; and a George of the duke of Norfolk, worn by his grandfather when he was ambassador in Germany. All these he had received as acknowledgments of the honour which he had done the garter, by his labours on that subject. This museum has been since enriched by the Mss. of Anthony Wood, Aubrey, and others. It has been remarked as something extraordinary, that Mr. Ashmole was never knighted for his services as a herald. It is perhaps as extraordinary that the university of Oxford bestowed on him the degree of doctor of physic, who never regularly studied or practised in that faculty, unless we conceive it as a compliment to his chemical studies.

heatrum Chemicum Britannicum, containing several poetical pieces of our famous English philosophers, who have written the Hermetique mysteries, in their own ancient

2. “Theatrum Chemicum Britannicum, containing several poetical pieces of our famous English philosophers, who have written the Hermetique mysteries, in their own ancient language. Faithfully collected into one volume, with annotations thereon, by Elias Ashmole, esq. qui est Mercuriophilus Anglicus,” London, 1652, 4to. The authors published in this collection are, Thomas Norton’s ordinal of Alchemic~ George Rrpley’s compound of Alchemic; Pater Sapientice, i.e. the father of wisdom, by an anonymous writer; Hermes’ s Bird, written originally in Latin, by Raymund Lully, and done into English verse by Abbot Cremer, of Westminster; Sir Geoffrey Chaucer’s Chanons Yeoman’s tale Dastin’s Dream, which seems to be a version of the Latin poem of John Dastm, entitled his Vision Pearce, the black monk, on the Elixir Richard Carpenter’s work, which some think, and not without reason, ought rather to be ascribed to John Carpenter, bishop of Worcester, who was one of the best chemists of his time Hunting of the Green Lion, by Abraham Andrews but there is also a spurious piece with the same title Breviary of Natural Philosophy, by Thomas* Charnock Ænigmas, by the same person Bloomfield' s Blossoms, which is likewise entitled the Camp of Philosophy, by William Bloomfield Sir Edward Kelle’s work his letter to G. S. Gent. (It is somewhat strange that this gentleman’s name, even by Mr. Ashmole, is written Keiley, though sir Edward himself wrote it Kelle.) Dr. John Dee’s Testament, which appears to be an epistle to one John Gwin, written A. D. 1568, and a third letter, the first two being wanting; Thomas Robinson, of the Philosopher’s Stone Experience and Philosophy, by an anonymous author the Magistery, by W. B. i. e. William Bloomfield John Gower, on the Philosopher’s Stone George Ripley’s Vision verses belonging to Ripley’s Scrowle Mystery of Alchymists preface to the Medulla of George Ripley; Secreta Secretorum, by John Lydgate Hermit’s Tale, anonymous description of the Stone the Standing of the Glass, for the time of the putrefaction and congelation of the medicine Ænigma Philosophicum, by William Bedman Fragments by various authors. 3. “The Way to Bliss, in three books, made public by Elias Ashmole, esq; qui est Mercuriophilus Anglicus,” London, 1658, 4to. This was the work in which he took his leave of the astrologers and aichymists, and bestowed his attention on the studies which produced, 4. “The Institution, Laws, and Ceremonies of the most noble Order of the Garter. Collected and digested into one body by Elias Ashmole, of the Middle Temple, esq. Windesore herald at arms. A work furnished with variety of matter relating to honour and noblesse” London, 1672, folio. He was not only so happy as to receive those extraordinary marks of the sovereign’s favour, mentioned above, but was complimented in an obliging manner by his royal highness the duke of York; who, though then at sea against the Dutch, sent for his book by the earl of Peterborough, and afterwards told our author he was extremely pleased with it. The rest of the knights-companions of the most noble order received him and his book with much respect and civility, and the regard shown him abroad was more singular. It was reposited, by the then pope, in the library of the Vatican. King Christie of Denmark, sent him, in 1674, a gold chain and- medal, which, with the king’s leave, he wore on certain high festivals. FredericWilliam, elector of Brandenburg!), sent him the like present, and ordered his boot to be translated into High Dutch. He was afterwards visited by the elector Palatine’s, the grand duke of Tuscany’s, and other foreign princes’ ministers, to return him thanks for this book, which he took care should be presented them, and thereby spread the fame of the garter, the nation, and himself, all over Europe. Yet it does not appear that this laborious and exquisite performance advanced at all the design he had formed some years before, of being appointed historiographer to the order, to which proposal some objections were made, and by our author fully answered, although we find no mention of this circumstance in any memoirs of Mr. Ashmole hitherto extant. 5, “The Arms, Epitaphs,. Feuestral Inscriptions, with the draughts of the Tombs, &c. in all the churches in Berkshire.” It was penned in 1666, and the original visitation taken in the two preceding years, in virtue of his deputatien from sir Edward Byshe, elariencieux king at arms, and published under the title of “The Antiquities of Berkshire,” 3 vols. 8vo, 1717, 1723, and at Reading in 1736, fol. 6. “Familiarum iilustrium Imperatorumque Romanorum Numismata Oxonire in Bodleianae Bibliotbecoe Archivis descripta et explanata.” This work was finished by the author in 1659, and given by him to the public library in Oxford, in 1666, in 3 vols, folio, as it was fitted for the press. 7. “A description and explanation of the Coins and Medals belonging to king Charles II.” a folio ms. in the king’s cabinet. 8. “A brief ceremonial of the Feast of St. George, held at Whitehall 1661, with other papers relating to the Order.” 9. “Remarkable Passages in the year 1660, set down by Mr. Elias Ashmole.” 10. “An account of the Coronation of our Kings, transcribed from a ms. in the king’s private closet.” 11 “The proceedings on the day of the Coronation of king Charles II.” mentioned by Anthony Wood, as printed in 1672, but he owns he never saw it. 12. “The Arms, Epitaphs, &c. in some churches and houses in Staffordshire,” taken when he accompanied sir William Dugdale in his visitation. 13. “The Arms, Epitaphs, Inscriptions, &c. in Cheshire, Shropshire, Derbyshire, Nottinghamshire, &c.” taken at the same time. Bishop Nicolson mentions his intention to write the history and antiquities of his native town of Litchfield. 14. “Answers to the objections urged.against Mr. Ashmole’s being made historiographer to the order of the Garter,” A. D. 1662. 15. “A Translation of John Francis Spina’s book of th Catastrophe of the World; to which was subjoined, Ambrose Merlin’s Prophecy.” It is doubtful whether this was ever published. What, indeed, he printed, was but a very small part of what he wrote, there being scarcely any branch of our English history and antiquities, on which he has not left us something valuable, of his own composing, in that vast repository of papers, which make several folios in his collection of Mss. under the title of, 16. CoU lections, Remarks, Notes on Books, and Mss. a wonderful proof of industry and application. 17. “The Diary of his Life,” written by himself, which was published at London, 1717, in 12mo, with the following title “Memoirs of the life of that learned antiquary, Elias Ashmole, esq. drawn up by himself by way of diary, with an appendix of original letters. Published by Charles Burman, esquire.” The copy from whence these papers were published, was in the hand-writing of Dr. Robert Plott, chief keeper of the Ashmolean museum at Oxford, and secretary of the Royal Society, and was transcribed by him for the use of a near relation of Mr. Ashmole’s, a private gentleman in Staffordshire. They had been collated a few years before, by David Perry, M. A. of Jesus’ college in Oxford. The appendix* contains a letter of thanks, dated January 26, 1666, from the corporation at Litchfield, upon the receipt of a silver bowl presented to them by Mr. Ashmole a preface to the catalogue of archbishop Laud’s medals, drawn up by Mr. Ashmole, and preserved in the public library at Oxford a letter from Dr. Thomas Barlow, afterwards bishop of Lincoln, to Mr. Ashmole, dated December 23, 1668, on the present of his books, describing archbishop Laud’s cabinet of medals a letter from John Evelyn, esq. to recommend Dr. Plott to him for reader in natural philosophy, and another from Mr. Joshua Barnes, dated from Emanuel college, Cambridge, October 15, 1688, wherein he desires Mr. Ashmole’s pardon, for having reflected upon his Order of the Garter, in his own history of king Edward III. with Mr. Ashmole’s answer to that letter, dated October 23 following. It is from this diary, which abounds in whimsical and absurd memoranda, that the dates and facts in his life have been principally taken.

of the obligation of the electors of Eton college to supply all vacancies in that society with those who are or have been fellows of King’s college, Cambridge, so long

, an English divine, the son of Dr, Ashton, usher of the grammar school at Lancaster (a place of only thirty-two pounds per annum, which he held for near fifty years), was born in 1716, educated at Eton, and elected thence to King’s college, Cambridge, 1733. He was the person to whom Mr. Horace Walpole addressed his epistle from Florence, in 1740, under the title of “Thomas Ashton, esq. tutor to the earl of Plymouth.” About that time, or soon after, he was presented to the rectory of Aldingham in Lancashire, which he resigned in March 1749; and on the 3d of May following was presented by the provost and fellows of Eton to the rectory of Sturminster Marshall in Dorsetshire. He was then M. A. and had been chosen a fellow of Eton in December 1745. In 1752 he was collated to the rectory of St. Botolph, Bishopsgate; in 1759 took the degree of D. D. and in May 1762, was elected preacher at Lincoln’s Inn, which he resigned in 1764. In 1770 he published, in 8vo, a volume of sermons on several occasions to which was prefixed an excellent metzotinto by Spilgbury, from an original by sir Joshua Reynolds, and this motto, “Insto pnepositis, oblitus praeteritorum.” Dr. Ashton died March 1, 1775, at the age of fifty-nine, after having for some years survived a severe attack of the palsy. His discourses, in a style of greater elegance than purity, were rendered still more striking by the excellence of his delivery. Hence he was frequently prevailed on to preach on public and popular occasions. He printed a sermon on the rebellion in 1745, 4to, and a thanksgiving sermon on the close of it in 1746, 4to. la 1756, he preached before the governors of the Middlesex hospital, at St. Anne’s, Westminster a commencement sermon at Cambridge in 1759; a sermon at the annual meeting of the chanty schools in 1760; one before the House of Commons on the 30th of January 1762; and a spital sermon at St. Bride’s on the Easter Wednesday in that year. All these, with several others preached at Eton, Lincoln’s inn, Bishopsgate, &c. were collected by himself in the volume above mentioned, which is closed by a “Clerum habita Cantabrigige in templo beatae Mariae, 1759, pro gradu Doctoratus in sacra theologii.” His other publications were, 1. “A dissertation on 2 Peter i. 19,1750, 8vo. 2. In 1754, the Rev. Mr. Jones of St. Saviour’s, delivered a sermon at Bishopsgate-churcb, which being offensive to Dr. Ashton, he preached against it; and an altercation happening between the two divines, some pamphlets were published on the occasion, one of which, entitled “A letter to the Rev. Mr. Thomas Jones, intended as a rational and candid answer to his sermon preached at St. Botolph, Bishopsgate,” 4to, was probably by Dr. Ashton. 3. “An extract from the case of the obligation of the electors of Eton college to supply all vacancies in that society with those who are or have been fellows of King’s college, Cambridge, so long as persons properly qualified are to be had within that description,” London, 1771, 4to, proving that aliens have no right at all to Eton fellowships, either by the foundation, statutes, or archbishop Laud’s determination in 1636. This is further proved in, 4. “A letter to the Rev. Dr. M. (Morell) on the question of electing aliens into the vacant places in Eton college. By the author of the Extract,1771, 4to. 5. “A second letter to Dr. M.” The three last were soon after re-published under the title of “The election of aliens into the vacancies in Eton college an unwarrantable practice. To which are now added, two letters to the Rev. Dr. Morell, in which the cavils of a writer in the General Evening Post, and others, are considered and refuted. Part I. By a late fellow of King’s college, Cambridge.” London, 1771, 4to. Part II. was never published. He lived long in habits of intimacy with Horace Walpole, afterwards earl of Orford, who, Mr. Cole informs us, procured him the Eton fellowship but a rupture separated them. Mr. Cole adds, what we have some difficulty in believing, that the “Sermon on Painting,” in lord Orford’s works, was preached by Dr. Ashton at Houghton, before the earl of Orford (sir Robert Walpole) in 1742.

was added a double appendix, the first touching the Athanasian, the second the Nicene creed. Baxter, who, in his “Reformed Pastor,” had advanced some things against

, rector of Hanwell, near Banbury in Oxfordshire, was the son of Robert Ashwell of Harrow on the Hill, in Middlesex, and was born in the parish of St. Martin, Ludgate, London, Nov. 18, 1612. He was admitted a scholar of Wadham college, Oxford, in 1627, took the degrees in arts, was elected fellow, and became a celebrated tutor in that house. In the time of the great rebellion he continued in Oxford, and preached several times before the king, court, and parliament. A little before the surrender of the garrison of Oxford, he had the degree of B. D. conferred upon him and about the latter end of 1658 he was presented to the living of Hanwell, having been before, as Mr. Wood thinks, chaplain in the family of sir Anthony Cope, lord of the manor of Hanwell. He had the character of a very peaceable and religious man, and was well versed in logic, the schoolmen, and fathers. He wrote, 1 “Fides Apostolica, or, a discourse asserting the received authors and authority of the Apostles’ Creed,” Oxon, 1653, 8vo; to which was added a double appendix, the first touching the Athanasian, the second the Nicene creed. Baxter, who, in his “Reformed Pastor,” had advanced some things against this work, expressed his regret afterwards, in his “Catholic Theology,” for having said any thing against it. 2. “Gestus Eucharisticus, concerning the Gesture to be used at the receiving the Sacrament,” Oxon. 1663, 8vo. 3. “De Socino et Socinianismo a treatise on the Socinian heresy,” said to be part of a greater work in manuscript. 4. “De Ecclesia, &c. a dissertation concerning the church of Rome;” also a part of his great work on Controversies, published at Oxford, 1688, 4to. 5. “An Answer to Plato Redivivus,” in manuscript. He also translated, from Pocock’s edition, “Philosophus Autodidactus, sive Epistola Abi Gioaphar Ebn Tophail de Hai Ebn Yokdan,” &c. Lond. 1686, 8vo. Our author died at Hanwell, Feb. 8, 1693, and was buried in the church of that place, of which he had been thirty-­five years rector.

e to London, where she was favourably received by some of the ladies of the court, and by the queen, who secretly favoured the reformed religion. But at length she was

, daughter of sir William Askew, of Kelsay, in Lincolnshire, knight, was born in 1529. She received a liberal and learned education, and manifested in early life a predilection for theological studies. Her eldest sister, after having been contracted in marriage to the son of Mr. Kyme, of Lincolnshire, died before the nuptials were completed. Her father, on this event, unwilling to lose a connection which promised pecuniary advantages, compelled his second daughter Anne, notwithstanding her reluctance, to become the wife of Mr. Kyme, a marriage which probably laid the foundation of her future misfortunes. Her husband was a bigoted Roman Catholic, while she, by studying the scriptures and the opinions of the reformers, became a convert, which so disgusted him that he turned her out of doors. Conceiving herself, by this treatment, at liberty to sue for a separation, she came to London, where she was favourably received by some of the ladies of the court, and by the queen, who secretly favoured the reformed religion. But at length she was accused, by her husband and the priests, of holding heretical opinions respecting the sacrament and, in 1545, was apprehended, and repeatedly examined by Christopher Dare, the lord mayor, the bishops, chancellor, and others, to whose questions she replied in a firm, easy, and unconstrained manner, and even with some degree of wit and ridicule. She was then committed to prison for eleven days, and prohibited from any communication with her friends. During this confinement, she employed herself in composing prayers and meditations, and in fortifying her resolution to endure the trial of her principles.

On the 23d of March, a relation, who had obtained permission to visit her, endeavoured to bail her,

On the 23d of March, a relation, who had obtained permission to visit her, endeavoured to bail her, and his earnest application to the mayor, to the chancellor, and to Bonner, the bishop of London, was at length successful. On this occasion she was brought before the bishop, who affected concern for what she had suffered, while he endeavoured to entrap her by ensnaring questions. Mr. Britagne, her relation, and Mr. Spilman, of Gray’s inn, became her sureties. But a short time after, she was again apprehended, and summoned before the king’s council, at Greenwich, when Wriothesely the chancellor, Gardiner bishop of Winchester, and other prelates, once more ques ­tioned her on the doctrines of the church of Rome. She replied with firmness, and without prevarication, and ou finding her impracticable, her judges determined on other measures, and remanded her to Newgate, though she was at the time suffering under a severe indisposition. Having entreated, in vain, to be allowed a visit from Dr. Latimer, she addressed a letter to tke king himself, declaring “That respecting the Lord’s supper, she believed as much as had been taught by Christ himself, or as the Catholic church required.” But' still refusing her assent to the popish meaning, her letter served only to aggravate her crime. She then wrote to the chancellor, inclosing her address to the king, but with no better success. From Newgate she was conveyed to the Tower, where she was interrogated respecting her patrons at court with several ladie^of whiph she held a correspondence, but, heroically maintaining her fidelity, she refused to make any discoveries of that kind. This magnanimity, so worthy of admiration, so incensed her barbarous persecutors, that they endeavoured by the rack to extort from her what she had refused to their demands, but she sustained the torturewith unshaken fortitude and meek resignation. Wriothesely, with unmanly and infernal rage, commanded, with menaces, the lieutenant of the Tower to strain the instrument of his vengeance, and when he refused, he himself became executioner, and every limb of the innocent victim was dislocated. When recovered from a swoon into which she fell, she remained sitting two hours on the bare ground, calmly reasoning with her tormentors, who were confounded by her courage and resolution. Pardon was afterwards offered if she would recant, but having rejected every offer of the kind, she was condemned to be burnt at the stake, which was accordingly executed, July 16, 1546. She bore this inhuman punishment with amazing courage and firmness, adhering to the last to the principles of her faith.

ot be supposed that his hand had the smallest imperfection. He was one of the first Flemish painters who adopted the clean and bright manner of landscape painting. He

, a Flemish painter, was born at Antwerp in 1610, and was a disciple of Esaias Vandervelde, and under the guidance of so able a master, he became an excellent painter of landscape. His companions nicknamed him Crabbetje, from a crooked turn in his fingers and his hand, which caused him to hold his pallet with some degree of awkwardness. And yet, by the lightness, freedom, and spirit of his touch, it could not be supposed that his hand had the smallest imperfection. He was one of the first Flemish painters who adopted the clean and bright manner of landscape painting. He studied after nature in the country about Rome, improving his taste by the delightful situations of towns, villas, antiquities, figures, and animals, which he sketched upon paper, to make a proper use of them in his designs. In the style of his landscape he chose particularly to imitate Claude Lorraine but in other parts of his painting he seemed fond of making Bamboccio his model. He enriched his landscapes with the vestiges of noble buildings, and the views of such seats as he observed to be beautiful, by their situation or construction. His colouring is extremely bright and clear his skies are warm his touch is free and firm his figures and animals are w r ell drawn, and judiciously disposed and his pictures justly merit the approbation which they have always received.

his artist very little is known. He married at Lyons in 1645, the daughter of a merchant of Antwerp, who happened accidentally to be in that place, and died at Amsterdam

Of the personal history of this artist very little is known. He married at Lyons in 1645, the daughter of a merchant of Antwerp, who happened accidentally to be in that place, and died at Amsterdam in 1660, in the fiftieth year of his age. Perelle has engraved some of his landscapes, and of his Italian ruins.

, keeper of the Vatican, and archbishop of Tyre, who died at Rome in his eightieth year, Jan. 14, 1768, was a very

, keeper of the Vatican, and archbishop of Tyre, who died at Rome in his eightieth year, Jan. 14, 1768, was a very able scholar in the languages of the East. During the years from 1719 to 1728, he published a work of great importance to the collectors of Oriental manuscripts, in the manner of Herbelot, entitled “Bibliotheca Orientalis, Clementino-Vaticana, recensens, manuscriptos codices, Syriacos, Arabicos, &c. jussu et munificentia Clem. XI.” Rome, 1719—1728, 4 vols. fol. He published also, 2. An edition of the works of EphremSyrus, Rome, 1732—1734, 6 vols. fol. 3. “De Sanctis Ferentinis in Tuscia Bonifacio ac Redempto episcopis, &c. dissertatio,” Rome, 1745. 4. “Italicae historiae scrip tores ex Bibl. Vatic. &c. collegit et prgefat. notisque illustravit J. S. Assemanus,” Rome, 1751—1753, 4 vols. 4to. 5. “Kalendaria ecclesise universas,” Rome, 1755— 1757, 6 vols. 4to. His edition of Ephrem is by far the best.

f visions has had the honour of two commentators, the rabbi Mair in the year 547, and another Asser, who died in 1328, and was printed by Elzivir at Leyden, in 1630,

, a celebrated rabbi, in the year 476, in conjunction with Hammai, another rabbi^ composed the Talmud of Babylon, so called from the place of their residence. This collection of visions has had the honour of two commentators, the rabbi Mair in the year 547, and another Asser, who died in 1328, and was printed by Elzivir at Leyden, in 1630, 4to, and again with all its commentators at Amsterdam in 1644, in 12 vols. folio.

brated scholars of his age, and had also the countenance of Nobis, or Novis, archbishop of that see, who was his relation but it does not appear that he was either his

, or Asser, or Asker (called, by Pitts, John,) a learned monk of St. David’s, and historian, was of British extraction, probably of that part of South Wales called Pembrokeshire, and was bred up in the learning of those times, in the monastery of St. David’s (in Latin Menevia), whence he derived his surname of Menevensis. There he is said to have had for his tutor Johannes Patricius, one of the most celebrated scholars of his age, and had also the countenance of Nobis, or Novis, archbishop of that see, who was his relation but it does not appear that he was either his secretary or his chancellor, as some writers would have us believe. From St. David’s he was invited to the court of Alfred the Great, merely from the reputation of his learning, probably about the year 880, or somewhat earlier. Those who had the charge of bringing him to court, conducted him from St. David’s to the town of Dene (Dean) in Wiltshire, where the king received him with great civility, and shewed him in a little time the strongest marks of favour and affection, insomuch that he condescended to persuade him not to think any more of returning to St. David’s, but rather to continue with him as his domestic chaplain and assistant in his studies. Asserius, however, modestly declined this proposal, alledging, that it did not become him to desert that holy place where he had been educated, and received the order of priesthood, for the sake of any other preferment. King Alfred then desired that he would divide his time between the court and the monastery, spending six months at court, and six at St. David’s. Asserius would not lightly comply even with this request, but desired leave to return to St. David’s, to ask the advice of his brethren, which he obtained, but in his journey falling ill at Winchester of a fever, he lay there sick about a year and as soon as he recovered he went to St. David’s, where, consulting with his brethren on the king’s proposal, they unanimously agreed that he should accept it, promising themselves great advantages from his favour with the king, of which, at that time, they appear to have had need, to relieve them from the oppressions of one Hemeid, a petty prince of South Wales. But they requested of Asserius, that he would prevail on the king to allow him to reside quarterly at court and at St. David’s, rather than that he should remain absent six months together. When he came back he found the king at Leoneforde, who received him with every mark of distinction. He remained with him then eight months at once, reading and explaining to him whatever books were in his library, and grew into so great credit with that generous prince, that on Christmas-eve following, he gave him the monasteries of Anigresbyri, and Banuwille, that is, Ambrosbury in Wiltshire, and Banwell in Somersetshire, with a silk pall of great value, and as much incense as a strong man could carry, sending together with them this compliment, “That these were but small things, and by way of earnest of better which should follow them.” Soon after, he had Exeter bestowed upon him, and not long after that, the bishopric of Sherburn, which, however, he seems to have quitted in the year 883, though he always retained the title, as Wilfred archbishop of York was constantly so styled, though he accepted of another bishopric. Thenceforward he constantly attended the court, in the manner before stipulated, and is named as a person, in whom he had particular confidence, by king Alfred, in his testament, which must have been written some time before the year 885; since mention is made there of Esna bishop of Hereford, who died that year. He is also mentioned by the king, in his prefatory epistle placed before his translation of Gregory’s Pastoral, addressed to Wulfsig bishop of London and there the king does not call him bishop of Sherburn, but “my bishop,” acknowledging the help received from him and others in that translation. It appears to have been the near resemblance, which the genius of Asserius bore to that of the king, that gained him so great a share in his confidence and very probably, it was on this account, that Asserius drew up those memoirs of the life of Alfred which we still have, and which he dedicated and presented to the king in the year 893. la this work we have a curious account of the manner in which that prince and our author spent their time together. Asserius tells us, that having one day, being the feast of St. Martin, cited in conversation a passage of some famous author, the king was mightily pleased with it, and would have him write it down in the margin of a book he carried in his breast; but Asserius finding no room to write it there, and yet being desirous to gratify his master, he asked king Alfred whether he should not provide a few leaves, in which to set dawn such remarkable things as occurred either in reading or conversation the king was delighted with this hint, and directed Asserius to put it immediately in execution. Pursuing this method constantly, their collection began to swell, till at length it became of the size of an ordinary Psalter and this was what the king called his “Hand-book, or Manual.” Asserius, however, calls it Enchiridion. In all probability, Asserius continued at court during the whole reign of Alfred, and, probably, several years after but where, or when he died is doubtful, though the Saxon Chronicle positively fixes it to the year 910. The editor of his life in the Biog. Brit, takes Asser the monk, and Asser bishop of Sherburnj for one and the same person, which some however have denied, and asserts him to have been also archbishop of Sk David’s, upon very plausible authority. He admits, however, i that if there was such a reader in the public schools at Oxford as Asser the monk, he must have been some other person of the same name, and not our author but this point rests almost wholly on the authority of Harpsfiekl nor is the account consistent with itself in several other respects,as sir John S'pelman has justly observed. There is no less controversy about the works of Asserius, than about his preferments for some alledge that he never wrote any thing but the Annals of king Alfred whereas, Pitts gives us the titles of no less than five other books of his writing, and adds, that he wrote many more. The first of these is a “Commentary on Boetius,” which is mentioned by Leland, on the authority of the Chronicle of St. Neot’s but he probably only explained this author to king Alfred when he made his Saxon translation. The second piece mentioned by Pitts, is the Anjials of Alfred’s life and reign. The third he styles “Annales Britannia;,” or the Annals of Britain, in one book, mentioned also by Leland and Bale, and which has been since published by the learned Dr. Gale. The fourth piece, he calls “Aurearum Sententiarum Enchiridion, lib. 1” which is without question the Manual or common-placebook made for king Alfred, and reckoned among his works by Pitts himself. Leland has also spoken of this Enchiridion, as an instance of the learning and diligence of Asser, which it certainly was and though the collections he made concerning this author, are much better and larger than those of Bale and Pitts, yet he modestly, upon this subject, apologizes for speaking so little and so obscurely of so great a man. The next in Pitts’ s catalogue, is a “Book of Homilies,” and the last, “A Book of Epistles” but the existence of these seems unsupported by any authority; nor is it known where he was interred. He appears to have been one of the most pious and learned prelates of the age in which he lived.

e a proper security to the subscribers. He first addressed himself to the corporation of the clergy, who declared they were not in a capacity to accept the proposal.

He was the projector of the scheme' for providing a maintenance for clergymen’s widows and others, by a jointure payable by the Mercers’ company. The bringing this project to perfection took up his thoughts for many years for, though encouraged by many judicious persons to prosecute it, he found much difficulty in providing such a fund as might be a proper security to the subscribers. He first addressed himself to the corporation of the clergy, who declared they were not in a capacity to accept the proposal. Meeting with no better success in his next application to the Bank of England, he applied himself to the Mercers’ company, who agreed with him upon certain rules and orders, of which the following are the chief

company’s bond, to have the subscription money paid to them. 3. That no seafaring men may subscribe, who follow it as their business or vocation; nor others, who go

1, “That the Company will take in subscriptions at any time, till the sum of 100,000l. be subscribed, but will never exceed that sum, 2. That all married men, at the age of thirty years or under, may subscribe any sum not exceeding 1000l. That all married men, not exceeding the age of forty years, may subscribe any sum” not exceeding 500l. And that all married men, not exceeding the age of sixty years, may subscribe any sum, not exceeding 300l. And that the widows of all persons, subscribing according to these limitations, shall receive the benefit of 30 per cent, per annum, according to the former proposal^ free of all taxes and charges, at the two usual feasts of the Annunciation of the Blessed Virgin Mary, and St. Michael the Archangel and that the first of these payments shall be made at the first of the said feast days, which shall happen four months or more after the decease of the person or persons so subscribing excepting such as shall voluntarily make away with themselves, or by any act of theirs occasion their own death either by duelling or committing any crime, whereby they shall be sentenced, and put to death by justice in any, or either of these cases, the widows to receive no annuity; but, upon delivering up the company’s bond, to have the subscription money paid to them. 3. That no seafaring men may subscribe, who follow it as their business or vocation; nor others, who go farther than Holland, Ireland, or the coasts of England and that any person may subscribe for any others, whom he shall nominate in his last will, during the natural life of his wife, if she survive, and his intention be declared in his subscription." The company had several meetings in committees with the doctor, about settling a sufficient security in which they satisfied him that their estates, being clear rents, amounted to 2888l. Ss. lOd. besides the payments of the benefactors, to be paid out of the same which, by a moderate calculation, would yield, when the leases came out, above 13,500l. per annum. All things being agreed upon, the deed of settlement was executed by the company and trustees, at a general court of the said company, held on Wednesday the 4th of October, 1699. This deed is enrolled in the high court of chancery, and an authentic copy of it kept by the company but owing to some miscalculations, the scheme did not ultimately succeed, as originally planned.

ndal and Persecution being a seasonable inquiry into these two things I. Whether the Nonconformists, who otherwise think subscription lawful, are therefore obliged to

A few years before his death, he was invited to accept the headship of the college, then vacant, but modestly declined it. He died at Beckenham, Sept. 1711, in the seventieth year of his age, and was buried in the chancel of that church. The writer of his life gives him the highest character for piety, probity, and inflexible adherence to the doctrines and interests of the church of England. His general sentiments and turn of mind may be discovered in the titles of his various works 1. “Toleration disapproved and condemned by the authority and convincing reasons of, I. That wise and learned king James, and his privycouncil, Anno Reg. II do II. The honourable Commons assembled in this present parliament, in their Votes, &c. Feb. 25, 1662. III. The Presbyterian ministers in the city of London, met at Sion College, December 18, 1645. IV. Twenty eminent divines, most (if not all) of them members of the late assembly; in their Sermons before the two houses of parliament on solemn occasions. Faithfully collected by a very moderate hand, and humbly presented to the serious consideration of all dissenting parties,” Oxford,! 670. He published a second edition of this book, the same year, with his name, and the pro-vice-chancellor of Oxford’s imprimatur, prefixed to it. 2. “The Cases of Scandal and Persecution being a seasonable inquiry into these two things I. Whether the Nonconformists, who otherwise think subscription lawful, are therefore obliged to forbear it, because the weak brethren do judge it unlawful II. Whether the execution of penal laws upon Dissenters, for non-communion with the Church of England, be persecution Wherein they are pathetically exhorted to return into the bosom of the church, the likeliest expedient to stop the growth of Popery,” London, 1674. 3. “The Royal Apology or, An Answer to the Rebel’s Plea wherein are the most noted anti-monarchical tenets, first published by Doleman the Jesuit, to promote a bill of exclusion against king James I. secondly, practised by Bradshaw, and the regicides, in the actual murder of king Charles I. thirdly, republished by Sidney, and the associates to depose and murder his present majesty,” London, 1685, the second edition. 4. “A seasonable Vindication of their present Majesties,” London. 5. “The Country Parson’s Admonition to his Parishioners against Popery with directions how to behave themselves, when any one designs to seduce them from the Church of England,” London, 1686. 6. “A full Defence of the former Discourse against the Missionaries Answer being a farther examination of the pretended Infallibility of the Chuvch of Rome” or, as it is intitled in the first impression, “A Defence of the Plain Man’s Reply to the Catholic Missionaries,” &c. 1688. 7. “A short Discourse against Blasphemy,1691. 8. “A Discourse against Drunkenness,1692. 9. “A Discourse against Swearing and Cursing,1692. 10. “Directions in order to the suppressing of Debauchery and Proprmneness,1693. 11. “A Conference with an Anabaptist; Part I. Concerning the subject of Baptism: being a Defence of Infant-Baptism,” 1694. It was occasioned by a separate congregation of Anabaptists being set up in Dr. Assheton’s parish but the meeting soon breaking up, the author never published a second part. 12. “A Discourse concerning a Death-bed Repentance.” 13. “A Theological Discourse of last Wills and Testaments,” London, 1696, 14. “A seasonable Vindication of the blessed Trinity being an answer to this question, Why do you believe the doctrine of the Trinity Collected from the works of the most reverend doctor John Tillotson, late lord archbishop of Canterbury, and the right reverend doctor Edward Stillingfleet, now lord bishop of Worcester,” London, 1679. 15. “A brief state of the Socinian Controversy, concerning a Trinity in Unity” collected from the Works of Dr, Isaac Barrow, London, 1698. 16. “The Plain Man’s Devotion, Part I. In a method of daily Devotion and, a method of Devotion for the Lord’s Day. Both fitted to the meanest capacities,1698. 17. “A full Account of the rise, progress, and advantages of Dr. Assheton’s Proposal (as now improved and managed by the worshipful company of Mercers, London,) for che benefit of Widows of Clergymen, and others, by settled Jointures and Annuities, at the rate of thirty per cent. With directions for the widow how to receive her annuity, without any delay, charges, or deductions. ‘ Plead for the widow,’ Isa. i. 17. 1713. 18.” A Vindication of the Immortality of the Soul, and a Future State,“London, 1703. 19.” A brief exhortation to the Holy Communion, with the nature and measures of Preparation concerning it fitted to the meanest capacities,“1705. 20.” A Method of Devotion for sick and dying persons with particular directions from the beginning of Sickness to the hour of Death,“London, 1706. 21.” The Possibility of Apparitions being an answer to this question ‘ Whether can departed souls (souls separated from their bodies) so appear, as to be visibly seen, and converse here on earth’ This book was occasioned by the remarkable story of one dying at Dover, and appearing to her friend at Canterbury. 22. “Occasional Prayers from bishop Taylor, bishop Cosins, bishop Kenn,” &c. and “A devout collection of Divine Hymns and Poems, on several occasions,” London, 1708. 23. “A seasonable Vindication of the Clergy being an answer to some reflections in a late book, entitled The Rights of the Christian Church asserted, &c. Humbly submitted to the serious consideration of the nobility and gentry of Great Britain. By a Divine of the Church of London,” 1709. 24. “Directions for the Conversation of the Clergy collected from the Visitation Charges of the. right reverend father in God, Edward Stillingfleet, D. D. late lord bishop of Worcester,” London, 1710. 25. "Two Sermons one preached before the Sons of the Clergy, at St. Paul’s, December 6, 1699 the other before the Honourable Society of the Natives of the County of KenVat St. Mary le Bow, Nov. 21, 1700. Mr. Wood mentions another Sermon on the Danger of Hypocrisy, preached at Guildhall chapel, Aug. 3, 1673.

n of Csesar Nostradamus and having set up for a quack, he succeeded in restoring to health a patient who fancied himself sick. The people of Calais, thinking that he

called the Ape of Scarron, was born at Paris in 1604, the son of an avocat of parleinent. At eight years old he ran away from his father’s house, stopped at Calais, where he gave himself out for the son of Csesar Nostradamus and having set up for a quack, he succeeded in restoring to health a patient who fancied himself sick. The people of Calais, thinking that he derived his medical skill from magic, were upon the point of throwing him into the sea, and it was with difficulty that he saved himself from their fury by flight. After many more adventures at London, at Turin, and in various other places, he came to Montpellier, where some irregular amours drew upon him the notice of the magistrate. He then strolled about from one country to another, and at length arrived at Rome, where his satires upon the court procured him to be imprisoned in the inquisition. Being returned to France, he was sent to the Bastille and afterwards was conducted to the Chatelet for the same crime for which he had been arrested at Montpellier. But, finding protectors, he was liberated at the end of six months. He died in 1679. His poetry was collected into three vols. 12mo, 1678. Among these pieces is a part of the Metamorphoses of Ovid translated, under the title of “Ovid in good humour.” It is a burlesque version, in which, as in all works of that nature, there are a thousand instances of dullness, and a thousand ruore of indecency, for one lively and ingenious turn of wit. We find also the rape of Proserpine, from Claudian, whom he makes harangue in the manner of declaimers. Assouci published also his adventures in a style of buffoonery, 3 vols. 12 mo, 1678. Upon the whole he appears to have been one of those writers that may be passed over with very slight notice, a man, with some talent for humour, but destitute of principle.

daughter of Mr. Astell, a merchant at Newcastle-uponTyne, where she was born about 1668. Her uncle, who was a clergyman, having discovered her superior capacity, generously

, a learned and ingenious lady, was the daughter of Mr. Astell, a merchant at Newcastle-uponTyne, where she was born about 1668. Her uncle, who was a clergyman, having discovered her superior capacity, generously undertook to be her preceptor and, under his tuition, she learned Italian and French, and made a considerable progress in logic, philosophy, and the mathematics. At the age of twenty, she left Newcastle and went to London, where, and at Chelsea, she spent the remaining part of her life. Here she assiduously prosecuted her studies, and acquired very considerable attainments in all the branches of polite literature. When the Rev. John Morris published his “Practical Discourses upon divine subjects,” several excellent letters passed between him and Mrs. Astell upon the love of God, which, at the request of Mr. Morris, she suffered him to publish in 1695, without her name, a precaution which their merit rendered useless. Having often observed and lamented the defects in the education of her sex, which, she said, were the principal causes of their running into so many follies and improprieties, she published in 1696, an ingenious treatise, entitled, “A serious Proposal to the Ladies, for the advancement of their true and greatest interest,” &c. and, some time after, a second part, under the same title, with this addition “wherein a Method is offered for the Improvement of their Minds.” Both these performances were published together in 1696, and had, in some measure, the desired effect. The scheme, indeed, in her proposal, seemed so rational, that a certain opulent lady, supposed to be the queen, intended to have given 10,000l. towards the erecting a sort of college for the education and improvement of the female sex and as a retreat to those ladies who preferred retirement and study to the noise and hurry of the world. Bishop Burnet, hearing of the design, went to the lady, and powerfully remonstrated against it, telling her it would look like paving the way for popish orders, and that it would be reputed a nunnery; in consequence of which the design was relinquished. About seven years after, she printed “An Essay in Defence of the Female Sex. In a Letter to a Lady. Written by a Lady.” These publications did not prevent her from being as intent on her studies as ever and when, she accidentally saw needless visitors coming, whom she knew to be incapable of conversing on useful subjects, instead of ordering herself to be denied, she used to look out at the window, and jestingly tell them, “Mrs. Astell was not at home.” In the course of her studies she became intimately acquainted with many classic authors. Those she admired most were Xenophon, Plato, Hierocles, Tully, Seneca, Epictetus, and M. Antoninus. In 1700, she published a book entitled “Reflections-on Marriage,” occasioned, as it is said, by a disappointment she experienced in a marriage-contract with an eminent clergyman. However that might be, in the next edition of her book, 1705, she added a preface, in answer to some objections, which perhaps is the strongest defence that ever appeared in print, of the rights and abilities of her own sex.

stimony to the merit of her works, as Hickes, Walker, Norris, Dodwell, Evelyn, and bishop Atterbury, who praises her controversial powers, but with a hint that a little

When Dr. D' Avenant published his “Moderation a Virtue,” and his “Essay on Peace and War,” she answered him in 1704, in a tract entitled “Moderation truly stated.” The same year D' Avenant published a new edition of his works, with remarks on hers, to which she immediately replied in a postscript, and although without her name, she was soon discovered, and distinguished with public approbation. Some eminent men of the time bear testimony to the merit of her works, as Hickes, Walker, Norris, Dodwell, Evelyn, and bishop Atterbury, who praises her controversial powers, but with a hint that a little more urbanity of manner would not have weakened her arguments. Among her other works was “An impartial Inquiry into the Causes of Rebellion and Civil Wars in this kingdom, in an examination of Dr. Rennet’s Sermon, Jan. 30, 1703-4.” “A fair way with Dissenters and their Patrons, not writ by Mr. Lindsay, or any other furious jacobite, whether a clergyman or a layman but by a very moderate person and dutiful subject of the queen,1704. “The Christian Religion, as practised by a daughter of the Church of England,1705. This was suspected to be the work of Atterbury. “Six familiar Essays upon Marriage, Crosses in Love, and Friendship,1706. “Bart'lemy Fair, or an Inquiry after Wit,1700, occasioned by colonel Hunter’s celebrated Letter on Enthusiasm. It was republished in 1722, without the words * Bart‘lemy Fair.’ Although living and conversing with the fashionable world, she led a pious life, generally calm and serene, and her deportment and conversation were highly entertaining and social. She used to say, the good Christian only has reason, and he always ought to be cheerful and that dejected looks and melancholy airs were very unseemly in a Christian. But though she was easy and affable to others, she was severe towards herself. She was abstemious in a very great degree frequently living many days together on bread and water and at other times, when at home, rarely eat any dinner till night, and then sparingly. She would frequently say, abstinence was her best physic and that those who indulge themselves in eating and drinking, could not be so well disposed or prepared, either for study, or the regular and devout service of their Creator.

, an Arian writer, in the fourth century, was a sophist of Cappadocia, who forsook Gentilism, and embraced Christianity. He afterwards

, an Arian writer, in the fourth century, was a sophist of Cappadocia, who forsook Gentilism, and embraced Christianity. He afterwards published some works in favour of Arianism, which were extant in the time of Socrates, the ecclesiastical historian, who also informs us that Asterius, although he was very much with the Arian bishops, was refused admission into their order, because he had once sacrificed to the heathen gods. This lapse of Asterius is supposed to have happened about the year 304, and probably in Maximian’s persecution. Jerom says he wrote commentaries on the epistle to the Romans, and upon the gospels, psalms, &c. which were much read by the men of his party. None of these remain, however, unless as quoted by Eusebius, and Athanasius, who calls him “a cunning sophist, and a patron of heresy.

same name, resident at, and lords of the manor of Fauld in Staffordshire. His father, Daniel Astle, who was keeper of Needwood forest, died in 1774, and was buried

, an eminent English antiquary, was descended from an ancient family of the same name, resident at, and lords of the manor of Fauld in Staffordshire. His father, Daniel Astle, who was keeper of Needwood forest, died in 1774, and was buried in Yoxal church, where is a neat mural monument erected to his memory. His eldest son, the subject of this article, imbibed an early taste for the study of antiquities, particularly that abstruse and laborious part of it, the decyphering of ancient records, in which the profession of an attorney, to which he was brought up at Yoxal, gave him an opportunity of excelling, far beyond any of his contemporaries. His father was about to fix him in a good country situation, to practise in the profession he had so aptly learnt; but his genius and enthusiasm, fortunately for himself and the public at large, frustrated that design, and induced him to come to London, where alone his taste could be indulged and his talents rewarded. About 1763, he obtained the patronage of Mr. Grenville, then first lord of the treasury and chancellor of the exchequer, who employed him as well in his public as private affairs, and joined him in a commission with the late sir Joseph Ayloffe, bart. and Dr. Ducarel, for superintending the regulation of the public records at Westminster. On the death of his colleague, Mr. Topham was substituted, and both were removed by Mr. Pitt during his administration". Previously, however, to this, if we mistake not, he had enjoyed the patronage of lord Townshend, and soon after he was introduced to the rev. Philip Morant, author of the History of Essex, a gentleman of good property in that country, whose daughter and heiress he soon after married, and by that means, at her father’s death, possessed his estate.

catalogue of the charters preserved in the same library,“which was communicated by him to S. Hooper, who published them in 1777, 8vo.” The Origin and Progress of Writing,

In 1765, he was appointed receiver-general of sixpence in the pound on the civil list. In 1766 he was consulted by the committee of the House of Lords, concerning the printing of the ancient records of parliament. To the superintendance of this work he introduced his father-in-law Mr. Morant; and on his death in 1770, was himself appointed by the House of Lords to carry on the work, a service in which he was employed till its completion five years afterwards. He was then appointed, on the death of Henry Rooke, esq. his majesty’s chief clerk in the record-office in the Tower of London and on the decease of sir John Shelly, he succeeded to the office of keeper of the records. He likewise became a member of the Royal and Antiquary societies, and of several learned bodies on the continent, and was one of the trustees of the British Museum. Of the Antiquary Society, he was long a useful and distinguished member, and contributed several valuable articles to the Archaeologia, in vols. IV. VII. XI XII. and XIII. He published also The Will of king Henry VII.“1775, 4 to.” A Catalogue of the Mss. in the Cottonian Library to which are added, many emendations and additions with an appendix, containing an account of the damage sustained by the fire in 1731 and also a catalogue of the charters preserved in the same library,“which was communicated by him to S. Hooper, who published them in 1777, 8vo.” The Origin and Progress of Writing, as well hieroglyphic as elementary illustrated by engravings taken frem, marbles, Mss. and charters, ancient and modern also, some account of the origin and progress of Printing, 1784,“4to. A new edition was published in 1803, with one additional plate from a ms. in the British Museum, marked Nero, D. IV.; and a portrait of Mr. A. painted by Howard, and engraved by Shelton, in which the accidental loss of an eye when at school is concealed. ”The Will of king Alfred,“found in a register of Newminster, Winchester, in the possession of the rev. George North, and given by Dr. Lort, his executor, to Mr. Astle, 1769, was printed at Oxford, with the illustrations of Mr, Manning, under the superintendance of sir H. Croft, 1788, 4to.” An account of the Seals of the King’s Royal Burghs and Magnates of Scotland, with five plates, 1793," foJ. The Calendar to the Patent Rolls in the Tower of London, reaching from 3 John to 23 Edward IV. containing grants of offices and lands, restitutions of temporalities to bishops, abbots, and other ecclesiastical persons confirmations of grants made to bodies corporate, as well ecclesiastical as civil ‘, grants in fee farm special licences grants of offices special and general patents of creations of peers; and licences of all kinds which pass the great seal and on the backs of these rolls are commissions to justices of the peace, of sewers, and all commissions which pass the great seal. The Calendar of these Rolls, published by his Majesty’s command, in pursuance of an address of the House of Commons, on the report of the Commissioners for inquiring into the state of the Public Records, is printed from four ms volumes procured, in 1775, by Mr. Astle, for public use, from the executors of Henry Rooke, esq. his predecessor in the office of keeper of the Tower records, collated with two Mss. in the Cottonian library, marked Titus C. II. and III. which appear to have been compiled in the reign of James I. by some experienced clerk, who seems to have selected from the records themselves what appeared to him most useful and interesting. They supply many omissions and deficiencies in the Tower copy and, after all, this Calendar, though entitled to great merit, is only a selection, various entries appearing on the Patent Rolls not entered here and therefore, though this work will be found to yield abundant information, no one is to be deterred from an examination of any record mentioned elsewhere as being on the Patent Roll because it is not mentioned here. Mr. A’s report on the state of the records under his care will be found in the report of the Committee abovementioned.

n terms to the marquis of Buckingham and on his declining the purchase, to the British Museum. Those who know the value of the latter national repository will wish he

By the direction of his will, his library was to be sold by public auction but it was purchased by the Royal Institution for iOOOl. His manuscripts were to be offered on certain terms to the marquis of Buckingham and on his declining the purchase, to the British Museum. Those who know the value of the latter national repository will wish he had bequeathed them unconditionally. It was here he first obtained employment in the preparation of the Harleian catalogue of Mss. and he had long enjoyed the honour of being one of the trustees. Mr. Astle was, however, a valuable contributor to the history and antiquities of his country, and very liberal in giving assistance to gentlemen employed in any species of historical investigation. His principal work is his “Origin and Progress of Writing,” some very acute remarks on which may be seen in the Monthly Review for October, 1784. His “Preface and Index to the Catalogue of the Harleian Collection of Mss.” was published in 1763.

, an officer of note in king Charles I-.'s army, was son of sir Arthur Aston of Fulham in Middlesex, who was the second son of sir Thomas Aston, of Aston, of Bucklow-hundred

, an officer of note in king Charles I-.'s army, was son of sir Arthur Aston of Fulham in Middlesex, who was the second son of sir Thomas Aston, of Aston, of Bucklow-hundred in Cheshire; “an ancient and knightly family of that county.” He was a great traveller, and made several campaigns in foreign countries. Being returned into England about the beginning of the grand rebellion, with as many soldiers of note as he could bring with him, he took part with the king against the parliament. He commanded the dragoons in the battle of Edge- hill, and with them did his majesty considerable service. The king, having a great opinion of his valour and conduct, made him governor of the garrison of Reading in Berkshire, and commissary-general of the horse in which post he three times repulsed the earl of Essex, who, at the head of the parliament army, laid siege to that place. But sir Arthur being dangerously wounded, the command was devolved on colonel Richard Fielding, the eldest colonel in the garrison. Sir Arthur was suspected of taking this opportunity to get rid of a dangerous command. Some time after, he was appointed governor of the garrison of Oxford, in the room of sir William Pennyman deceased. In September following, he had the misfortune to break his leg by a fall from his horse, and was obliged to have it cut off, and on the twenty-fifth of December, he was discharged from his command, which was conferred on colonel Gage. After the king’s death, sir Arthur was employed in the service of king Charles IL and went with the flower of the English veterans into Ireland, where he was appointed, governor of Drogheda, commonly called Tredagk; “at which time (Mr. Wood tells us) he laid an excellent plot to tire and break the English army.” But at length Cromwell having taken the town, about the tenth of August 1649, and put the inhabitants to the sword, sir Arthur the governor was cut to pieces, and his brains beaten out with his wooden-leg. Wood says, that he was created doctor of physic, May 1,

, the name, or assumed name of a person who lived in the ninth century, and wrote “The life of the emperor

, the name, or assumed name of a person who lived in the ninth century, and wrote “The life of the emperor Lewis le Debonnaire,” at whose court he is supposed to have enjoyed some office. He is said to have had many conferences with that prince on astronomical s’ubjects. The life was written in Latin, and has been translated into French by the president Cousin. The original is in Du Chesne’s Collection of Historians.

a very celebrated French physiciaiTj was born in 1684, at Sauve in the diocese of Alais. His father, who was a Protestant clergyman, bestowed great pains upon his early

, a very celebrated French physiciaiTj was born in 1684, at Sauve in the diocese of Alais. His father, who was a Protestant clergyman, bestowed great pains upon his early education, after which he was sent to the university of Montpelier, where he was created M. A, in 1700. He then began the study of medicine; and in two years obtained the degree of bachelor^ having upon that occasion written a dissertation on the cause of fermentation, which he defended in a very able manner. On Jan. 25, 1703, he was created doctor of physic, after which, before arriving at extensive practice, he applied to the study of medical authors, both ancient and modern, with uncommon assiduity. The good effects of this study soon appeared; for in 1710 he published a treatise concerning muscular motion, from which he acquired very high reputation. In 1717 he was appointed to teach medicine at Montpelier, which he did with such perspicuity and eloquence that his fame soon rose to a very great height; the king assigned him an annual salary, and he was at the same time appointed to superintend the mineral waters in the province of Languedoc. But as Montpelier did not afford sufficient scope for one of his celebrity, he went to Paris with a great numher of manuscripts, which he designed for the press. Soon afterwards, however, he left it, having in 1729 accepted the office of first physician to the king of Poland, which was then offered to him; but here his stay was very short, as he disliked the ceremonious restraint of a court. He again therefore returned to Paris, and upon the death of the celebrated Geoffroy, in 1731, he was appointed regins professor. The duties of this office he discharged in such a manner as toanswer the most sanguine expectations; and he drew, from the other universities to that of Paris, a great concourse of medical students, foreigners as well as natives. At the same time he was not more celebrated as a professor than as a practitioner, and his private character was in all respects truly amiable. He reached a very advanced age, and died May 5, 1766. Of his works, which are very numerous, the following are the principal 1. “Origine de la Peste,1721, 8vo. 2. “De ia Contagion cle la Peste,1724. 8vo. 3. “De Motu Musculari,1710, 12mo. 4. “Memoires pour servir a l'Histoire naturelle cle Languedoc,1737, 4to. 5. “De Morbis Veuereis, libri’sex,1736, 4 to, afterwards enlarged to -t 8vo Vols. and translated into French by Jault, 4 vols. 12mo, “Traitedes maladies desFemmes,1761—1765, 6vols. 12tno. 7. “L'Art crAccoucher reduit a ses principles,1766, 12mo. 8. “Theses de Phantasia,” &c. 9. “De motus Fermentativi causa,1702, 12mo. 10. “Memo ire sur la Digestion,1714, 8vo. 11.“Tractatus Pathologicus,1766, 8vo. Besides these, in 1759 he published “Trait des Tumeurs,” 2 vols. 12mo; and one or two treatises not connected with medicine, one with the singular title of “Conjectures sur les Memoires originaux qui ont servi a Moise pour ecrire la Genese,” Paris, 1753, 12mo, and a dissertation on the immateriality and immortality of the Soul, Paris, 1755. His work on the venereal disease, and those on the diseases of women, and on midwifery, have been translated into English.

here had like to have been sacrificed to the rage of a student belonging to the university of Padua, who having committed a work to his correction, Atanagi adopted it

, a native of Cagli, in the duchy of Urbino, came to Rome in 1532, where he was distinguished for his taste and eloquence; but having a reluctance to any regular profession which might have afforded him an opportunity and means to cultivate literature, he soon fell into extreme poverty. In 1560, however, he became corrector of the press at Venice, and there had like to have been sacrificed to the rage of a student belonging to the university of Padua, who having committed a work to his correction, Atanagi adopted it and published it under his own name. This is theonly incident recorded of this eccentric genius, whom the Italians consider as a very pure writer, and one of their best critics. He published,

t Alexandria, of heathen parents. He was noticed, when very young, by Alexander, bishop of that see, who took care to have him educated in all good learning, and when

, an eminent father of the Christian church, of the fourth century, was born at Alexandria, of heathen parents. He was noticed, when very young, by Alexander, bishop of that see, who took care to have him educated in all good learning, and when of age, ordained him deacon. He took him in his company when he attended the council of Nice, where Athanasius distinguished himself as an able and zealous opposer of the Arians. Soon after the dissolution of the council, Alexander died, and Athanasius was appointed to succeed him in the government of the church of Alexandria. This was in the year 326, when Athanasius is supposed to have been about twenty-eight years of age.

he Nicene faith, by which means they obtained the countenance and favour of the emperor Constantine, who wrote letters to Athanasius, insisting upon his re-admitting

Arius and some of the principal of his followers renounced their opinions, and subscribed to the Nicene faith, by which means they obtained the countenance and favour of the emperor Constantine, who wrote letters to Athanasius, insisting upon his re-admitting Arius into the church, and receiving him into communion but this he peremptorily and inflexibly refused to do, though urged warmly by sovereign authority, and menaced with the rod of imperial vengeance. While thus he lay under the emperor’s displeasure, his enemies took the opportunity of bringing against him many grievous accusations, which, however, appeared in the end to be false and groundless. Among others, they charged him with threatening that he would take care no corn should be carried from Alexandria to Constantinople and said, that there were four prelates ready to testify that they had heard such words from his own mouth. This so much incensed the emperor, that he exiled him into France though some writers intimate, that this sentence was not the effect of his resentment, but his policy, which indeed is more probable. It was the desire of the emperor to remove all frivolous disputes about words, to allay the heats and animosities among Christians, and to restore peace and unanimity to the church, and perhaps he looked upon Athanasius as a great obstacle to his favourite design, as he could by no means be brought to communicate with the Arians.

When the emperor restored Athanasius, he told him, that there were several people in Alexandria who differed in opinion from him, and separated themselves from

When the emperor restored Athanasius, he told him, that there were several people in Alexandria who differed in opinion from him, and separated themselves from his communion; and he requested of him, that he would permit them to have one church for themselves. The bishop replied, the emperor’s commands should be obeyed; but he humbly presumed to beg one favour in return, viz. that he would be pleased to grant one church in every city for such as did not communicate with the Arians. The proposal was made at the suit, and through the insinuations, of the Arians who, when they heard the reply, and had nothing either reasonable or plausible to object to it, thought proper to desist from their suit, and make no more mention of it. This is one proof among many others, that the Arians had no reason to reproach Athanasius with intolerant principles. At the death of Constans, which happened soon afterwards, he was again deposed, ana Constantius gave orders that he should be executed wherever he was taken. He was re-instated by Julian; but, before the end of that apostate’s reign, was again obliged to have recourse to flight for safety. When orthodoxy found a patron in Jorian, and the Nicene creed became again the standard of catholic faith, Athanasius recovered his credit and his see, which he enjoyed unmolested in the time of Valentinian and even Valens, that furious and persecuting Avian, thought it expedient to let him exercise his function unmolested, because he found there was a great multitude of people in Egypt and Alexandria, who were determined to live and die with Athanasius. He died in peace and tranquillity in the year 373, after having been bishop forty-six years. His works were published in Greek and Latin, at Heidelberg, 1601; at Paris, 1627; at Cologne, 1686; but the best edition is that given by Montfaucon, at Paris, 1698, in 3 vols. folio. There has been a reprint of this, however, at Padua, in 1777, 4 vols, folio, which some prefer as being more complete and more elegantly printed.

no question but that it is to be ascribed to a Latin author, Vigilius Tapsensis, an African bishop, who lived in the latter end of the fifth century, in the time of

Photius greatly extols Athanasius as an elegant, clear, and excellent writer. It is controverted among learned men, whether Athanasius composed the creed commonly received under his name. Baronius is of opinion that it was composed by Athanasius when he was at Rome, and offered to pope Julius as a confession of his faith which circumstance is not at all likely, for Julius never questioned his faith. However, a great many learned men have ascribed it to Athanasius as cardinal Bona, Petavius, Bellarmine, and Rivet, with many others of both communions. Scultetus leaves the matter in doubt; but the best and latest critics- make no question but that it is to be ascribed to a Latin author, Vigilius Tapsensis, an African bishop, who lived in the latter end of the fifth century, in the time of the Vandalic Arian persecution. Vossius and Quesnel have written particular dissertations in favour of this opinion. Their arguments are, 1. Because this creed is wanting in almost all the manuscripts of Athanasius’ s works. 2. Because the style and contexture of it do not bespeak a Greek but a Latin author. 3. Because neither Cyril of Alexandria, nor the council of E^phesus, nor pope Leo, nor the council of Chalcedon, have ever mentioned it in all that they say against the Nestorians or Eutychians. 4. Because this Vigilms Tapsensis is known to have published others of his writings under the borrowed name of Athanasius, with which this creed is commonly joined. These reasons have persuaded Pearson, Usher, Cave, and Dupin, critics of the first rank, to come into the opinion, that this creed was not composed by Athanasius, but by a later and a Latin writer.

, or Adelard, was a learned monk of Bath in England, who flourished about 1150, as appears by some manuscripts of his

, or Adelard, was a learned monk of Bath in England, who flourished about 1150, as appears by some manuscripts of his in the libraries of Corpus Christi and Trinity colleges, Oxford. Vossius says, he was universally learned in all the sciences of his time, and that, to increase his knowledge, he travelled into France, Germany, Italy, Spain, Egypt, and Arabia. He wrote many books himself, and translated others from different languages among the latter, he translated from Arabic into Latin, Euclid’s Elements, at a time before any Greek copies had been discovered, and “Erichiafarim” upon the seven planets. He wrote a treatise on the several liberal arts, another on the astrolobe, another on the causes of natural compositions, besides several on physics and on medicine. Some manuscripts of his referred to by Vossius remain in the colleges in Oxford as in Oriel, “De decisionibus naturalibns,” and “De philosophia Danielis,” in Corpus Christi,

ly observes, it is probable that this author is more valued by us than he was by his contemporaries, who could consult the originals from which these facts and quotations

, a Greek grammarian, born at Naucratis in Egypt, flourished in the third century. He was one of the most learned men in his time, and had read so much, and had such an uncommon memory, that he might be styled the Varro of the Greeks. Of all his writings none remain but the work entitled “The Deipnosophists,” or, the Sophists discoursing at Table. Here an infinite variety of facts and quotations are preserved, which are to be met with no where else and hence, as Bayle truly observes, it is probable that this author is more valued by us than he was by his contemporaries, who could consult the originals from which these facts and quotations were taken. Athenaeus is supposed to have been injured by transcribers the omissions, transpositions, and false readings in him being extremely numerous. The work consists of fifteen books, the two, first and beginning of the third of which are wanting, but, with many hiatuses in the rest, have been supplied from an abridgment which is extant. It was first printed in 1514, by Aldus Manutius, Venice, folio, and reprinted under the inspection of Casaubon, Leyden, 1600, folio. The last edition is that of Shweighaeuser, Strasburgh, 1801—1807, 14 vols. 8vo, which Mr. Dibdin has copiously described, and highly praised. The French critics, and perhaps others, have, however, objected that this editor was not sufficiently versed in the rules of Greek versification, and that he neglected to consult some modern critics, in whose works he might have found many passages of Athenaeus corrected.

the most famous of those philosophers, the Father of the Pneumatic sect; but Athenaeus was the first who applied it to physic. He thought that, in the greatest part

, a physician, born at Attalia, a city of Cilicia, was contemporary with Pliny, in the first century, and was the founder of the Pneumatic sect. His doctrine was, that the fire, air, water, and earth, are not the true elements, as is generally supposed, but that their qualities are so, namely, heat, cold, moisture, and dryness. To these he added a fifth element, which he called spirit ('Evsufta.) whence hisisect had its name. He thought that this spirit penetrated all bodies, and kept them in their natural state this he borrowed from the Stoics, whence Galen calls Chrysippus, one of the most famous of those philosophers, the Father of the Pneumatic sect; but Athenaeus was the first who applied it to physic. He thought that, in the greatest part of diseases, this spirit was the first that suffered and that the pulse was only a motion caused by the natural and involuntary dilatation of the heat in the arteries and heart. We have but very little of this famous author remaining, and must look for a further account of the doctrines of his sect In the writings of Aretseus.

, an Athenian philosopher, who became a convert to Christianity. He was remarkable for his

, an Athenian philosopher, who became a convert to Christianity. He was remarkable for his zeal, and also for his great learning, as appears from the Apology which he addressed to the emperors Aurelius and Commodus, about the year 180. Bayle thinks that this Apology was not actually presented, but only published. Besides the Apology, there is also remaining of Athenagoras, a piece upon the Resurrection, both written in a style truly Attic. They have been printed often, but the best edition is that of Dechair, Gr. and Lat. Oxon. 1706, 8vo. His works are also to be found in the Bibliotheca Patrum. Dr. Waterland gives an account of him in his “Importance of the doctrine of the Trinity,” which, Athenagoras held. In 1599, a romance, pretendedly translated from Athenagoras, was printed at Paris by Daniel Guillemot in 1612, with the following title: “Du vrai et parfait Amour, escrit en Grec par Athenagoras, philosophe Athenien, contenant les Amours honestes de Theogone et de Charide, de Pherecides et de Melangenie” i. t. “Of true and perfect Love, written in Greek by Athenagoras, an Athenian philosopher; containing the chaste loves of Theogonus and Charidea, of Pherecides and Melangenia.” Martin Fumee, lord of Genille, had made this translation, and sent it, in 1569, to Mr. de Larnane, secretary to cardinal d'Armagnac. It was found in the papers of Bernard de San- Jorry, who published it in 1612. Huetius speaks very largely of this book, and conjectures that Philander was the real author of it. He tells us that this Fumee boasted that he had the original Greek by means of Lamane, protonotary to cardinal d'Armagnac. There is no doubt, however, that it was not the production of Athenagoras but Cave, from whom we borrow the preceding account, does not appear to have seen the first edition, which was published at Paris, 1599.

ith Cato till his death, which happened about fifty before the Christian era. He is perhaps the same who is mentioned by Diogenes Laertius, in the life of Zeno Citticus.

, a Stoic philosopher, was probably of Pergamus, where he lived till he was very much advanced in years. He constantly refused to accept the favours which kings and generals would have bestowed upon him. Cato the younger, being in Asia at the head of an army, and knowing the merit of this eminent character, was very desirous of having him with him; but thinking that a letter would not prevail upon him to leave his retirement, he resolved to go himself to Pergamus, and by his intreaties and prayeVs he prevailed upon Athenodo, rus to follow him to the camp, whither he returned in a triumphant manner, being more remarkable for his new acquisition than Lucullus or Pompey could be for the conquests they had made. Athenodorus continued with Cato till his death, which happened about fifty before the Christian era. He is perhaps the same who is mentioned by Diogenes Laertius, in the life of Zeno Citticus.

his office, procured him much veneration and respect from all persons, especially from his ordinary, who conferred upon him the dignity of Moderator of the presbytery.

, bishop of Galloway in Scotland, was the son of Henry Atkins, sheriff and commissary of Orkney, and was born in the town of Kirkwall, in the stewartry of Orkney. He was educated in the college of Edinburgh, where he commenced M, A. and from thence went to Oxford in 1637-8, to finish his studies Under the tuition of Dr. Prideaux, the regius professor of divinity. Soon after he was appointed chaplain to James marquis of Hamilton, his majesty’s high-commissioner for Scotland, in which station he acquitted himself so well, that, by the application of his noble patron upon his return to England, he obtained from the king a presentation to the church of Birsa, in the stewartry of Orkney. Here he continued some years, and his prudence, diligence, and faithfulness in the discharge of his office, procured him much veneration and respect from all persons, especially from his ordinary, who conferred upon him the dignity of Moderator of the presbytery. In the beginning of 1650, when James marquis of Montrosc landed in Orkney, Dr. Atkins was nominated by the unanimous votes of the said presbytery, to draw up a declaration in their names, containing the strongest expressions of loyalty and allegiance to king Charles II., for which the whole presbytery being deposed by the assembly of the kirk at that time sitting at Edinburgh, Dr. Atkins was likewise excommunicated as one who held a correspondence with the said marquis. At the same time the council passed an act for the apprehending and bringing him to his trial but upon private notice from his kinsman sir Archibald Primrose, then clerk of the council, he fled into Holland, where he lay concealed till 1653, and then returning into Scotland, he settled with his family at Edinburgh, quietly and obscurely, till 1660. Upon the restoration of the king, he accompanied Dr. Thomas Sydserf, bishop of Galloway (the only Scotch bishop who survived the calamities of the usurpation) to London, where the bishop of Winchester presented him to the rectory of Winfrith in Dorsetshire. In 1677, he was elected and consecrated bishop of Murray in Scotland, to the great joy of the episcopal party; and, in 1680, he was translated to the see of Galloway, with a dispensation to reside at Edinburgh, on account of his age, and the disaffection of the people to episcopacy. At this distance, however, he continued to govern his diocese seven years, and died at Edinburgh of an apoplexy, October 28th, 1687, aged seventy -four years. His body was decently interred in the church of the Grey-friars^ and his death was extremely regretted by all good and pious men.

"I wish with all my soul, and I humbly and heartily pray to almighty God, that these gentlemen who have given so great proof of their love to the true religion,

"I wish with all my soul, and I humbly and heartily pray to almighty God, that these gentlemen who have given so great proof of their love to the true religion, and of the just rights and liberties of their country, and of their zeal against popery, may upon their trial appear innocent. I am so satisfied of their great worth, that I cannot easily believe them guilty of so horrid a crime. I pray God stand by them in the time of their distress. I wish I might have the liberty fairly to give them what assistance I could in that wherein I might be any way capable of doing it. I beseech almighty God to heal our divisions, and establish us upon the sure foundation of peace and righteousness. I thank you for the favour you have done me by imparting some public affairs, which might perhaps have been unknown to me, or not known till after a long time, for I keep no correspondence. When there is any occasion, pray oblige me by a farther account, especially what concerns these gentlemen and though I have written nothing here but what is innocent and justifiable, yet that J may be the surer against any disadvantage or misconstruction, pray take the pains to transcribe what notes you think fit, out of this large paper, but send me this paper back again, inclosed in another, by the same hand that brings it.

. Secondly^ that., however, that which was done in this case was not to be imputed to the defendant, who acted in it but as a servant or minister of the parliament,

In 1684 he appears to have given a fresh proof of his deep learning, in the case between the king and sir William Williams. An information was exhibited against William Williams, esq. late speaker of the House of Commons, for endeavouring to stir up sedition, and procure ill-will between the king and his subjects, by appointing a certain seditious and infamous libel, entitled “The information of Thomas Dangerfield,” to be printed and published. The defendant pleaded to the jurisdiction of the court, setting forth that he was speaker of the House of Commons, and that, in obedience to their order, he had appointed that narrative to be printed; wherefore he demanded the judgment of the court of king’s bench, whether it ought to take farther cognizance of the matter. Sir Robert Atkyns undertakes, in his argument in support of this plea, to prove three propositions First, that what was. done in this case was done in a course of justice, and that in the highest court of the nation, and according to the law and custom of parliament. Secondly^ that., however, that which was done in this case was not to be imputed to the defendant, who acted in it but as a servant or minister of the parliament, though in a very honourable station. Thirdly, that these, being matters transacted in parliament, and by the parliament, the court of king’s bench ought not to take cognizance of them, nor had any jurisdiction to judge or determine them.

hich sir Robert zealously promoted, he was received with great marks of distinction by king William, who, in May 1689, made him lord chief baron of the exchequer. In

At the revolution, which sir Robert zealously promoted, he was received with great marks of distinction by king William, who, in May 1689, made him lord chief baron of the exchequer. In October following, the marquis of Halifax, whom the Lords had chosen for their speaker, desiring to be excused from discharging that office any longer, the lord chief baron Atkyns was immediately elected in his room, and was speaker till the great seal was given to sir John Sommers, in the beginning of 1693.

by his command and particular good providence. So the death of Julian the apostate heathen emperor, who was killed in his wars in Persia, was known in the very moment

"It is a vulgar error that hath obtained among some of us, that these wicked spirits are now confined under chains of darkness in the place of torment. I remember that expression of some of them to our Saviour, Art thou come to torment us before the time It was not then the time of their being tormented it is rather to'be believed that they are wandering about in the air, and there fleeting to and fro, driving on such wicked purposes as this our enemy is engaged in. We know grave and serious historians give us instances of correspondences held both by good and bad spirits here the wicked by God’s permission, the good by his command and particular good providence. So the death of Julian the apostate heathen emperor, who was killed in his wars in Persia, was known in the very moment of it at the city of Rome, at a great distance from the place of battle, to the no little joy of the Christians. And this, I suppose, was by the ministry of a good angel.

its rise from an intention of the same sort in Dr. Parsons, chancellor of the diocese of Gloucester, who had been at great pains and trouble to collect the materials

, son of the preceding, by Anne, daughter of sir Thomas Dacres of Hertfordshire, was born in 1646, and educated with great care under the eye of his father. He became early attached to the study of antiquities, and as he had a very considerable estate settled upon him, he lived chiefly upon it, pursuing his studies and exercising old English hospitality. He was elected to represent his county in parliament as often as he chose to accept that honour, and his knowledge and integrity induced many of his neighbours to make him the arbitrator of their differences, which he readily undertook, and generally executed to the satisfaction of both parties. He married Louisa, daughter to sir John Carteret, of Hawnes in Bedfordshire but having by her no issue male, his father settled his estate on the male issue of sir Edward Atkyns, which settlement was the unfortunate cause of a law-suit between the father and son. Sir Robert differed in other respects from his father’s opinions, being more attached to the house of Stuart, yet he inherited both his prudence and his probity, and was equally esteemed and beloved by men of all parties. His design of writing “The History of Gloucestershire,” took its rise from an intention of the same sort in Dr. Parsons, chancellor of the diocese of Gloucester, who had been at great pains and trouble to collect the materials for such a work, in the compiling of which he was hindered by the infirm and declining state of his health. Sir Robert, however, did not live to see it published, which was done by his executors. It appeared in 1712, in one volume folio. It was very expensive to the undertaker, who printed it in a pompous manner, adorning it with variety of views and prospects of the seats of the gentry and nobility, with their arms and he has inserted some, which, in Mr. Gough’s opinion, very little deserve it. It were to be wished, says the same excellent antiquary, that more authorities had been given, and the charters and grants published in the original language. The transcripts of all these were collected by Parsons. The price of this work, which was five guineas, has been greatly raised by an accidental fire, Jan. 30, 1712-13, which destroyed most of the copies in the house of Mr. Bowyer, printer, in White Fryars. All the plates, except two or three, falling into the hands of Mr. Herbert, engraver of charts, he caused the lost ones to he supplied, and republished this book in 1768, correcting the literal errors, but without so much as restoring in their proper place several particulars pointed out in the original errata. Great part of this second edition was also destroyed by fire.

the close of his life, he renounced the world, and was made a convert to piety by the abbe Gautier, who was afterwards the confessor of Voltaire. The Parisian wits

, a French poet, was born at Paris in 1697, educated for the church, and made a canon of Rheims. He passed his iife, however, in Paris, keeping all sorts of company, good and bad, and rendering himself universally agreeable by his impromptus, his songs, and madrigals, some of which were of the satirical kind, and occasionally involved him in quarrels. Towards the close of his life, he renounced the world, and was made a convert to piety by the abbe Gautier, who was afterwards the confessor of Voltaire. The Parisian wits observed that such an attempt was worthy of Gautier, as he was chaplain to the hospital of incurables. The abbe Attaignant died at Paris Jan. 10, 1779. He published

1. “Pieces derobées a un ami,” 1750, 2 vols. 12mo, published by Meunier de Querlon, who dedicated them to the author himself. All the pieces which form

1. “Pieces derobées a un ami,1750, 2 vols. 12mo, published by Meunier de Querlon, who dedicated them to the author himself. All the pieces which form this collection were reprinted in his next publication. 2. “Poesies de l'abbé de FAttaignant,174*7, 4 vols. 12mo. In 1779 a fifth volume appeared under the title of “Chansons et poesies fugitives deFabbe” de FAttaignant.“S.” Epitre a M. L. P. sur ma retraite,“1769, 8vo. 4. tc Reflexions nocturnes,” 1679, 8vo. It would appear that this abbe lost the reputation he gained as an extempore composer and singer, by turning author, his countrymen being of opinion that very few of his printed works will bear the test of criticism.

31. He was the son of Francis Atterbury, rector of Middleton Malser, or Milton, in Northamptonshire, who among other ministers subscribed the solemn league and covenant

, born about the year 1631. He was the son of Francis Atterbury, rector of Middleton Malser, or Milton, in Northamptonshire, who among other ministers subscribed the solemn league and covenant in 1648. He was entered a student of Christ-church, Oxford, 1647, toofc the degree of B. A. Feb. 23, 1649, and was created M. A. by dispensation from Oliver Cromwell the chancellor, March I, 1651. He was one of those who had submitted to the authority of the visitors appointed by the parliament. In 1654 he became rector of Great or Broad Rissington, in Gloucestershire and after the restoration, took a presentation for that benefice under the great seal, and was instituted again to confirm his title to it. Sept. 11, 1657, he was admitted rector of Milton, or MiddletonKeynes, in Bucks; and at the return of Charles II. took the same prudent method to corroborate his title to this living. July 25, 1660, he was made chaplain extraordinary to Henry duke of Gloucester; and D. D. Dec. 1, the same year. Returning from Condon, whither the law-suits he was frequently involved in had brought him, he had the jnisfortune to be drowned near his own house, Dec. 7,1693. He published three occasional Sermons, entitled “The good old Subject or the right Test of Religion and Loyalty,” London, 1684, 4to. “The Ground of Christian Feasts,1686, 4to, and “Babylon’s Downfall,1691, 4to, ibid.

his marriage he settled at Highgate, where he supplied the pulpit of the reverend Mr. Daniel Lathom, who was very old and infirm, and had lost his sight and, upon the

, eldest son of the preceding, was born at Caldecot, in the parish of Newport Pagnel, in Bucks, on May 2, 1656. He was educated at Westminsterschool under Dr. Busby, and sent to Christ-church, Oxford, at the age of eighteen. He was ordained deacon in Sept. 1679, being then B. A. and priest the year following, when also he commenced M. A. In 1683, he served the office of chaplain to sir William Pritchard, lord mayor of London. In Feb. 1684 he was instituted rector of Symel in Northamptonshire, which living he afterwards resigned upon his accepting of other preferments. July 8, 1687, he accumulated the degrees of bachelor aud doctor of civil law. In 1691 we find him lecturer of St. Mary Hill in London. Soon after his marriage he settled at Highgate, where he supplied the pulpit of the reverend Mr. Daniel Lathom, who was very old and infirm, and had lost his sight and, upon the death of this gentleman, was in June 1695 elected by the trustees of Highgate chapel to be their preacher. He had a little before been appointed one of the six preaching chaplains to the princess Anne of Denmark at Whitehall and St. James’s, which place he continued to supply after she came to the crown, and likewise during part of the reign of George I. When he first resided at Highgate, observing what difficulties the poor in the neighbourhood underwent for want of a good physician or apothecary, he studied physic and acquiring considerable skill, practised it gratis among his poor neighbours. In 1707, the queen presented him to the rectory of Shepperton in Middlesex and in March 1719, the bishop of London collated him to the rectory of Hornsey, which was the more agreeable to him, because the chapel of Highgate being situate in that parish, many of his constant hearers became now his parishioners. In 1720, on a report of the death of Dr. Sprat, archdeacon of Rochester, he applied to his brother, the celebrated bishop, in whose gift this preferment was, to be appointed to succeed him. The bishop giving his brother some reasons why he thought it improper to make him his archdeacon the doctor replied, “Your lordship very well knows that Lanfranc, archbishop of Canterbury, had a brother for his archdeacon and that sir Thomas More’s father was a puisne judge when he was lord chancellor. And thus, in the sacred history, did God himself appoint that the safety and advancement of the patriarchs should be procured by their younger brother, and that they with their father should live under the protection and government of Joseph.” In answer to this, which was not very conclusive reasoning, the bishop informs his brother, that the archdeacon was not dead, but well, and likely to continue so. He died, however, soon after; and, on the 20tli of May 1720, the bishop collated Dr. Brydges, the duke of Chandos’s brother, to the archdeaconry, after writing thus in the morning to the doctor “I hope you are convinced by what I have said and written, that nothing could have been more improper than the placing you in that post immediately under myself. Could I have been easy under that thought, you may be sure no man living should have had the preference to you.” To this the doctor answered: “There is some shew of reason, I think, for the non-acceptance, but none for the not giving it. And since your lordship was pleased to signify to me that I should overrule you in this matter, I confess it was some disappointment to me. I hope I shall be content with that meaner post in which I am my time at longest being but short in this world, and my health not suffering me to make those necessary applications others do nor do I understand the language of the present times for, I find, I begin to grow an old-fashioned gentleman, and am ignorant of the weight and value of words, which in our times rise and fall like stock.” In this affecting correspondence there is evidently a portion of irritation on the part of Dr. Lewis, which is not softened by his brother’s letters but there must have been some reasons not stated by the latter for his refusal, and it is certain that they lived afterwards in the strictest bonds of affection.

affection,” as the words of the will are and made the bishop’s son Osborn (after his grand-daughter, who did not long survive him) heir to all his fortune. This granddaughter

Dr. Lewis Atterbury died at Bath, whither he went for a paralytic disorder, Oct. 20, 1731. In his will he gave some few books to the libraries at Bedford and Newport, and his whole collection of pamphlets, amounting to upwards of two hundred volumes, to the library of Christchurch, Oxford. He charged his estate for ever with the payment of ten pounds yearly to a school-mistress to instruct girls at Newport-Pagnel, which salary he had himself in his lifetime paid for many years. He remembered some of his friends, and left a respectful legacy of one hundred pounds to his “dear brother, in token of his true esteem and affection,” as the words of the will are and made the bishop’s son Osborn (after his grand-daughter, who did not long survive him) heir to all his fortune. This granddaughter was the daughter of Mr. George Sweetapple of St. Andrew’s, brewer, by Dr. Lewis’s only daughter. He had married Penelope, the daughter of Mr. John Bedingfield, by whom he had this daughter, and three sons, none of whom survived him Mrs. Atterbury died May I, 1723, and the grand-daughter in 1732.

riginal of the Reformation.” These Considerations were published under the name of Abraham Woodhead, who was a popish writer, but were really written by Obadiah Walker,

, bishop of Rochester in the reigns of queen Anne and king George I. was born March 6, 1662-3, at Milton or Middleton Keynes, near Newport- Pagnel, Bucks. He was admitted a king’s scholar in 1676 at Westminster-school; and thence, in 1680, was elected a student of Christ-Church college, Oxford, where he soon distinguished himself by his wit and learning and gave early proofs of his poetical talents, in a Latin version of Dryden’s “Absalom and Achitophel,” published in 1682; and in 1684 he edited the “Ανθολογια, seu selecta quædam poematum Italorum qui Latin escripserunt,” which was afterwards enlarged and published by Pope in 1740, with the omission, however, of Atterbury’s excellent preface. In 1687 he made his first essay in controversial writing, and shewed himself as an able and strenuous advocate for the Protestant religion, in “An Answer to some Considerations on the spirit of Martin Luther, and the original of the Reformation.” These Considerations were published under the name of Abraham Woodhead, who was a popish writer, but were really written by Obadiah Walker, master of University college, Oxford. Mr. Atterbury’s answer was soon after animadverted upon by Mr. Thomas Deane, fellow of University college, at the end of “The Religion of Martin Luther, whether Catholic or Protestant, proved from his own works.” This spirited performance of Atterbury induced bishop Burnet to rank the author among the eminent divines who had distinguished themselves by their admirable defences of the Protestant religion. Atterbury also pleads this pamphlet in his speech at his trial, as a proof of his zeal in that cause, and the same was urged by his counsel.

ber 1690, when he was moderator of the college, and had had Mr. Boyle four months under his tuition, who a took up half his time,“and whom he never had a thought of

The time of his entering into the church is not exactly known but may be very nearly ascertained by his “Epistolary Correspondence;” where a letter to his father in 1690 is highly expressive of a superior genius, impatient of the shackles of an humble college life whilst the father’s answer displays the anxiety, together with a mixture of the severity, of the paternal character, offended by the quemlousness of the son, and his dissatisfaction. He had taken the degree of B. A. June 13, 1684 (when he was little more than twenty-two years old) ayd that of M.A. April 20, 1687; and it has been ingeniously conjectured, that he had applied to the college for permission to take pupils whilst he xv.is B. A. only (winch is unusual), and that he was refused. After passing two or three years more in the college, he then seems to have thought too highly of himself (when now become M. A.) to take any at all, and to be “pinned down, as,” he says, “it is his hard luck to be, to this scene.” This restlessness appears to have broken out in October 1690, when he was moderator of the college, and had had Mr. Boyle four months under his tuition, who a took up half his time,“and whom he never had a thought of parting with till he should leave Oxford; but wished he” could part with him to-morrow on that score.“The father tells him in November,” You used to say, when you had your degrees, you should be able to swim without bladders. You used to rejoice at your being moderator, and of the quantum and sub-lecturer but neither of these pleased you; nor was you willing to take those pupils the house afforded you when master nor doth your lecturer’s place, or nobleman satisfy you.“In the same letter the father advises his marrying into some family of interest,” either bishop’s or archbishop’s, or some courtier’s, which may be done, with accomplishments, and a portion too.“And to part of this counsel young Atterbury attended for he soon after married Miss Osborn, a relation (some say a niece) of the duke of Leeds, a great beauty, who lived at or in the neighbourhood of Oxford, and by whom he had a fortune ofTOOO/. In February 1690-1, we find him resolved” to bestir himself in his office in the house,“that of censor probably, an officer (peculiar to Christ Church) who presides over the classical exercises he then also held the catechetical lecture founded by Dr. Busby. About this period he probably took orders, and entered into” another scene, and another sort of conversation;“for in 1691 he was elected lecturer of St. Bride’s church in London, and in October 1693, minister and preacher at Bridewell chapel. An academic life, indeed, must have been irksome and insipid to a person of his active and aspiring temper. It was hardly possible that a clergyman of his fine genius, improved by study, with a spirit to exert his talents, should remain long unnoticed and we find that he was soon appointed chaplain to king William and queen Mary. The earliest of his sermons in print was preached before the queen at Whitehall, May 29, 1692. In August 1694 he preached his celebrated sermon before the governors of Bridewell and Bethlem,” On the power of charity to cover sins“to which Mr. Hoadly (afterwards bishop) published sorne^” Exceptions“in the postscript to his” Second Letter to Dr. Atterbury,“mentioned hereafter. In this he accuses Atterbury, and not without reason, of endeavouring to maintain the proposition that” God will accept one duty (charity) in lieu of many others.“In” October that year he preached before the queen p “The scorncr incapable of true wisdom” which was also warmly attacked by a friend of sir Robert Howard, author of “The History of Religion,” supposed to be alluded to in this sermon. The pamphlet was entitled “A two-fold Vindication of the late archbishop of Canterbury, and the Author of the History of Religion, &c.1696, 8vo.

Phalaris’s Epistles in the preface to which, he complains of Dr. Bentley, the king’s library-keeper, who had (pro solitd sud humanitate) denied him the inspection of

The share he took in the controversy against Bentley is now very clearly ascertained. In one of the letters to his noble pupil, dated “Chelsea, 1698,” he says, “the matter had cost him some time and trouble. In laying the design of the book, in writing above half of it, in reviewing a good part of the rest, in transcribing the whole, and attending the press,” he adds, “half a year of my life went away.” His pupil, afterwards lord Orrery, about the year 1695, obliged the world with a new edition of Phalaris’s Epistles in the preface to which, he complains of Dr. Bentley, the king’s library-keeper, who had (pro solitd sud humanitate) denied him the inspection of a valuable manuscript. This sarcasm so exasperated the doctor, that, in order to his revenge on Mr. Boyle, he published a long letter to Dr. Wotton, who was then employed in writing on the State of ancient and modern Learning in which he undertakes to prove, that the Epistles, which go under the name of Phalaris, are spurious, and probably the work of some modern sophist. This drew from Mr. Boyle a reply, so full of satire and raillery, that, on which side soever truth and argument may be supposed to lie, the wit, and the laugh too, were evidently on Mr. Boyle’s. This reply was said to be written, jointly, by a select club of ingenious men belonging to Christ Church among whom. Atterbury is now clearly proved to have been the chief.

pon the indisposition of the archbishop and others, he adds “All this was directed by Dr. Atterbury, who had the confidence of the chief minister and because the other

In 1710 came on the celebrated trial of Dr. Sacheverell, whose remarkable speech on that occasion was generally supposed to have been drawn up by our author, to whom Sacheverell, in his last will, bequeathed 500l. in conjunction with Smalridge and Freind. The same year Dr. Atterbury was unanimously chosen prolocutor of the lower house of convocation, and had the chief management of affairs in that house. This we learn from bishop Burnet.In his account of this convocation, having observed, that the queen, in appointing a committee of bishops to be present, and consenting to their resolutions, not only passed over all the bishops made in king William’s reign, but a great many of those named by herself, and set the bishops of Bristol and St. David’s, then newly consecrated, in a distinction above all their brethren, by adding them to the committee, upon the indisposition of the archbishop and others, he adds “All this was directed by Dr. Atterbury, who had the confidence of the chief minister and because the other bishops had maintained a good correspondence with the former ministry, it was thought fit to put the marks of the queen’s distrust upon them, that it might appear with whom her royal favour and trust wa^ lodged.” May 11, 1711, he was appointed, by the convocation, one of the committee for comparing Mr. Whiston’s doctrines with those of the church of England and, in June following, he had the chief hand in drawing up “A Representation of the present State of Religion.” In 1712, Dr. Atterbury was made dean of Christ Church, notwithstanding the strong interest and warm applications of several great men in behalf of his competitor Dr. Smalridge but, “no sooner was he settled there,” says Stackhouse, “than all ran into disorder and confusion. The canons had been long accustomed to the mild and gentle government of a dean, who had every thing in him that was endearing to mankind, and could not therefore brook the wide difference that they perceived in Dr. Atterbury. That imperious and despotic manner, in which he seemed resolved to carry every thing, made them more tenacious of their rights, and inclinable to make fewer concessions, the more he endeavoured to grasp at power, and tyrannize. This opposition raised the ferment, and, in a short time, there ensued such strife and contention, such bitter words and scandalous quarrels among them, that it was thought adviseable to remove him, on purpose to restore peace and tranquillity to that learned body, and that tether colleges might not take the infection a new method of obtaining preferment, by indulging such a temper, and pursuing such practices, as least of all deserve it In a word,” adds this writer, “wherever he came, under one pretence or other, but chiefly under the notion of asserting his rights and privileges, he had a rare talent of fomenting discord, and blowing the coals of contention which made a learned successor (Dr. Smalridge) in two of his preferments complain of his hard fate, in being forced to carry water after him, to extinguish the flames, which his litigiousness had every where occasioned.” The next year saw him at the top of his preferment, as well as of his reputation for, in the beginning of June 1713, the queen, at the recommendation of lord chancellor Harcourt, advanced him to the bishopric of Rochester, with the deanery of Westminster in commendam he was confirmed July 4, and consecrated at Lambeth next day.

ester in Essex, where he died July 29, 1752. He was a very ingenious, learned, and worthy clergyman, who had greatly improved and enlarged his mind, by his travels into

At the beginning of the succeeding reign, his tide of prosperity began to turn and he received a sensible mortification presently after the coronation of king George I. Oct. 20, 1714, when, upon his offering to present his majesty (with a view, no doubt, of standing better in his favour) with the chair of state and royal canopy, his own perquisites as dean of Westminster, the offer was rejected, not without some evident marks of dislike to his person. At the close of this year he is supposed to have written a pamphlet, deemed a libel by government, “English Advice to the Freeholders of England.” Bolingbroke and Swift were also supposed to have had a hand in it. During the rebellion in Scotland, which broke out in the first year of this reign, Atterbury gave an instance of his growing disaffection to the established government, in refusing to sign the “Declaration” of the bishops. In that juncture of affairs, when the Pretender’s declaration was posted up in most market towns, and, in some places, his title proclaimed, it^was thought proper, by most bodies of men, to give the government all possible assurance of their fidelity iand allegiance and accordingly there was published “A Declaration of the archbishop of Canterbury, and the bishops in and near London, testifying their abhorrence of the present rebellion and an exhortation to the clergy, and people under their care, to be zealous in the discharge of their duties to his majesty king George.” This paper both Atterbury and Smalridge refused to sign, on pretence of a just offence taken at some unbecoming reflections cast on a party, not inferior to any, they said, in point of loyalty. But Atterbury' s refusal of signing the declaration of his episcopal brethren, during the rebellion in Scotland, was not the only testimony he at that time afforded of his disaffection to government. Another remarkable proof of it was his conduct to an ingenious and learned clergyman, Mr. Gibbin, curate of Gravesend. When the Dutch troops, which came over to assist in subduing the rebellion, were quartered at that place, the officers requested of Mr. Gibbin the use of his church one Sunday morning for their chaplain to preach to their soldiers, alleging that the like favour had been granted them in other parishes, and promising that the service should begin at six in the morning, that it might not interfere with that of the town. The request was granted, the chaplain preached, and his congregation was dismissed by nine o'clock. But Dr. Atterbury was so in^ censed at this transaction, that he suspended Mr. Gibbiu for three years. The suspension, however, was deemed so injurious by the inhabitants of Gravesend, that they subscribed a sum to Mr. Gibbin more than double the income of his church and the affair being represented to the king, his majesty* gave him the rectory of NorthFleet in Kent, which living he afterwards exchanged for Birch, near Colchester in Essex, where he died July 29, 1752. He was a very ingenious, learned, and worthy clergyman, who had greatly improved and enlarged his mind, by his travels into France, Italy, and other countries, with Mr. Addison. A farther striking instance (if true) of bishop Atterbury’s attachment to the Pretender, is related, by the author of the “Memoirs of lord Chesterfield,” from Dr. Birch’s manuscript papers, and was often mentioned by the late bishop Pearce (who appears to have been always severe on the memory of Atterbury) “Lord Harcourt leaving the old ministry, provoked Atterbury’s abusive tongue. He, in return, declared, that on the queen’s death, the bishop came to him and to lord Bolingbroke, and said, nothing remained but immediately to proclaim king James. He further offered, if they would give him a guard, to put on his lawn sleeves, and head the procession.” Whatever may be in this, it is certain that from the time he perceived himself slighted by tile king he constantly opposed the measures of the court in the House of Lords, and drew up some of the most violent protests with his own hand. In 1716, we find him advising dean Swift in the management of a refractory chapter.

6, 1722, he sustained a severe trial in the loss of his lady, by whom he had four children; Francis, who died an infant; Osborn , student of Christ-church; Elizabeth,

April 26, 1722, he sustained a severe trial in the loss of his lady, by whom he had four children; Francis, who died an infant; Osborn , student of Christ-church; Elizabeth, who died Sept. 29, 1716, aged seventeen; and Mary, who had been then seven years married to Mr. Morice.

royal assent. June 18, 1723, this eminent prelate, having the day before taken leave of his friends, who, from the time of passing the bill against him, to the day of

This commitment of a bishop upon the suspicion of hightreason, as it was a thing rarely practised since the Reformation, occasioned various speculations among the people. March 23, 1723, a bill was brought into the House of Commons, for “inflicting certain pains and penalties on Francis lord bishop of Rochester” a copy of which was sent to him, with notice that he had liberty of counsel and solicitors for making his defence. Under these circumstances, the bishop applied, by petition, to the House of Lords, for their direction and advice, as to his conduct in this conjuncture and April 4, he acquainted the Speaker of the House of Commons, by a letter, that he was determined to give that house no trouble, in relation to the bill depending therein but should be ready to make his defence against it, when it should be argued in another house, of which he had the honour to be a member. On the 9th, the bill passed the House of Commons, and was the same day sent up to the House of Lords for their concurrence. May 6, being the day appointed by the lords for the first reading of the bill, bishop Atterbury was brought to Westminster, to make his defence. The counsel for the bishop were, sir Constantine Phipps and William Wynne, esq. for the king, Mr. Reeve and Mr. Wearg. The proceedings continued above a week; and on Saturday, May 11, the bishop was permitted to plead for himself, which he did in a very eloquent speech. On Monday the 13th he was carried, for the last time, from the Tower, to hear the reply of the king’s counsel to his defence. On the 15th, the bill was read the third time, and, after a long and warm detiate, passed on the 16th, by a majority of 83 to 43. On the 27th, the king came to the house, and confirmed it by his royal assent. June 18, 1723, this eminent prelate, having the day before taken leave of his friends, who, from the time of passing the bill against him, to the day of his departure, had free access to him in the Tower, embarked on board the Aldborough man of war, and landed the Friday following at Calais. When he went on shore, having been informed that lord Bolingbroke, who had, after the rising of the parliament, received the king’s pardon, was arrived at the same place on his return to England, he said, with an air of pleasantry, “Then I am exchanged” and it was, in the opinion of Mr. Pope on the same occasion, “a sign of the nation’s being afraid of being over-run with too much politeness, when it could not regain one great man, but at the expence of another.” But the severity of his treatment did not cease even with his banishment. The same vindictive spirit pursued him in foreign climes. NoBritish subject was even permitted to visit him without the king’s sign manual, which Mr. Morice was always obligee! to solicit, not only for himself, but for every one of his family whom he carried abroad with him, for which the fees of office were very high.

that Atterbury’s wishes reached to the bishopric of London, or even to York or Canterbury. But those who were better acquainted with his views, knew that Winchester

It has been said that Atterbury’s wishes reached to the bishopric of London, or even to York or Canterbury. But those who were better acquainted with his views, knew that Winchester would have been much more desirable to him than either of the others. And it has been asserted, from respectable authority, that that bishopric was offered to him whenever it should become vacant (and till that event should happen, a pension of 5000l. a-year, besides an ample provision for Mr. Morice) if he would cease to give the opposition he did to sir Robert Wai pole’s administration, by his speeches and protests in the House of Lords. When that offer was rejected by the bishop, then the contrivance for his ruin was determined on but surely no contrivance could have been successful, had he been innocent of the treason laid to his charge.

tterbury’s character, as a preacher, with the encomium bestowed on him by the author of “The Tatler” who, having observed that the English clergy too much neglect the

As to bishop Atterbury’s character, however the moral and political part of it may have been differently represented by the opposite parties, it is universally agreed, that he was a man of great learning and uncommon abilities, a fine writer, and a most excellent preacher. His learned friend Smalridge, in the speech he made, when he presented him to the upper house of convocation, as prolocutor, styles him “Vir in nullo literarum genere hospes, in plerisque artibus et studiis diu et feliciter exercitatus, in maxime perfectis literarum disciplinis perfectissimus.” In his controversial writings, he was sometimes too severe upon his adversary, and dealt rather too much in satire and invective but this his panegyrist imputes more to the natural fervour of his wit, than to any bitterness of temper, or prepense malice. In his sermons, however, he is not only every way unexceptionable, but highly to be commended. The truth is, his talent as a preacher was so excellent and remarkable, that it may not improperly he said, that he owed his preferment to the pulpit, nor any hard matter to trace him, through his writings, to his several promotions in the church. We shall conclude bishop Atterbury’s character, as a preacher, with the encomium bestowed on him by the author of “The Tatlerwho, having observed that the English clergy too much neglect the art of speaking, makes a particular exception with regard to our prelate; who, says he, “has so particular a regard to his congregation, that he commits to his memory what he has to say to them, and has so soft and graceful a behaviour, that it must attract your attention. His person,” contnues this author, “it is to be confessed, is no small recommendation but he is to be highly commended for not losing that advantage, and adding to a propriety of speech (which might pass the criticism of Longinus) an action which would have been approved by Demosthenes. He has a peculiar force in his way, and has many of his audience, who could not be intelligent hearers of his discourse, were there no explanation as well as grace in his action. This art of his is used with the most exact and honest skill. He never attempts your passions till he has convinced your: reason. All the objections which you can form are laid open and dispersed, before he uses the least vehemence in his sermon; but when he thinks he has your head, he very soon wins your heart, and never pretends to shew the beauty of holiness, till he has convinced you of the truth of it.” In his letters to Pope, &c. bishop Atterbury appears in a pleasing light, both as a writer and as a man. In ease and elegance they are superior to those of Pope, which are more studied. There are in them several beautiful references to the classics. The bishop excelled in his allusions to sacred as well as profane authors.

utrality, he preserved the esteem and affection of all parties. He sent money to the younger Marius, who had been declared an enemy to the commonwealth yet was so much

, was a celebrated Roman knight, to whom Cicero wrote a great number of letters, which contain the general history of the times. These are still extant, divided into seventeen books but it is the excellence of Atticus’s private character which has procured him a place in most collections of this description. He was a man of such prudence, that, without departing from his neutrality, he preserved the esteem and affection of all parties. He sent money to the younger Marius, who had been declared an enemy to the commonwealth yet was so much in favour with Sylla, that this Roman general would always have had him with him. He kept himself quiet at Rome during the war between Caesar and Pompey, without giving offence to the one or the other, and he sent money to Brutus, while he was doing kind offices to An­%ony. Afterwards, in the cruel divisions which arose between Antony and Augustus, he contrived to preserve the friendship of both, difficult as it must have been in the case of two such antagonists. The strict friendship he had with Cicero., did not hinder him from being intimate with Hortensius and he was the cause (as Nepos, his biographer, tells us) that these two rivals not only ceased from mutual reproaches, but even lived together upon very good terms. The contests between the parties of Cinna and Marius induced him to go to Athens young, where he continued a long time, and became such a favourite with the Athenians, that the day he left them was a day of mourning. He never attempted to raise himself above the rank of life in which he was born, which was that of knight, although he might have obtained the highest posts in the republic but he chose to renounce all pretensions to them, because, in the then prevailing corruption, he could neither gain nor discharge them according to the laws, and as a man of integrity; no inconsiderable proof of his virtue, notwithstanding he has been charged with avarice and political duplicity. He did not marry till he was fifty-three, and had only a daughter, who was married to Agrippa from which marriage came a daughter, whom Augustus betrothed to Tiberius almost as soon as she was born. He reached the age of seventy-seven years, almost without knowing bodily illness but when his last sickness, which was slight for three months, at length became painful, he sent for Agrippa, his son-in-law, and two other persons, and declared to them a resolution to put an end to his life, by abstinence from food. Agrippa remonstrated with tears, but all in vain. After two days abstinence, the fever left him, and the disease abated but Atticus persisted, and died three days after. This happened in the year of Rome 721.

the Catholic church. In the year 406, being then a priest, he was chosen to succeed St. Chrysostom, who had been deprived of the see of Constantinople, but met with

, patriarch of Constantinople in the beginning of the fifth century, was born at Sebastia, now Soustia, a city of Armenia. He was first educated by the Macedonian monks in the principles of their sect, but when arrived at riper years, he embraced the faith of the Catholic church. In the year 406, being then a priest, he was chosen to succeed St. Chrysostom, who had been deprived of the see of Constantinople, but met with much obstruction from the friends of Chrysostom, and from all the bishops of the East, who considered Chrysostom as unjustly deprived, and refused to communicate with the new patriarch. Atticus, upon this, procured an edict from the emperor to compel them, but finding this produced no other effect than schism and confusion, after the death of Chrysostom he ordered his name to be put in the Diptychs, or ecclesiastical tables, in which were inserted the names of persons who had died in the peace and communion of the church, and those names were read at the altar during divine service. He also wrote to St. Cyril, bishop of Alexandria, earnestly intreating him to do the same, but Cyril answered that he should by that step appear to condemn those who had deposed Chrysostom. Both these letters are extant in Nicephorus Calixtus’s Ecclesiastical History. There is another letter of his extant to Calliopius, by which he appears to have been a man of moderate principles towards those who differed from him in opinion. There are likewise some fragments of a homily on the birth of Christ, in the general collection of the Councils, and a fragment of a letter of his to Eupsychius, quoted by Theodoret. Writers differ much in their estimate of his general character and learning.

31, 1702, and at first took lessons in painting, and made considerable proficiency under his father, who was an artist. He then went to Rome, under the patronage of

, a French Jesuit and painter, attached to the mission to Pekin, was born at Dole, in Tranche-Comté, July 31, 1702, and at first took lessons in painting, and made considerable proficiency under his father, who was an artist. He then went to Rome, under the patronage of the marquis de Brossa, and on his return, painted some pictures at Lyons, which procured him great reputation. In his thirtieth year he entered among the Jesuits, in the humble character of a lay- brother, and some, years afterwards, when the missionaries of Pekin demanded the services of a painter, he obtained the appointment, and went to China about the end of 1737. He had no sooner arrived at Pekin than he offered the emperor a painting of the Adoration of the Kings, with which the emperor was so much pleased that he ordered it to be placed in his interior apartment. Notwithstanding this promising outset, he underwent many mortifications, in being obliged to comply with the bad taste of the Chinese in what paintings he executed for them, and was so teazed by the emperor himself, that, in order to please him, he was obliged to take lessons from the Chinese artists but finding that a compliance with their instructions must spoil his performances, and injure his reputation, he declined painting for his majesty. Ddring the years, however, from 1753 to 1760, distinguished by many victories gained by the emperor Kien Long, he had frequent orders for battlepieces, &c. which he executed so much to the satisfaction of that monarch, that he created him a mandarin, and when Attiret refused to accept it, the minister of state told him he should have the revenues, although he declined the honour. The missionaries speak in the highest terms of his talents, modesty, and piety. He died at Pekin, Dec. 8, 1768, and the emperor defrayed the expences of his funeral the large pictures he painted for the emperor are in the palace, but never shown the missionaries can exhibit only one picture, “The Guardian Angel,” which is in the chapel of the Neophites, in the French missionary church at Pekin. There is nothing of Attiret' s in print, except a letter in the “Recueil des Lettres Edifiantes,” vol. XXVII. which was translated by the late Rev. Joseph Spence, under his assumed name of sir Harry Beaumont, entitled “A particular account of the emperor of China’s gardens near Pekin, in a letter from father Attiret, a French missionary, now employed by that emperor to paint the apartments in those gardens, to his friend at Paris,” London, 1752, 8vo.

ste for polite literature, that Riccoboni, his master, said, he was the only youth he had ever known who seemed to be born a poet and orator. His father wished him to

, or Avanzi Giammarie, a celebrated Italian lawyer, was born Aug. 23, 1564. He was educated with great care, and discovered so much taste for polite literature, that Riccoboni, his master, said, he was the only youth he had ever known who seemed to be born a poet and orator. His father wished him to study medicine, but his own inclination led him to study law, in which he soon became distinguished. At Ferrara he acquired an intimacy with Tasso, Guarini, Cremonini, and other eminent characters of that time. He afterwards retired to Rovigo, and practised as a lawyer, but was singularly unfortunate in his personal affairs, not only losing a considerable part of his property by being security for some persons who violated their engagements, but having his life attempted by assassins who attacked him one day and left him for dead with eighteen wounds. He recovered, however, but his brother being soon after assassinated, and having lost his wife, he retired, in 1606, to Padua, where he died, March 2, 1622, leaving several children, of whom Charles, his second son, became a learned physician and botanist. Avanzi wrote a poem “Il Satiro Favola Pastorale,” Venice, 1587, and dedicated it to the emperor Ferdinand, who rewarded him amply, and wished to bring him to his court, by the offer of the place of counsellor of state. He left in manuscript, a church history, “Historia Ecclesiastica a Lutheri apostasia;” and “Concilia de rebus civilibus et criminalibus.

s, April 5, 1652. His last moments were disturbed by the harsh conduct of the rector of St. Sulpice, who endeavoured to obtain from him an acknowledgment of error, but

, a minister of the reformed church of Paris in the seventeenth century, was born at Chalons sur Marne in 1595. He was admitted a minister at the synod of Charenton in 1618, and promoted to the church of Chartres, from whence he was removed to Paris in 1631. He wrote a very celebrated work, entitled “L‘Eucharistie de l’ancienne Eglise,1633, fol. proving from history and argument, the opinions of the Protestants on the subject of transubstantiation and the real presence. This excited much controversy, and was attempted to be confuted by Arnauld and other divines in the work entitled “La Perpetuite de la Foi.” M. Aubertin died at Paris, April 5, 1652. His last moments were disturbed by the harsh conduct of the rector of St. Sulpice, who endeavoured to obtain from him an acknowledgment of error, but M. Aubertin declared that he persevered in the reformed religion.

from the quarter from whence it originates, and on account of the bad style of the wretched writer, who, lucro addictus & addductus, will not fail to play the mercenary,

, a lawyer of Paris, born in 1617, became an indefatigable student, it being his practice to rise at five o'clock every morning, and study without intermission till six in the evening. He scarcely made any visits, and received still fewer, and though he had taken his oath as avocat au conseil, he preferred the silent commerce of his books to the tumult of affairs. The “Remarques de Vaugelas” was his only book of recreation. He died of a fall in 1695, at upwards of 78. Several works of his are to be met with, very inferior in respect of style, but they are not deficient in historical anecdotes and useful remarks. The chief of them are, 1. “Histoire generale des Cardinaux,” 5 vels. 1642, 4to, composed from the memoirs of Naud6 and of du Puy. 2. “Memoire pour rhistoire du Cardinal de Richelieu,1660, 2 vols. folio, and 1667, 5 vols. in 12 mo. 3. “Histoire de me me ministre,1660, folio. The materials here are good, but the best use has not been made of them. The cardinal, whom the author praises without restriction, is not painted in his proper colours, and the author has obviously laid himself open to the charge of flattery. Nor has he discovered much judgment, for, in striving to make too honest a man of the cardinal, he has not made him a politician, which was his distinguishing characteristic. Guy Patin, in his cxxxvith letter to Charles Spon, speaks in a very contemptuous manner of this history: “The duchess of Aiguillon,” says he, “has just had the history of her uncle the cardinal de Richelieu printed, composed from the memoirs she has furnished herself, by M. Aubery; but it is already fallen into contempt, being too much suspected from the quarter from whence it originates, and on account of the bad style of the wretched writer, who, lucro addictus & addductus, will not fail to play the mercenary, and to prostitute his pen to the direction of that lady.” It is said that the queen-mother answered the bookseller Berthier, who expressed his fear that certain persons of the court, of whom the historian spoke by no means advantageously, would bring him into trouble: “Go, pursue your business in peace, and put vice so much to shame, that nothing but virtue shall dare to be seen in France.” 4ubery is one of those who doubt whether the Testament published under the name of the cardinal de Richelieu be really by him. 4. “Histoire du cardinal Mazarin,1751, 4 vols. 12mo, a work in still less credit than the foregoing; but, as it was composed from the registers of the parliament, many of which have since disappeared, it contains several particulars not to be found any where else. Cardinal Mazarin, whose portrait is much over-charged, and but a very faint likeness, is very often lost among the great number of facts heaped together, and in which he sometimes plays but a very interior part, 5. “Traite historique de la preeminence des Rois de France/' 1649, 4to. 6.” Traite des justes pretensions du Roi de France sur PEmpire," 1667, 4to, which caused him to be thrown into the Bastille, because the princes of Germany thought the ideas of Aubery to be the same with those of Louis XIV. He was, however, soon set at liberty, and even his confinement was made easy.

, the son of William Aubespine, who was ambassador from the French court in England, became bishop

, the son of William Aubespine, who was ambassador from the French court in England, became bishop of Orleans in 1604. He was remarkable for his zeal as a divine, and his great application as a student, and was employed, as his father had been, in many public transactions. He died at Grenoble, Aug. 15, 1630, in the 52d year of his age. His writings are, “De veteribus ecclesiae ritibus,1622, 4to, a work which discovers much knowledge of ecclesiastical antiquities; “Un traite de Tancienne police de l'Eglise,” respecting the administration of the eucharist. He published also notes on the Councils, and on Tertullian. His brother Charles became marquis de Chateau-Neuf, and an eminent statesman in the seventeenth century.

eptors, that at eight years old he was able to translate the Crito of Plato. Having lost his father, who left him only his name and his debts, at the age of thirteen,

, a very celebrated French Protestant, was son to John D‘Aubigne, lord of Brie, in Saintonge, and born in 1550 at St. Maury. He made such proficiency under his preceptors, that at eight years old he was able to translate the Crito of Plato. Having lost his father, who left him only his name and his debts, at the age of thirteen, he betook himself to the profession of arms, for which a spirit and zeal particularly ardent and persevering seemed to have qualified him. He accordingly attached himself to Henry then king of Navarre, who made him successively gentleman of his bed-­chamber, marshal of the camp, governor of the island and castle of Maillezais, vice-admiral of Guienne and Bretagne, and what D’Aubigne valued most, his favourite. But he lost this last honour by a want of subserviency to his pleasure, and a stern and uncourtly inflexibility. It is well known that ingratitude was not the failing of Henry IV. yet he expended so much in conciliating the catholic lords, that he was often incapable of rewarding his old servants as they deserved, and with the utmost esteem for D‘Aubigne, he had bestowed little else upon him, and was probably not sorry for any pretence to get rid of him. D’Aubigne, displeased with his conduct, left the court, and although Henry intreated and demanded his return, continued inexorable, until he accidentally learnt that upon a false report of his being made a prisoner at the siege of Limoges, the king had ordered him to be ransomed at a great expence. Penetrated by this mark of returning kindness, he again came to court, but persisted in giving the king both advice and reproaches, in a blunt and sometimes satirical manner, which the king scarcely knew how to tolerate, while he felt conscious of the value of so sincere a friend and counsellor.

manner, he replied, “Sire, I said yes yes, because kings drive away from their presence all persons who will not make use of those words to every thing which their

Many curious anecdotes are reported of his freedoms with the king. Before he returned to the court, he sent one of his pages to announce to the sovereign that he was upon the road. The king asked him from whence he came? The page said, “Yes, yes;” and to every question that was put to him, still returned “Yes, yes.” On the king’s asking him why he continued to answer his questions in that manner, he replied, “Sire, I said yes yes, because kings drive away from their presence all persons who will not make use of those words to every thing which their sovereigns require of them.” While equerry to the king, and lying one night with the Sieur de la Force in the guard chamber, he whispered in his companion’s ear, “Certainly our master is the most covetous, and most ungrateful mortal upon earth.” Receiving no answer, he repeated the accusation, but la Force, being scarcely awake, did not hear him distinctly, and asked, “What do you say, D'Aubigne?” “Cannot you hear him?” said the king, who was awake, “he tells you I am the most covetous and most ungrateful mortal on earth.” “Sleep on, sire,” replied D'Aubigne, “I have a good deal more to say yet.” The next day, Aubigne tells us in his memoirs, the king did not look unkindly on him, but still gave him nothing. After, however, sometimes pleasing and sometimes displeasing the king and court by these freedoms, he again found it necessary to retire, and passed the rest of his days at Geneva, where he died in 1630, in the 80th year of his age. It was here probably, where he was received with great respect and honour, that he employed his pen on those various works which entitle him to a distinguished place in the republic of letters. These were his universal history, entitled “Histoire Universelle depuis 1550 jusq'en 1601, avec un histoire abregée de la mort de Henry IV.” 3 vols. folio, printed at St. Jean d'Angeli, although the title page says Maille, 1616—18—20, and reprinted in 1626, with additions and corrections. The first edition is in most request by the curious, as having some strokes of satire in it which are omitted in the other. His style is not uniform, and he often departs from the dignity of history to indulge in a jocose garrulity, accompanied with impassioned coarse passages, which are, however, highly characteristic of the writer. The first volume was burnt by order of the parliament of Paris, on account of the freedoms he had taken with the royal personages, particularly Henry III. The first and second parts of this history, which contain the wars of the prince of Condé and of the admiral Coligny, the massacre of St. Bartholomew, and the first transactions of the League, are given rather in a succinct form, but the third, which continues the detail until the peace of Henry the Great, is the most full and most correct. He wrote also some “Tragedies,1616, 4to and 8vo; “A collection of Poetical pieces,” printed at Geneva, 1630, 8vo; a very satirical piece entitled “La Confession de Sancy;” and in 1731, was printed “Baron de Foeneste,” 12mo, said to be his, which is a more gross composition. In the same year his Memoirs, written by himself, were printed, and have been translated into English. His son, Constant D'Aubigne, a most profligate character, was the father of madame de Maintenon.

the first rudiments of his education in the grammar-school at Malmesbury, under Mr. Robert Latimer; who had also been preceptor to the famous Thomas Hobbes, with whom

, an eminent English antiquary, descended from an ancient family in Wiltshire, was born at Easton-Piers in that county, Nov. 3, 1625 or 1626. He received the first rudiments of his education in the grammar-school at Malmesbury, under Mr. Robert Latimer; who had also been preceptor to the famous Thomas Hobbes, with whom Mr. Aubrey commenced an early friendship, which lasted as long as Mr. Hobbes lived. In 1642, Mr. Aubrey was entered a gentleman-commoner of Trinity college at Oxford, where he pursued his studies with great diligence, making the history and antiquities of England his peculiar object. About this time the famous “Monasticon Anglicanum” was talked of in the university, to which Mr. Aubrey contributed considerable assistance, and procured, at his own expence, a curious draught of the remains of Osney abbey near Oxford, which were entirely destroyed in the civil wars. This was afterwards engraved by Hollar, and inserted in the Mouasticon with an inscription by Aubrey. In 1646 he was admitted of the Middle Temple, but the death of his father hindered him from pursuing the law. He succeeded to several estates in the counties of Wilts, Surrey, Hereford, Brecknock, and Monmouth, but they were involved in many law-suits. These suits, together with other misfortunes, by degrees consumed all his estates, and forced him to lead a more active life than he was otherwise inclined to. He did not, however, break off his acquaintance with the learned at Oxford or at London, but kept up a close correspondence with the lovers of antiquity and natural philosophy in the university, and furnished Anthony Wood with a considerable part of the materials for his two large works. W r ood, however, in his own life, does not speak very respectfully of his assistant. He calls him a pretender to antiquities, and after giving an account of the origin of their acquaintance, of the gay appearance which Aubrey made at Oxford, and of his subsequent poverty, Wood adds, “He was a shiftless person, roving and magotie-headed, and sometimes little better than erased. And being exceedingly credulous, would stuff his many letters sent to A. W. with folliries and mis-informations, which sometimes would guide him into the paths of error.

Aubrey preserved an intimacy with those great persons^ who then met privately, and were afterwards formed into the Royal

Aubrey preserved an intimacy with those great persons^ who then met privately, and were afterwards formed into the Royal Society. Soon after the restoration, he went into Ireland, and returning from thence, in the autumn of 1660, narrowly escaped shipwreck near Holyhead. On the 1st of Nov. 1661, he was so unfortunate as to suffer another shipwreck. In 1662, he was admitted a fellow of the Royal Society. In June 1664, he travelled through. France into Orleans, and returned in the month of October. In 1666, he sold his estate in Wiltshire; and was at length obliged to dispose of all he had left, so that, in the space of four years, he was reduced even to want yet his spirit remained unbroken. His chief benefactress was. the lady Long of Dray cot in Wilts, who gave him an apartment in her house, and supported him as long as he lived. When his death happened is uncertain we are only told in general that he died suddenly on a journey to Oxford in his way to Dray cot and he was there buried, as near as can be conjectured, in 1700. He was a man of an excellent capacity, and indefatigable application; a diligent searcher into antiquities, a good Latin poet, an excellent naturalist, but somewhat credulous, and tinctured with superstition.

in his “Historical account of the English Stage,” is worthy of transcription, as the opinion of one who has had every opportunity to investigate his merits. “That,”

The character Mr. Malone has given him, in his “Historical account of the English Stage,” is worthy of transcription, as the opinion of one who has had every opportunity to investigate his merits. “That,” says Mr. Malone, “the greater part of his life was devoted to literary pursuits, is ascertained by the works which he has published, the correspondence which he held with many eminent men, and the collections which he left in manuscript, and which are now reposited in the Ashtnolean Museum. Among these collection* is a curious account of our English poets and many other writers. While Wood was preparing his Athenoe Oxonienses, this manuscript was lent to him, as appears from many queries in his hand-writing in the margin and his account of Milton, with whom Aubrey was intimately acquainted, is (as has been observed by Mr. Warton) literally transcribed from thence. Wood afterwards quarreled with Mr. Aubrey, whom in the second volume of his Fasti, p. 262, he calls his friend, and on whom, in his History of the University of Oxford he bestows the highest encomium; and, after their quarrel, with his usual warmth, and, in his loose diction, he represented Aubrey as a pretender, &c. But whatever Wood in a peevish humour may have thought or said of Mr. Aubrey, by whose labours he highly profited, or however fantastical Aubrey may have been on the subject of chemistry and ghosts, his character for veracity has never been impeached and as a very diligent antiquary, his testimony is worthy of attention. Mr. Toland, who was well acquainted with him, and certainly a better judge of men than Wood, gives this character of him” Though he was extremely superstitious, or seemed to be so, yet he was a very honest man, and most accurate in his account of matters of fact. But the facts he knew, not the reflections he made, were what I wanted."

stones in Oxfordshire“a manuscript. This is said to have been written at the command of Charles II t who meeting Mr. Aubrey at Stone-henge, as his majesty was returning

The manuscripts mentioned by. Mr. Malone, now in the Museum at Oxford, are, “An Apparatus for the Lives of our English mathematical and other writers an Interpretation of Villare Anglicanum Designatio de Easton-Piers in com. Wilts A volume of Letters and other papers of E. Ashmole’s, relating chiefly to Dr. Dee and sir Edward Kelly two volumes of Letters from eminent persons to John Aubrey, esq.” His principal works besides are, 1. “The Life of Thomas Hobbes of Malmesbury,” a manuscript written in English, but never published the principal part has been used by Dr. Blackbourne, in his Vitae Hobbianse auctarium,“published in 1681. 2.” Miscellanies on the following subjects 1. Day-fatality. 2. Local fatality. 3. Ostenta. 4. Omens. 5. Dreams. 6. Apparitions. 7. Voices. 8. Impulses. 9. Knockings. 10. Blows invisible. 11. Prophecies. 12. Marvels. 13. Magic. 14. Transportation in the air. 15. Visions in a beril or speculum. 16. Converse with angels and spirits. 17. Corpse candles in Wales. 18. Oracles. 19. Extasies. 20. Glances of love and envy. 21. Second-sighted persons. 22. The discovery of two murders by apparitions,“often reprinted. 3.” A Perambulation of the county of Surry, begun 1673, ended 1692.“This work the author left behind him in manuscript it was published, 1719, in five volumes 8vo, and is now scarce. 4.” Monumenta Britannica, or a discourse concerning Stone-henge and Rollich-stones in Oxfordshire“a manuscript. This is said to have been written at the command of Charles II t who meeting Mr. Aubrey at Stone-henge, as his majesty was returning from Bath, conversed with him in relation to that celebrated monument of antiquity; and also ^approved of his notion concerning it, which was this, that both it and the stones in Oxfordshire were the remains of places dedicated to sacred uses by the Druids, long before the time of the Roman invasion. See a letter from Mr. Paschal to Mr. Aubrey, prefixed to his Memoirs. 5.” Architectonica sacra,“a Dissertation concerning the manner of our Church-building in England,” a manuscript in the Museum at Oxford. 6. " The Idea of universal Education.' 5 There are besides many letters of our author relating to natural philosophy, and other curious subjects, published in several collections.

where he doubtless would have ended his days, had he not have been set at liberty by the Maillotins, who wanted to make him their captain in their insurrection upon

, a native of Burgundy, was made treasurer of the finances, and provost of the merchants of the city of Paris. He built the Bastille by order of Charles V. king of France, in 1369, as a fortress against the English but being accused of heresy by the clergy, he was condemned to be immured between two walls, where he doubtless would have ended his days, had he not have been set at liberty by the Maillotins, who wanted to make him their captain in their insurrection upon account of the taxes. But that night he made his escape from them into Burgundy, where he soon after died in 1382. From this person the Hugonots are said to have derived their name, which seems not very consistent with the conjectures of most historians.

the king’s magistrates in 1590, when he was attacked and dangerously wounded by eleven of those men who were endeavouring to raise the country against Henry IV. and

, a French nobleman, was born at Clermont in 1565. His life was a continued series of misfortunes and escapes. He was one of the king’s magistrates in 1590, when he was attacked and dangerously wounded by eleven of those men who were endeavouring to raise the country against Henry IV. and in favour of the league. He had scarcely recovered, when, in company with his father, he was again attacked and wounded by the same men. He determined now to quit Gascony, and pass into Hungary but his servant with whom he set out robbed him and left htm destitute with some difficulty, however, he reached Paris, where he found friends was introduced to court, plunged into all manner of pleasures, and forgot his former losses and his former resolutions. But here he fell sick, and had scarcely recovered, when he wounded a false friend in a duel, and was obliged to make his escape. He wandered for & considerable time from place to place, spent much money, contracted debts, became poor, and lost his friends. Again he surmounted his difficulties, when for some crime he was thrown into prison he vindicated his innocence, plunged again into a set of adventurous troubles, and at last was assassinated in 1630. He was a voluminous writer both in verse and prose, published Romances and books of Devotion translated Cervantes’ novels, and a work entitled “Usage des Duels,1617, 8vo. His works shew some marks of genius, but partook too much of the irregularities of their author to enjoy long reputation.

Suffolk’s recommendation, to whom he was chancellor, brought him to the' knowledge of his sovereign, who at that time wanted men of learning and some pliability he was,

, descended of an ancient and honourable family, of the county of Essex, was born in 1488. He was by nature endowed with great abilities, from his ancestors inherited an ample fortune, and was happy in a regular education, but whether at Oxford or Cambridge is not certain. At what time he was entered of the Inner-Temple, does not appear, but in 1526 he was autumn reader of that house, and is thought to have read on the statute of privileges, which he handled with so much learniag and eloquence, as to acquire great reputation. This, with the duke of Suffolk’s recommendation, to whom he was chancellor, brought him to the' knowledge of his sovereign, who at that time wanted men of learning and some pliability he was, accordingly, by the king’s influence, chosen speaker of that parliament, which sat first on the third of November, 1529, and is by some styled the Black Parliament, and by others, on account of its duration, the Long Parliament. Great complaints were made in the house of commons against the clergy, and the proceedings in ecclesiastical courts, and several bills were ordered to be brought in, which alarmed some of the prelates. Fisher, bishop of Rochester, inveighed boldly against these transactions, in the house of lords, with which the house of commons were so much offended, that they thought proper to complain of it, by their speaker, to the king, and Fisher had some difficulty in excusing himself. The best historians agree, that great care was taken by the king, or at least by his ministry, to have such persons chosen into this house of commons as would proceed therein readily and effectually, and with this view Audley was chosen to supply the place of sir Thomas More, now speaker of the lords’ house, and chancellor of England. The new house and its speaker justified his majesty’s expectations, by the whole tenor of their behaviour, but especially by the passing of a law, not nowfound among our statutes. The king, having borrowed very large sums of money of particular subjects, and entered into obligations for the repayment of the said sums, the house brought in, and passed a bill, in the preamble of which they declared, that inasmuch as those sums had been applied by his majesty to public uses, therefore they cancelled and discharged the said obligations, &c. and the king, finding the convenience of such a parliament, it sat again in the month of January, 1530-1. In this session also many extraordinary things were done amongst the rest, there was a law introduced in the house of lords, by which the clergy were exempted from the penalties they had incurred, by submitting to the legatine power of Wolsey. On this occasion the commons moved a clause in favour of the laity, many of themselves having also incurred the penalties of the statute. But the king insisted that acts of grace ought to flow spontaneously, and that this was not the method of obtaining what they wanted; and the house, notwithstanding the intercession of its speaker, and several of its members, who were the king’s servants, was obliged to pass the bill without the clause, and immediately the king granted them likewise a pardon, which reconciled all parties. In the recess, the king thought it necessary to have a letter written to the pope by the lords and commons, or rather by the three estates in parliament, which letter was drawn up and signed by cardinal Wolsey, the archbishop of Canterbury, four bishops, two dukes, two marquisses, thirteen earls, two viscounts, twenty-three barons, twenty-two abbots, and eleven members of the house of commons. Thepurport of this letter, dated July 13, above three weeks after the parliament rose, was to iMigage the pope to grant the king’s desire in the divorce business, for the sake of preventing a civil war, on account of the succession, and to threaten him if he did not, to take some other way. To gratify the speaker for the great pains he had already taken, and to encourage him to proceed in the same way, the king made him this year attorney for the duchy of Lancaster, advanced him in Michaelmas term to the state and degree of a serjeant at law, and on the 14th of November following, to that of his own serjeant. In January, 1531-2, the parliament had its third session, wherein the grievances occasioned by the excessive power of the ecclesiastics and their courts, were regularly digested into a book, which was presented by the speaker, Audley, to the king. The king’s answer was, He would take advice, hear the parties accused speak, and then proceed to reformation. Jn this session, a bill was brought into the house of lords, for the better securing the rights of his majesty, and other persons interested in the eare of wards, which rights, it was alleged, were injured by fraudulent wills and contracts. This bill, when it came into the house of commons, was violently opposed, and the members expressed a desire of being dissolved, which the king would not permit but after they had done some business, they had a recess to the month of April. When they next met, the king sent for the speaker, and delivered to him the answer which had been made to the roll of grievances, presented at their last sitting, which afforded very little satisfaction, and they seemed now less subset viciit. Towards the close of the month, one Mr. Themse moved, That the house would intercede with the king, to take back his queen again. The king, extremely alarmed at this, on the 30th of April, 1532, sent for the speaker, to whom he repeated the plea of conscience, which had induced him to repudiate the queen, and urged that the opinion of the learned doctors, &c. was on his side. On the 11th of May the king sent for the speaker again, and told him, that he had found that the clergy of his realm were but half his subjects, or scarcely so much, every bishop and abbot at the entering into his dignity, taking an oath to the pope, derogatory to that of their fidelity to the king, which contradiction he desired his parliament to take away. Upon this motion of the king’s, the two oaths he mentioned were read in the house of commons and they would probably have complied, if the plague bad not put an end to the session abruptly, on the 14th of May; and two days after, sir Thomas More, knt. then lord chancellor of England, went suddenly, without acquainting any body with his intention, to court, his majesty being then at York Place, and surrendered up the seals to the king. The king going out of town to EastGreenwich, carried the seals with him, and on Monday, May 20, delivered them to Thomas Audley, esq, with the title of lord keeper, and at the same time conferred on him the honour of knighthood. September 6, sir Thomas delivered the old seal, which was much worn, and received a new one in its stead, yet with no -higher title: but on January 26, 1533, he again delivered the seal to the king, who kept it a quarter of an hour, and then returned it with the title of lord chancellor. A little after, the king granted to him the site of the priory of Christ Church, Aldgate, together with all the church plate, and lands belonging to that house. When chancellor he complied with the king’s pleasure as effectually as when speaker of the house of commons. For in July 1535, he sat in judgment on sir Thomas More, his predecessor, (as he had before on bishop Fisher,) who was now indicted of high-treason upon which indictment the jury found him gnilty, and the lord chancellor, Audley, pronounced judgment of death upon him. This done, we are told, that sir Thomas More said, that he had for seven years bent his mind and study upon this cause, but as yet he found it no where writ by any approved doctor of the church, that a layman could be head of the ecclesiastical state. To this Audley returned, “Sir, will you be reckoned wiser, or of a better conscience, than all the bishops, the nobility, and the whole kingdom” Sir Thomas rejoined, “My lord chancellor, for one bishop that you have of your opinion, I have a hundred of mine, and that among those that have been saints and for your one council, which, what it is, God knows, I have on my side all the general councils for a thousand years past; and for one kingdom, I have France and all the ether kingdoms of the Christian world.” As our chancellor was very active in the business of the divorce, he was no less so in the business of abbies, and had particularly a large hand in the dissolution of such religions houses as had not two hundred pounds by the year. This was in the twenty-seventh of Henry VIII, and the bill being delayed long in the house of commons, his majesty sent for the members of that house to attend him in his gallery, where he passed through them with a stern countenance, without speaking a word the members not having received the king’s command to depart to their house, durst not return till they knew the king’s pleasure so they stood waiting in the gallery. In the mean time the king went a hunting, and his ministers, who seem to have had better manners than their master, went to confer with the members to some they spoke of the king’s steadiness and severity to others, of his magnificence and generosity. At last the king came back, and passing through them again, said, with an air of fierceness peculiar to himself, That if his bill did not pass, it should cost many of them their heads. Between the ministers’ persuasions and the king’s threats, the matter was brought to an issue the king’s bill, as he called it, passed and by it, he had not only the lands of the small monasteries given him, but also their jewels, plate, and rich moveables. This being accomplished, methods were used to prevail with the abbots of larger foundations to surrender. To this end, the chancellor sent a special agent to treat with the abbot of Athelny, to offer him an hundred marks per annum pension which he refused, insisting on a greater sum. The chancellor was more successful with the abbot of St. Osithes in Essex, with whom he dealt personally and, as he expresses it in a letter to Cromwell, the visitor-general, by great solicitation prevailed with him but then he insinuates, that his place of lord chancellor being very chargeable, he desired the king might be moved for addition of some more profitable offices unto him. In suing for the great abbey of Walden, in the same county, which he obtained, besides extenuating its worth, he alleged under his hand, that he had in this world sustained great damage and infamy in serving the king, which the grant of that should recompense. But if the year 1536 was agreeable to him in one respect, it was far from being so in another; since, notwithstanding the obligations he was under to queen Anne Bullen, he was obliged, by the king’s command, to be present at her apprehension and commitment to the Tower. He sat afterwards with Cranmer archbishop of Canterbury, when he gave sentence of divorce on the pre-contract between the queen and the lordPiercy and on the 15th of May, in the same year, he sat in judgment on the said queen, notwithstanding we are told by Lloyd, that with great address he avoided it. The lengths he had gone in serving the king, and his known dislike to popery, induced the northern, rebels in the same year, to name him as one of the evil counsellors, whom they desired to see removed from about the king’s person which charge, however, his majesty, as far as in him lay, wiped off, by his well- penned answer to the complaints of those rebels, wherein an excellent character is given of the chancellor. When the authors of this rebellion came to be tried, the chancellor declined sitting as lord high steward, which high office was executed by the marquis of Exeter, on whom shortly after, viz. in 1538, Audley sat as high-steward, and condemned him, his brother, and several t other persons, to suffer death as traitors. In the latter end of the same year, viz. on the 29th of November, 30 Hen. VIII. the chancellor was created a baron, by the style of lord Audley of Walden in the county of Essex, and was likewise installed knight of the garter. In the session of parliament in 1539, there were many severe acts made, and the prerogative carried to an excessive height, particularly by the six bloody articles, and the giving the king’s proclamation the force of a law. It does not very clearly appear who were the king’s principal counsellors in these matters but it is admitted by the best historians, that the rigorous execution of these laws, which the king first designed, was prevented by the interposition of the lord Audley, in conjunction with Cromwell, who was then prime minister, and the duke of Suffolk, the king’s favourite throughout his whole reign. In the beginning of 1540, the court was excessively embarrassed. What share Audley had in the fall of Cromwell afterwards is not clear, but immediately after a new question was stirred in parliament, viz. How far the king’s marriage with Anne of Cleves, was lawful This was referred to the judgment of a spiritual court and there are yet extant the depositions of Thomas lord Audley, lord chancellor, Thomas, archbishop of Canterbury, Thomas, duke of Norfolk, Charles, duke of Suffolk, and Cuthbert, lord bishop of Durham, wherein they jointly swear, that the papers produced to prove the retraction of the lady Anne’s contract with the duke of Lorrain, were inconclusive and unsatisfactory. Other lords and ladies deposed to other points, and the issue of the business was, that the marriage was declared void by this court, which sentence was supported by an act of parliament, affirming the same thing, and enacting, That it should be high-treason to judge or believe otherwise. This obstacle removed, the king married the lady Catherine Howard, niece to the duke of Norfolk, and cousin -german to Anne Bullen. Nothing is clearer from history, than that the chancellor was closely attached to the house of Norfolk and yet in the latter end of the year 1541, he was constrained to be an instrument in the ruin of the unfortunate queen information of her bad life before her marriage, being laid first before the archbishop of Canterbury, and by him communicated to the chancellor. The king then appointed lord Audley one of the commissioners to examine her, which they did, and there is yet extant a letter subscribed by him and the other lords, containing an exact detail of this affair, and of the evidence on which, in the next session of parliament, the queen and others were attainted. The whole of this business was managed in parliament by the chancellor, and there is reason to believe, that he had some hand in another business transacted in that session which was the opening a door for the dissolution of hospitals, the king having now wasted all that had accrued to him by the suppression of abbies. Some other things of the like nature were the last testimonies of the chancellor’s concern for his master’s interest but next year a more remarkable case occurred. Jn the 34th of Henry VIII. George Ferrers, esq. burgess for Plymouth, was arrested, and carried to the compter, by virtue of a writ from the court of king’s bench. The house, on notice thereof, sent their serjeant to demand their member in doing which, a fray ensued at the compter, his mace was broke, his servant knocked down, and himself obliged to make his escape as well as he could. The house, upon notice of this, resolved they would sit no longer without their member, and desired a conference with the lords where, after hearing the mutter, the lord chancellor Audley declared the contempt was most flagrant, and referred “the punishment thereof to the house of commons whereupon Thomas Moyle, esq. who was then speaker, issued his warrant, and the sheriff of London, and several other persons, were brought to the bar of the house, and committed, some to the Tower, and some to Newgate. This precedent was gained by the king’s want of an aid, who at that time expected the commons would offer him a subsidy the ministry, and the house of lords, knowing the king’s will gave the commons the complimerit of punishing those who had imprisoned one of their members. Dyer, mentioning this case, sap,” The sages of the law held the commitment of Ferrers legal, and though the privilege was allowed him, yet was it held unjust.“As the chancellor had led a very active life, he grew now infirm, though he was not much above fifty years old, and therefore began to think of settling his family and affairs. But, previous to this, he obtained from the king a licence to change the name of Buckingham college in Cambridge, into that of Magdalen, or Maudlin some will have it, because in the latter word his own name is included. To this college he was a great benefactor, bestowed on it his own arms, and is generally 'reputed its founder, or restorer. His capital seat was at Christ-Christ in town, and at Walden in Essex and to preserve some remembrance of himself and fortunes, he caused a magnificent tomb to be erected in his new chapel at Walden. About the beginning of April, 1544, he was attacked by his last illness, which induced him to resign the seals but he was too weak to do it in person, and therefore sent them to the king, who delivered them to sir Thomas Wriothesley, with the title of keeper, during the indisposition of the chancellor a circumstance not remarked by any of our historians. On the 19th of April, lord Audi ey made hU will, and, amongst other things, directed that his executors should, upon the next New-year’s day after his decease, deliver to the king a legacy of one hundred pounds, from whom, as he expresses it,” he had received all his reputations and benefits." He died on the last of April, 1544, when he had held the seals upwards of twelve years, and in the fifty-sixth of his life, as appears by the inscription on his tomb. He married Elizabeth, daughter of Thomas iGrey, marquis of Dorset, by whom he had two daughters, Margaret and Mary; Mary died unmarried, and Margaret became his sole heir. She married first lord Henry Dudley, a younger son of John duke of Northumberland, and he being slain at the battle of St. Quintin’s, in Picardy, in 1557, she married a second time, Thomas duke of Norfolk, to whom she was also a second wife, and had by him a son Thomas, who, by act of parliament, in the 27th of Elizabeth, was restored in blood; and in the 39th of the same reign, summoned to parliament by his grandfather’s title, as baron of Walden, In the 1st of James I. he was created earl of Suffolk, and being afterwards lord hightreasurer of England, he built on the ruins of the abbey of Walden, that nee noble palace, which, in honour of our chancellor, he called Audley-End.

e parliament of Paris. These circumstances contributed not a little to the reputation of the author, who is said to have died the year following.

, a native of Provence, went to Paris in his youth, there studied law, and became a member of the counsel of the house of Orleans. In 1708 he published a work entitled “Traite de Porigine de la Regale, et des causes de son etablissement,” 4to, in eight books, in which he had introduced a dissertation on the authenticity of canon 22 distinct. 63 of the first part of the canon law, which had been rejected by Baronius and Bellarmin, and some other able writers, even in France. The consequence was, that his work was condemned in a brief of pope Clement XI. in 1710, and this censure was repealed a few months after by a sentence of the parliament of Paris. These circumstances contributed not a little to the reputation of the author, who is said to have died the year following.

p a state of the population of the district of Lyons, which was published under the name of Mezence, who was secretary to the intendant. In 1769, the abbe Audra was

, a French philosopher, was born at Lyons in 1714, was brought up to the church, and became a professor of philosophy in his native country. In conjunction with the intendant Michaudiere, he drew up a state of the population of the district of Lyons, which was published under the name of Mezence, who was secretary to the intendant. In 1769, the abbe Audra was appointed professor of history in the college of Toulouse, and, we are told, filled that chair with distinction. It was here he wrote the first volume of his “General History,” which proved thecause of his death. The archbishop of Toulouse issued a mandate in which he condemned the work as being replete with dangerous principles; and the author’s mortification on hearing of this affected his brain to such a degree, as to carry hinj off in twenty- four hours, Sept. 17, 1770. Voltaire and D'Alembert praise this history, as likely to give offence only to bigots and fanatics, from which we may safely infer that the archbishop’s opinion of it was not ill founded.

, the first of this famijy who is mentioned as an artist, was born in 1592, and died in 1677.

, the first of this famijy who is mentioned as an artist, was born in 1592, and died in 1677. He was the son of Louis Audran, an officer belonging to the wolf-hunters, in the reign of Henry IV. of France. Claude appears to have become an engraver rather late in life, and his prints, which are but few, are not held in much estimation. Yet, though he acquired no great reputation by his own works, it was no small honour to be father to three great artists, Germain, Claude, and Gerard, the last of whom has immortalized the name of the family.

ry, he settled at Paris, where he died in 1674, without having ever been married. The abbé Marolles, who always speaks of this artist with great praise, attributes one

, is generally believed to have been brother of the preceding Claude, but others have asserted that he was cousin-german to him only. It is, however, universally agreed that he was born at Paris in 1594. In his infancy he discovered much taste, and an apt disposition for the arts; and, to perfect himself in engraving, of which he appears to have been chiefly fond, he went to Rome, where he produced several prints that did him great honour. What master he studied under at Rome cannot easily be determined. The style he adopted is very like that of Cornelius Bloemart, but still neater Mr. Strutt thinks that the prints of Lucas Kilian and of the Sadelers may have laid the first foundation on which he built. On his return to his own country, he settled at Paris, where he died in 1674, without having ever been married. The abbé Marolles, who always speaks of this artist with great praise, attributes one hundred and thirty prints to him amongst which, the “Annunciation,” from Annibale Caracci, and the “Assumption,” from Domenichino, are the most esteemed.

his genius soon began to manifest itself and his reputation brought him to the knowledge of Le Brun, who employed him to engrave the “Battle of Constantine,” and the

, the most celebrated artist of the family, was the third son of the first-mentioned Claude Audran, and born at Lyons in 1640. He learned from his father the first principles of designing and engraving following the example of his brother, he went to Paris, where his genius soon began to manifest itself and his reputation brought him to the knowledge of Le Brun, who employed him to engrave the “Battle of Constantine,” and the “Triumph” of that emperor, and for these works he obtained apartments at the Gobelins. At Rome, where he went for improvement, he is said to have studied under Carlo Maratti, in order to perfect himself in drawing and in that city, where he resided three years, he engraved several fine plates among; the rest the portrait of pope Clement IX. M. Colbert, a great encourager of the arts, was so struck with the beauty of Audran’s works, whilst he resided at Rome, that he persuaded Louis XIV. to recall him. On his return, he applied himself assiduously to engraving, and was appointed engraver to the king, From whom he received liberal encouragement. In 1681, he was named counsellor of the royal academy and died at Paris in 1703. He had been married, but left no male issue behind him.

fter this he undertook to write the “Annals of Bavaria,” being encouraged by the dukes of that name; who settled a pension upon him, and gave him hopes that they would

, author of the Annals ofBavaria, was born of mean parentage, in 1466, at Abensperg in the country just named. He studied first at Ingolstadt, and afterwards in the university of Paris. In 1503, he privately taught eloquence and poetry at Vienna; and in 1507, publicly taught Greek at Cracow in Poland. In 1509, he read lectures on some of Cicero’s pieces at Ingolstadt and in 1512, was appointed to be preceptor to prince Lewis and prince Ernest, sons of Albert the Wise, duke of Bavaria. He also travelled with the latter of those two princes. After this he undertook to write the “Annals of Bavaria,” being encouraged by the dukes of that name; who settled a pension upon him, and gave him hopes that they would defray the charges of the book. This work, which gained its author great reputation, was first published in 1554, by Jerome Zieglerus, professor of poetry in the university of Ingolstadt but, as he acknowledges in the preface, he retrenched the invectives against the clergy, and several stories which had no relation to the history of Bavaria. The Protestants, however, after long search, found an uncastrated manuscript of Aventin’s Annals, which was published at Basil in 1580, by Nicholas Cisner.

imprudent marriage, which disturbed his latter days. He died in 1534, aged 68, leaving one daughter, who was then but two months old. Jt was supposed, from the inquiries

In 1529, he was forcibly taken out of his sister’s house at Abensperg, and hurried to a gaol the true cause of which violence was never known but it would probably have been carried to a much greater length, had not the duke of Bavaria interposed, and taken this learned man into his protection. In his 64th year he made an imprudent marriage, which disturbed his latter days. He died in 1534, aged 68, leaving one daughter, who was then but two months old. Jt was supposed, from the inquiries made by the Jesuits, that he was a Lutheran in sentiment and the adherents to the church of Rome make use of this argument to weaken the force of his testimony against the conduct of the popes, and the vicious lives of the priests for the Annals of Aventin have been often quoted by Protestants, to prove the disorders of the Romish church.

d, as he enjoyed perfect health to his last hour. He left a son, known also by the name of Ebn Zohr, who followed his father’s profession, was in great favour with Al-Mansor

, an eminent Arabian physician, flourished about the end of the eleventh or the beginning of the twelfth century. He was of noble descent, and born at Seville, the capital of Andalusia, where he exercised his profession with great reputation. His grandfather and father were both physicians. The large estate he inherited from his ancestors rendered it unnecessary for him to practise for gain, and he therefore took no fees from the poor, or from artificers, though he refused not the presents of princes and great men. His liberality extended even to his enemies; for which reason he used to say, that they hated him not for any fault of his, but rather out of envy. Dr. Freind thinks that he lived to the age of 135, that he began to practise at 40 or, as others say, at 20, and had the advantage of a. longer experience than almost any one ever had, as he enjoyed perfect health to his last hour. He left a son, known also by the name of Ebn Zohr, who followed his father’s profession, was in great favour with Al-Mansor emperor of Morocco, and wrote several treatises of physic. Avenzoar was contemporary with Averroes, who, according to Leo Africanus, heard the lectures of the former, and learned physic of him. Avenzoar, however, is reckoned by the generality of writers an empiric, although Dr. Freind observes that this character suits him less than any of the Arabians. He wrote a book on the “Method of preparing Medicines,” which is much esteemed. It was translated into Hebrew in the year 1280, and thence into Latin by Paravicius, and printed at Venice in 1490, fol. and again in 1553.

s of learning from his father, after which he was put under the tuition of Vincent Glarea, a Jesuit, who then gave public lectures on rhetoric at Florence, with whom

was born at Florence the 19th of March 1662, the youngest of the three sons of John Francis Averani. Benedict, the eldest, made himself famous for his eloquence and the thorough knowledge he had of the Greek and Roman classics while Nicholas, the other brother, so greatly excelled in jurisprudence and all kinds of mathematical learning, as to be reckoned among the foremost in those studies. Joseph received the first rudiments of learning from his father, after which he was put under the tuition of Vincent Glarea, a Jesuit, who then gave public lectures on rhetoric at Florence, with whom he made uncommon progress. He was taught Greek by Antonius Maria Salvini, and advanced so rapidly in his studies, that, in a short time, whether he wrote in Italian, or Latin, or Greek, he shewed an intimate acquaintance with the ancient writers. Young as he was, however, he did not confine himself to oratorical performances alone, but exercised himself in poetry, for which he had much taste. He next applied to the study of the peripatetic philosophy, taking for his guide John Francis Vannius, the Jesuit. After pursuing a variety of studies, with astonishing success, he at length attached himself to mathematics and natural philosophy. When at Pisa he applied to the study of the law and at his leisure hours, in the first year of his residence there, he translated Archimedes with the commentaries of Eutocius Ascalonita out of Greek into Latin, adding many remarks of his own in explanation and illustration of those books which treat of the sphere and cylinder, the circles, the spheroids and conies, and the quadrature of the parabola. He shortly after wrote a treatise on the Momenta of heavy bodies on inclined planes, in defence of Galileo against the attacks of John Francis Vannius, but did not publish it. He cleared up many obscurities in Apollonius Pergaeus. These and other studies did not retard the wonderful progress he made in jurisprudence, which induced Cosmo III. of Medicis to appoint him public teacher of the institutes of civil law in the academy of Pisa. It is to be lamented that none of the orations which he made in this capacity have reached us, except one on the principles of jurisprudence, medicine, and theology. He published two books of the interpretations of the law. The applause with which these were received, induced him to join to them three more books, in the composition and arrangement of which he passed many years. He made a great variety of discoveries in experimental philosophy. He applied himself earnestly to ascertain the time in which sound is propagated, and to discover whether its velocity is retarded by contrary and increased by fair winds. These and other experiments he made at the request of Laurentio Magoloti, who communicated them to the royal society of London i.nd the society in return admitted Averani as an honorary member. Upon the death of his brother Benedict, he sought for consolation in composing an elegiac poem in his praise, and in writing his life in Latin. He died on the 22d of September 1738, lamented as one of the ablest and best of men.

elder brother to Joseph, was born at Florence in 1645. His preceptor in rhetoric was Vincent Glarea, who soon confessed that his pupil went beyond him. He read almost

, elder brother to Joseph, was born at Florence in 1645. His preceptor in rhetoric was Vincent Glarea, who soon confessed that his pupil went beyond him. He read almost incessantly the best Italian and Latin writers. And having at first employed a considerable time in the perusal of the poets, epecially the epic, he afterwards applied himself wholly to the reading of Cicero, and of the historians. From the works of the rhetoricians he proceeded to those of the philosophers, and particularly admired and followed Plato. He bestowed an indefatigable attention upon those parts in the writings of the philosophers, which in any manner related to eloquence, the attainment of which he sought with incredible ardour. Amidst these occupations he sometimes renewed his poetical exercises. At his father’s request he composed a Latin poem in praise of St. Thomas Aquinas. This, with many others of our author’s poems, is lost. Those of his poems which are extant, most of which he composed. in his youth, shew that if he had chosen to addict himself exclusively to this study, he might have attained a very high rank. His father afterwards sent him to Pisa to study jurisprudence, and he exercised himself daily in writing to perfect his style. Nor did he write in Latin only for he translated Sallust, and Celsus, and other Latin authors, into Greek and some Greek elegies of his are extant. He was created chief of the academy of Apathists. On the death of the cardinal Leopold of Medicis, he was ordered to compose verses in his praise, which were so much approved, that similar tasks were imposed upon him on the deaths of other princes. In the year 1676, the place long Tacant of teacher of Greek in the Lyceum of Pisa was bestowed upon him by the archduke Cosmo III. After filling this office six years, he was advanced to the dignity of teacher of humanity. In this he succeeded Gronovius, who, by the rudeness and asperity of his manners, had given so much offence to the college, that he was obliged to quit the academy in less than a year after his entering on his office in it. Benedict wrote well in Italian, as appears by the Lezioni which he recited in the Tuscan academy, and in the academy of the Apathists. In his youth he cultivated Italian poetry, and several of his Italian poems are preserved at Rome. He was invited to be professor of humanity in the academy of Pavia on the death of the former professor in 1682, and the same offer was soon after made to him by pope Innocent XI. who was desirous of bringing into the Roman Archigymnasium so eminent a man. In 1688 he was induced by the solicitations of his friends to publish the first book of his Orations. He died in 1707. The dissertations he made in the academy at Pisa, a posthumous work, his orations and poems republished, and his letters then first printed, were all published together at Florence in 3 vols. 1717, folio.

erwards reached the caliph Jacob Al-Mansor, king of Mauritania, the third of the Almohadean dynasty, who had built a magnificent school at Morocco and that prince appointed

, a very celebrated Arabian philosopher, and whom Christians as well as Arabians esteemed equal, if not superior to Aristotle himself, was born about the middle of the 12th centufy, of a noble family at Corduba, the capital of the Saracen dominions in Spain. He was early instructed in the Islamitic law, and, after the usual manner of the Arabian schools, united with the study of Mahometan theology that of the Aristotelian philosophy. These studies he pursued under Thophail, and became a follower of the sect of the Asharites. Under Avenzoar he studied the science of medicine, and under Ibnu-Saig he made himself master of the mathematical sciences. Thus qualified, he was chosen, upon his father’s demise, to the chief magistracy of Corduba. The fame of his extraordinary erudition and talents soon afterwards reached the caliph Jacob Al-Mansor, king of Mauritania, the third of the Almohadean dynasty, who had built a magnificent school at Morocco and that prince appointed him supreme magistrate and priest of Morocco and all Mauritania, allowing him still to retain his former honours. Having left a temporary substitute at Corduba, he went to Morocco, and remained there till he had appointed, through the kingdom, judges well skilled in the Mahometan law, and settled the whole plan of administration after which he returned home, and resumed his offices.

This rapid advancement of Averroes brought upon him the envy of his rivals at Corduba who conspired to lodge an accusation against him, for an heretical

This rapid advancement of Averroes brought upon him the envy of his rivals at Corduba who conspired to lodge an accusation against him, for an heretical desertion of the true Mahometan faith. For this purpose, they engaged several young persons among their dependants, to apply to him for instruction in philosophy. Averroes, who was easy of access, and always desirous of communicating knowledge, complied with their request, and thus fell into the snare that had been laid for him. His new pupils were very industrious in taking minutes of every tenet or opinion advanced by their preceptor, which appeared to contradict the established system of Mahometan theology. These minutes they framed into a charge of heresy, and attested upon oath, that they had been fairly taken from his lips. The charge was signed by an hundred witnesses. The caliph listened to the accusation, and punished Averroes, by declaring him heterodox, confiscating his goods, and commanding him for the future to reside among the Jews, who inhabited the precincts of Corduba where he remained an object of general persecution and obloquy. Even the boys in the streets pelted him with stones, when he went up to the mosque in the city to perform his devotions. His pupil, Maimonides, that he might not be under the necessity of violating the laws of friendship and gratitude, by joining the general cry against Averroes, left Corduba. From this unpleasant situation Averroes at last found means to escape. He fled to Fez, but had been there only a few days, when he was discovered by the magistrate, and committed to prison. The report of his flight from Corduba was soon carried to the king, who immediately called a council of divines and lawyers, to determine in what manner this heretic should be treated. The members of the council were not agreed in opinion. Some strenuously maintained, that a man who held opinions so contrary to the law of the prophet deserved death. Others thought that much mischief, arising from the dissatisfaction of those among the infidels who were inclined to favour him, might be avoided, by only requiring from the culprit a public penance, and recantation of his errors. The milder opinion prevailed and Averroes was brought out of prison to the gate of the mosque, and placed upon the upper step, with his head bare, at the time of public prayers and every one, as he passed into the mosque, was allowed to spit upon his face. At the close of the service, the judge, with his attendants, came to the philosopher, and asked him whether he repented of his heresies. He acknowledged his penitence, and was dismissed without further punishment, with the permission of the king. Averroes returned to Corduba, where he experienced all the miseries of poverty and contempt. In process of time the people became dissatisfied with the regent who had succeeded Averroes, and petitioned the king that their former governor might be restored. Jacob Al-Mansor, not dar.ng to show sucli indulgence to one who had been infamous for heresy, without the consent of the priesthood, called a general assembly, in which it was debated, whether it would be consistent with the safety of religion, and the honour of the law, that Averroes should be restored to the government of Corduba. The deliberation terminated in favour of the penitent heretic, and he was restored, by the royal mandate, to all his former honours. Upon this fortunate change in his affairs, Averroes removed to Morocco, where he remained till his death, which happened, as some say, in 1195, or according to others in 1206.

red by some of our most industrious antiquaries. It was unknown to Leland and to Bale, and the first who mentioned it and had seen it was Fox the martyrologist. ^Archbishop

, a very ancient English historian, of whose personal history, however, we know little. In the title of his history he calls himself register of the archbishop of Canterbury’s court, His design seems to have been to compose a history of the reign of Edward III. from such authentic materials as came to his hands but when he had laboured about thirty years, he was surprised by death, in the latter end of 1356, or in the beginning of the year following. In this work we have a plain narrative of facts, with an apparent candour and impartiality but his chief excellence lies in his accuracy in point of dates, and his stating all public actions from records, rather than from his own notions. This work, however, remained long in manuscript, and undiscovered by some of our most industrious antiquaries. It was unknown to Leland and to Bale, and the first who mentioned it and had seen it was Fox the martyrologist. ^Archbishop Parker had also perused it, and so had Stowe, who mentions Avesbury in his Chronicle, and from him Pits ventures to tell us, that he flourished about 1340, but does not add that he had any acquaintance with his works. Du Fresne, in his Index of Writers, places Avesbury in the same year. Mr. Jocelyn, however, who was chaplain to archbishop Parker, never saw this ms. though in his patron’s possession, nor did it fall under the inspection of Anthony Wood.

1574, and he took possession of it in 1578. He was also preceptor to the son of that Francis Olivier who was chancellor of France, as appears from the preliminary epistle

, in Latin Augentius, a native of Villeneuve, in the diocese of Sens in Champagne, lived in the sixteenth century, and was esteemed on account of his learning and writings. The office of the king’s professor in the Greek tongue in the university of Paris was designed for him in 1574, and he took possession of it in 1578. He was also preceptor to the son of that Francis Olivier who was chancellor of France, as appears from the preliminary epistle of a book, which he dedicated to Anthony Olivier bishop of Lombes, and uncle to his pupil, dated from Paris the 1st of March 1555. The time of his death is not certainly known but Francis Parent, his successor in the professorship of the Greek tongue, entered upon it in 1595, and Moreri gives that as the date of Auge’s death. He wrote, 1. “A consolatory oration upon the death of Messire Francis Olivier, chancellor of France,” Paris, 1560. 2. “Two dialogues concerning Poetical Invention, the true knowledge of the Art of Oratory, and of the Fiction of Fable,” Paris, 1560. 3. “A discourse upon the Decree made by the parliament of Dole in Burgundy with relation to a man accused and convicted of being a Werewolf.” 4. “The institution of a Christian Prince, translated from the Greek of Synesius, bishop of Syrene, with an oration concerning the True Nobility, translated from the Greek of Phiio Judseus,” Paris, 1555. 5. “Four homilies of St. Macarius the Egyptian,” Paris, and Lyons 1559. 6. “A letter to the noble and virtuous youth Anthony Thelin, son of the noble Thelin, author of the book entitled `Divine Tracts,' in which is represented the true Patrimony and Inheritance which fathers ought to leave to their children.” This letter is printed in the beginning of the above-mentioned “Divine Tracts,” Paris, 1565. He revised and corrected them, Paris, 1556. 6. “A French translation of the most beautiful Sentences and Forms of Speaking in the familiar Epistles of Cicero.” The “Discourse upon the Decree,” &c. relates to a man convicted of having murdered and eat one or two persons, for which he was burnt alive.

nsought services, and was once narrowly saved from the gallows by a minister of the reformed church, who hoped to gain him over to his party. This, however, only served

, a French Jesuit, was born in 1530, at Allernan, a village in the diocese of Troyes, and became noted for his extraordinary skill in the conversion of heretics, that is, llugonots, or Protestants, of whom he is said to have recovered many thousands to the church. He was often in danger from his unsought services, and was once narrowly saved from the gallows by a minister of the reformed church, who hoped to gain him over to his party. This, however, only served to excite his ardour in the cause of proselytism, and he distinguished himself very remarkably at Lyons during the ravages of the plague. Henry III. appointed him to be his preacher and confessor, the first time in which this latter honour had been conferred. He was, however, either so conscientious or so unfortunate as neither to gain the affections of his prince, nor to preserve the good opinion and confidence of the Jesuits. After the death of Henry III. his superiors recalled him to Italy, and sent him from house to house, where he was considered as an excommunicated person, travelling on foot in the depth of winter; and of such fatigues he died in the sixty-first year of his age, in 1591. He wrote some controversial works in a very intemperate style. One of his pieces was published in 1568, under the title of “Pedagogue d‘armes a un Prince Chretien, pour entreprendre et achever heureusement une bonne guerre, victorieuse de tous les ennemis de son etat et de l’eglise.” Father Dorigny published the life of Auger in 1716, 12mo.

undation for this, unless his employing 'the technicals of the art in the manner of a didactic poet, who studies imagination more than utility. Leo X. to whom he dedicated

, an Italian, highly praised by Paul Jovius, and as much condemned by Scaliger, was born in 1441, at Rimini, of a noble family. He studied at Padua, and was professor of belles lettres in several universities, particularly Venice and Trevisa in the latter place he obtained the rank of citizen, and died there in 1524. His principal poem, “Chrysopoeia,” or the art of making, gold, occasioned his being supposed attached to alchymy but there is no foundation for this, unless his employing 'the technicals of the art in the manner of a didactic poet, who studies imagination more than utility. Leo X. to whom he dedicated the work, is said to have rewarded him by an empty purse, the only article he thought necessary to a man who could make gold. This poem was first printed at Venice, with, another on old age, entitled “Geronticon,1515 and as some proof that it was seriously consulted by alchymists, it has obtained a place in Grattorolo’s collection of alchymical authors, Bale, 1561, fol. in vol. III. of the “Theatrum Chemicum,” Strasburgh, 1613, and in Mangel’s “Bibl. Chemica.” His other Latin poems, consisting of odes, satires, and epigrams, were published under the title “Carmina,” Verona, 1491, 4to, and at Venice, 1505, 8vo. They are superior to most of the poetry of his age in elegance and taste, and in Ginguene’s opinion, approach nearly to the style and manner of the ancients. Augurello was also an accomplished Greek scholar, and well versed in antiquities, history, and philosophy, and in his poetry, without any appearance of pedantry, he frequently draws upon his stock of learning.

In the year 418, a general council was held at Carthage against the Pelagians. Augustin, who had formerly refuted their errors, now prepared nine articles

In the year 418, a general council was held at Carthage against the Pelagians. Augustin, who had formerly refuted their errors, now prepared nine articles against them, and evinced a zeal on the subject, which procured him the title of the “Doctor of grace.” After having thus triumphed over the enemies of the church, he had to contend with those of the empire. The Vandals, who had passed from Africa into Spain, under the conduct of their king Genseric, in the year 428, made themselves masters of a considerable part of that country, but Carthage and Hippo resisted them a long time. Augustin, when consulted by his associates, whether they ought to escape by flight, or wait for the barbarians, gave his opinion for the latter, as more becoming their duty and when the episcopal city was besieged by a great army, he encouraged his flock by his example and exhortations, He dreaded, nevertheless, lest Hippo should fall into the hands of the enemy, and prayed to God that he might be taken away before that calamity happened. His prayer, it would appear, was answered, as he was cut off, during the siege, by a violent fever, on the 2Sth of August, in the year 430, at the age of seventy-six. The Vandals, who took Hippo the year following, showed respect to his library, his works, and his body. The catholic bishops of Africa carried his body to Sardinia, the place to which they were driven by Thrasamond, king of* the Vandals and Luitprand, king of Lombardy, caused it to be conveyed, nearly two hundred years after, to Pavia. His works have been printed at Paris in 1679 and 1700, in eleven volumes, folio. But the author of the Bibliographical Dictionary says, there are two editions under the same date, and that the first is preferred, and is distinguished by the preface at the beginning of the first volume. In the first edition there are only five lines of the preface on the first page in the second edition there are more. In the tenth volume of the first edition there is a little tract, of half a leaf, preceding page 747, before the book “De Corruptions et Gratia,” which is not found in the second edition. There was another edition in 12 vols. fol. published also by the Benedictines at Antwerp, 1700 1703.

ears, nor in denying that he may justly be ranked among those illustrious characters, in a dark age, who preserved and elucidated many of those doctrines which are held

The character of Augustin has been depreciated by some modern writers, and ought undoubtedly to be considered with a reference to the time he lived, and the state of learning and religion. There is neither wisdom nor candour, however, in collecting and publishing the frailties of his early years, nor in denying that he may justly be ranked among those illustrious characters, in a dark age, who preserved and elucidated many of those doctrines which are held sacred in days of more light and knowledge. Mosheim’s character seems candid and just. The fame of Augustin, says that ecclesiastical historian, filled the whole Christian world and not without reason, as a variety of great and shining qualities were united in his character. A sublime genius, an uninterrupted and zealous pursuit of truth, an indefatigable application, an invincible patience, a sincere piety, a subtile and lively wit, conspired to establish his fame upon the most lasting foundations. It is, however, certain, that the accuracy and solidity of his judgment were, by no means, proportionable to the eminent talents now mentioned, and that, upon many occasions, he was more guided by the violent impulse of a warm imagination, than by the cool dictates of wisdom and prudence. Hence that ambiguity which appears in his writings, and which has sometimes rendered the most attentive readers uncertain with respect to his real sentiments and hence also the just complaints which many have made of the contradictions that are so frequent in his works, and of the levity and precipitation with which he set himself to write upon a variety of subjects, before he had examined them with a sufficient degree of attention and diligence. It ought to be added, that almost all Augustin’s works have been printed separately and often, particularly his “City of God,” and his “Confessions.

in the convent of St. Andrew at Rome, and was educated under St. Gregory, afterwards pope Gregory I. who undertook the conversion of the island of Britain. His inducement

, or by contraction Austin (St.), usually styled the Apostle of the English, and the first archbishop of Canterbury, was originally a monk in the convent of St. Andrew at Rome, and was educated under St. Gregory, afterwards pope Gregory I. who undertook the conversion of the island of Britain. His inducement to this, in the life of St. Gregory, written by John Diaconus, introduces us to a string of puns, which we must refer to the manners and taste of the times, without surely impeaching the seriousness of Gregory, who in his present situation, as well as when pope, had no other visible motive for his zea], than the propagation of Christianity. Walking in the forum at Rome, he haprfened to see some very handsome youths exposed to sale, and being informed that they were of the island of Britain, and that the inhabitants of that island were Pagans, he regretted that such handsome youths should be destitute of true knowledge, and again asked the name of the nation. “Angli” was the answer on which he observed, “In truth they have angelic countenances, and it is a pity they should not be coheirs with angels in heaven.” When informed that they came from the province of Deira (Northumberland), he observed, “It is well, de mz, snatched from the wrath of God, and called to the mercy of Christ and when, in answer to another interrogatory, he was told that the name of their king was Ella, he said,” Alleluia, should be sung to God in those regions." More seriously impressed with a sense of his duty on this occasion, he requested pope Benedict to send some persons to our island on a mission, and offered to be one of the number. He was himself, however, too much a favourite with the Roman citizens to be suffered to depart, and it was not until he became pope, that he was enabled effectually to pursue his purpose. After his consecration in the year 595, he directed a presbyter, whom he had sent into France, to instruct some young Saxons, of seventeen or eighteen years of age, in Christianity, to act as missionaries and in the year 597, he sent about forty monks, including perhaps some of these new converts, with Augustine at their head. Having proceeded a little way on their journey, they began to dread the attempt of committing themselves to a savage and infidel nation, whose language they did not understand. In this dilemma, doubtful whether to return or proceed, they agreed to send back Augustine to Gregory, to represent their fears, and intreat that he would release them from their engagement. Gregory, however/ in answer, advised them to proceed, in confidence of divine aid, undaunted by the fatigue of the journey, or any other temporary obstructions, adding, that it would have been better not to have begun so good a work, than to recede from it afterwards. He also took every means for their accommodation, recommending them to the attention of Etherius, bishop of Aries, and providing for them such assistance in France, that at length they arrived safely in Britain.

allowed the use of a small church without the walls of Canterbury, where Luidhart, a French bishop, who came over in her retinue, with other clergymen, publicly performed

Before proceeding to their success here, it is necessary to advert to some circumstances highly in their favour. Christianity, although not extended over the kingdom, was not at this period unknown in Britain, notwithstanding it had been much persecuted by the Saxons. They were at this time, however, disposed to look upon their Christian brethren with a more favourable eye, and the marriage of Ethelbert, king of Kent, in the year 570, with Birtha, or Bertha, daughter of Cherebert, king of France, a Christian princess of great virtue and merit, contributed not a little to abate the prejudices of that prince and his subjects against her religion, for the free exercise of which she had stipulated in her marriage contract. She was also allowed the use of a small church without the walls of Canterbury, where Luidhart, a French bishop, who came over in her retinue, with other clergymen, publicly performed all the rites of Christian worship, and by these means Christianity had some, although probably a very confined influence.

they were come from Rome, and brought with them the best tidings in the world eternal life to those who received them, and the endless enjoyment of life hereafter.

It is easy to suppose that a queen, thus sincere in her principles, would be very earnest in persuading her husband to give Augustine and his followers a hospitable reception, and Ethelbert accordingly assigned Augustine an habitation in the isle of Thanet. By means of French interpreters, whom the missionaries brought with them, they informed the king that they were come from Rome, and brought with them the best tidings in the world eternal life to those who received them, and the endless enjoyment of life hereafter. After some days, Ethelbert paid them a visit but being afraid of enchantments, things which, true or false, were then objects of terror, chose to receive them in the open air. The missionaries met him, singing litanies for their own salvation, and that of those for vvhojse sake they came thither; and then, by the king’s direction, unfolded the nature of their mission, and of the religion they wished to preach. The substance of the king’s answer was, that he could not, without further consideration, abandon the religion of his forefathers, but as they had come so far on a friendly errand, he assigned them a place of residence in Canterbury, and allowed them to use their best endeavours to convert his subjects. The place assigned them was in the parish of St. Alphage, on the north side of the High or King’s street, where, in Thorn’s time, the archbishop’s palace stood, now called Stable-gate. Accordingly they entered the city, singing in concert a short litany, recorded by Becle, in these words “We pray thee, O Lord, in all thy merc^, that thine anger and thy fury may be removed from this city, and from thy holy house, for we have sinned. Alleluia.

hould be used in making converts, although he could not avoid expressing greater partiality to those who embraced Christianity.

In this city they employed example and precept in the introduction of their doctrines. They prayed, lasted, watched, preached, wherever they had opportunity, and received only bare necessaries in return. They practised also what they taught, and showed a firmness and zeal, even, to death, if it should be necessary, which produced considerable effect on the people and at length the king himself was converted, and gave the missionaries his license to preach every where, and to build or repair churches. The king, however, declared that no compulsion should be used in making converts, although he could not avoid expressing greater partiality to those who embraced Christianity.

t Augustine’s request, sent over more missionaries, and directed him to constitute a bishop at York, who might have other subordinate bishops yet in such a manner, that

During this success, Augustine went to France, and was there, by the archhishop of Aries, consecrated archbishop of the English nation, thinking that this new dignity would give additional influence to his exhortations. When he returned into Britain, he sent Laurentius the presbyter, and Peter the monk, to acquaint Gregory with what had been done, and to consult him upon several points of doctrine and discipline. Some of these points savour, undoubtedly, of the superstitious scruples of the monastic, austerity, but others lead to some information respecting the early constitution of the church. To his inquiries concerning the maintenance of the clergy, Gregory answered, that the donations made to the church were, by the custom of the Roman see, divided into four portions one for the bishop and his family to support hospitality, a second to the clergy, a third to the poor, and a fourth to the reparation of churches. As the pastors were all monks, they were to live in common, but such as chose to marry were to be maintained by the monastery. With respect to diversities of customs and liturgies, Gregory’s answer was truly liberal, implying that Augustine was not bound to follow the precedent of Rome, but might select whatever parts or rules appeared the most eligible and best adapted to promote the piety of the infant church of England, and compose them into a system for its use. Gregory also, at Augustine’s request, sent over more missionaries, and directed him to constitute a bishop at York, who might have other subordinate bishops yet in such a manner, that Augustine of Canterbury should be metropolitan of all England. He sent over also a valuable present of books, vestments, sacred utensils, and holy relics. He advised Augustine not to destroy the heathen temples, but only to remove the images of their gods, to wash the walls with holy water, to erect altars, deposit relics in them, and so gradually convert them into Christian churches not only to save the expence of building new ones, but that the people might be more easily prevailed upon to frequent those places of worship to which they had been accustomed. He directs him further, to accommodate the ceremonies of the Christian worship, as much as possible, to those of the heathen, that the people might not be too much startled at the change and in particular, he advises him to allow the Christian converts, on certain festivals, to kill and eat a great number of oxen, to the glory of God, as they had formerly done to the honour of the devil. It is quite unnecessary, in our times, to offer any remark on this mixture of pious zeal with worldly policy.

he North, the Bangorian monks were cruelly murdered; but this was lon^ after the death of Augustine, who, nevertheless, has been accused by some writers of exciting

The next great event of Augustine’s life was his attempt to establish uniformity of discipline and customs in the island, and as a necessary step to gain over the British (Welch) bishops to his opinion. These Britons, from the first time of planting Christianity in the island, had constantly followed the rules and customs left them by their first masters. But the church of Rome had made certain alterations in the manner of celebrating divine service? to which it pretended all other churches ought to conform, The churches of the West, as being the nearest to Rome, were the most easily gained and almost all of them, excepting those of France and Milan, conformed at last to the Roman ritual. But Britain still continued, as kwere, a world apart. Since the embassy of Lucius to pope Eleutherius, the Britons bad very little communication with the bishops of Rome. They acknowledged them only as bishops of a particular diocese, or, at most, as heads of a patriarchate, on which they did not think the British church ought to be any way dependent. They were so far from receiving orders from the pope, that they were even strangers to his pretensions. But Augustine, full of zeal for the interests of the see of Rome, made an attempt to bring them to acknowledge the superiority of the pope over all other churches. For this purpose he invited the Welch bishops to a conference, and began to admonish them to enter into Christian peace and concord, that they might join with him in converting the Pagans but this proved fruitless, as they would hearken to no prayers or exhortations, and Augustine, therefore, had recourse to a miracle. A blind man. was introduced to be healed, and was healed by Augustine’s prayers, when those of the ancient Britons failed. They were obliged, therefore, to confess that Augustine was sent of God, but pleaded the obstinacy of their people as a reason for their non-compliance. A second synod was appointed, attended by seven British bishops, and many of their learned men, belonging to the ancient monastery of Bangor, of which Dinoth was at that time abbot. Before these came to the synod, they asked the advice of a person of reputed sanctity, whether they should give up their own traditions on the authority of Augustine or not. “Let humility,” said he, “be the test; and if you find, when you come to the synod, that he rises up to you at your approach, obey him if not, let him be despised by you.” On such precarious evidence was a matter to rest which they thought so important. It happened that Augustine continued sitting on their arrival, which might easily have been the case without any intentional insult but it answered the purpose of the Britons, already averse to join him, and they would now hearken to no terms of reconciliation. Augustine proposed that they should agree with him only in three things, leaving other points of difference undetermined namely, to observe Easter at the same time with the rest of the Christian world to administer baptism after the Roman manner; and to join with him in preaching the gospel to the English but all this they rejected, and refused to acknowledge his authority. This provoked Augustine to tell them, that if they would not have peace with brethren, they should have war with enemies and it hap, pened afterwards, that in an invasion of the Pagan Saxons. of the North, the Bangorian monks were cruelly murdered; but this was lon^ after the death of Augustine, who, nevertheless, has been accused by some writers of exciting the animosity which ended in that massacre. For this there seems no solid foundation. Augustine betrayed an improper warmth, and was not free from ambition but in all his history we can find no instance of a sanguinary spirit, or any inclination to propagate Christianity by any other weapons than those he had at first employed. The Britons undoubtedly had a right to their independence, and Augustine is not to be praised for endeavouring to destroy what had so long existed, and over which he had no legal controul.

lenus, which was published in Latin, at Lunenburg, in 1624, folio, was also the work of this prince, who died in 1666, in the eighty-seventh year of his age.

, duke of Brunswick and Lunenburg, was a man of learning, and a patron of men of learning. He published several works, among which his “Evangelical Harmony,” written in German, is much esteemed by Protestants. He published also, in 1636, a “Treatise on the Cultivation of Orchards, which is still consulted in Germany. The” Steganographia," under the name of Gustavus Selenus, which was published in Latin, at Lunenburg, in 1624, folio, was also the work of this prince, who died in 1666, in the eighty-seventh year of his age.

Several great princes had been taken dangerously ill, and Avicenna was the only one who could know their ailments, and administer a remedy. His reputation

Several great princes had been taken dangerously ill, and Avicenna was the only one who could know their ailments, and administer a remedy. His reputation consequently increased daily, and all the kings of Asia desired to retain him in their families. Mahmoud, the first sultan of the dynasty of Samanides, was then the most powerful prince of the east. Imagining that an implicit obedience was due by all to his will, he wrote a haughty letter to Mamoun, sultan of Kharism, ordering him to send Avicenna to him, who was at his court, with several other learned men but as Avicenna had himself been used to the most flattering distinctions, he resented this imperious command, and refused to go. The sultan of Kharism, however, obliged him to depart with the others who had been demanded.

icenna pretended to obey, but, instead of repairing to Gazna, he took the road to Giorgian. Mahmoud, who had gloried in the thought of keeping him at his palace, was

Avicenna pretended to obey, but, instead of repairing to Gazna, he took the road to Giorgian. Mahmoud, who had gloried in the thought of keeping him at his palace, was greatly irritated at his flight, and dispatched portraits of this philosopher to all the princes of Asia, with orders to have him conducted to Gazna, if he appeared in their courts. But Avicenna eluded the most diligent search, and arrived in the capital of Giorgian, where, under a disguised name, he performed many admirable cures. Cabous then reigned in that country, and a favourite nephew having fallen sick, he consulted the most able physicians, none of whom were able to discover his disorder, or to give him any relief. Avicenna was at last consulted, who discovered, as soon as he felt the young prince’s pulse, that his disorder was concealed love, and he commanded the person, who had the care of the different apartments in the palace, to name them all in their respective order. A more lively motion in the prince’s pulse, at hearing mentioned one of those apartments, betrayed a part of his secret. The keeper then had orders to name all the slaves that inhabited that apartment. At the name of one of those beauties, the young prince, by the extraordinary beating of his pulse, completed the discovery of what he in vain desired to keep concealed. Avicenna, now fully assured that this slave was the cause of his illness, declared that she alone had the power to cure him. The Sultan’s consent being necessary, he expressed a desire to see his nephew’s physician, and had scarcely looked at him when he knew in his features those of the portrait sent to him by Mahmoud but Cabous, far from forcing Avicenna to repair to Gazna, retained him for some time with him, and heaped honours and presents on him.

e liberation of Desgodets and A viler, and likewise for John Foi Vaillant, the celebrated antiquary, who had been a passenger with them. Sixteen months, however, elapsed

, descended from a family originally of Nanci in Lorraine, but long established at Paris, was born in the latter city in 1653. From his earliest years, he discovered a taste for architecture, and studying the art with eagerness, soon made very considerable progress. At the age of twenty he was sent to an academy at Rome, founded by the king of France for the education of young men of promising talents in painting, architecture, &c. He was accompanied in the voyage by the celebrated Antony Desgodets, whose measurements of the ancient Roman edifices are so well known. They embarked at Marseilles about the end of 1674, with all the impatience of youthful curiosity, but had the misfortune to be taken by an Algerine corsair, and carried into slavery. Louis XIV. no sooner heard of their disaster, than he made interest for the liberation of Desgodets and A viler, and likewise for John Foi Vaillant, the celebrated antiquary, who had been a passenger with them. Sixteen months, however, elapsed before the Algerines admitted them to be exchanged for some Turkish prisoners in the power of France. Aviler and his friends obtained their liberty, Feb. 22, 1676. During their slavery, Aviler could not conceal his art, although the admiration with which it struck the Algerines, might have afforded them a pretext for detaining one who could be so useful to them. On the contrary, he solicited employment, and had it at least there was extant some time ago, an original plan and elevation of a mosque which he made, and which was built accordingly at Tunis. On being released, however, he went to Rome, where he studied for five years with uninterrupted assiduity, and on his return to France was appointed by M. Mansart, first royal architect, to a considerable place in the board of architecture. While in this situation, iie began to collect materials for a complete course of architectural studies. His first design was to reprint an edition of Vignola, with corrections but perceiving that the explanations of the plates in that work were too short, he began to add to them remarks and illustrations in the form of commentary and, what has long rendered his work valuable, he added a complete series, in alphabetical order, of architectural definitions, which embrace every branch, direct or collateral, of the art, and which have been copied into all the subsequent French dictionaries. He prefixed also a translation of Scamozzi’s sixth book, which treats of the orders.

r, where he built a magnificent triumphal arch, in honour of Louis XIV. from a design by M. D'Orbay, who was one of his friends, and had assisted him in completing his

While Aviler remained as subordinate to Mansart, "he conceived that he could not acquire any high distinction in his profession, and therefore accepted an invitation to go to Montpeliier, where he built a magnificent triumphal arch, in honour of Louis XIV. from a design by M. D'Orbay, who was one of his friends, and had assisted him in completing his literary work. This arch was finished in 1692, and highly approved, and A viler afterwards constructed various edifices at Beziers, Nismes, Montpeliier, and at Toulouse, where he built the archiepiscopal palace. In 1693 the states of Languedoc, as a testimony of their esteem, created the title of architect to the province, a mark of distinction which induced him to reside there during life; but this was not long, as he died in -1700, when only forty-seven years of age.

was republished in the third edition of his essay in 1775. Avison had been a disciple of Geminiani, who, as well as Giardini, had a great esteem for him, and visited

, an ingenious English musician, was born probably at Newcastle, where he exercised his profession during the whole of his life. In 1736, July 12, he was appointed organist of St. John’s church in that town, which he resigned for the church of St. Nicholas in October following. In 1748, when the organ of St. John’s required repair, which would amount to 160l. Mr. Avison offered to give 100l. if the parish would raise the other 60l. upon condition that they appointed him organist, with a salary of 20l. and allow him to supply the place by a sufficient deputy. This appears to have been agreed upon, and the place was supplied by his son Charles. In 1752 he published “An essay on Musical Expression,” London, 12mo. In this essay, written with neatness and even elegance of style, he treats of the power and force of music, and the analogies between it and painting of musical composition, as consisting of harmony, air, and expression and of musical expression so far as it relates to the performer. To the second edition, which appeared in 1753^ was added, an ingenious and learned letter to the author, concerning the music of the ancients, now known to be written by Dr. Jortin. Mr. Avison’s treatise was very favourably received, but some were dissatisfied with his sentiments on the excellencies and defects of certain eminent musicians, and particularly his preference of Marcello and Geminiani, or at least, the latter, to Handel. In the same year, therefore, was published, “Remarks on Mr. Avison’s essay, &c. wherein the characters of several great masters, both ancient and modern, are rescued from the misrepresentations of the above author and their real merit ascertained and vindicated. In a letter, from a gentleman to his friend in the country.” In this tract, which was written by Dr. Hayes, professor of music at Oxford, Mr. Avison is treated with very little ceremony, and accused of being ignorant, or neglectful of our ancient English musicians, and of having spoke too coldly of the merits of Handel. It is also insinuated that he was obliged to abler pens for the style and matter of his essay. This last was probably true, as both Dr. Brown and Mr. Mason are supposed to have assisted him, but in what proportions cannot now be ascertained. Mr. Avison wrote a reply to Dr. Hayes, nearly in the same uncourtly style, which was republished in the third edition of his essay in 1775. Avison had been a disciple of Geminiani, who, as well as Giardini, had a great esteem for him, and visited him at Newcastle, where the latter played for his benefit. Whenever Geminiani affected to hold Handel’s compositions cheap, it was usual with him to say, “Charley Avison shall make a better piece of music in a month’s time.” Avison died at Newcastle, May 10, 1770, and was succeeded in the church of St. Nicholas, by his son Edward, who himself died in 1776, and in the church of St. John, by his son Charles, who resigned in 1777. Avison assisted in the. publication of Marcello’s music to the psalms adapted to English words. Of his own composition there are extant five collections of concertos for violins, forty-four in number; and two sets of sonatas for the harpsichord, and two violins, a species of composition little known in England till his time. The music of Avison is light and elegant, but wants originality, a consequence of his too close attachment to the style of Geminiani.

d during his conferences, for this purpose with the Arian bishops before Goudeband king of Burgundy, who was an Arian, he converted his son Sigismorid. Cave thinks he

, son to the senator Isychius, and brother to Apollinaris, bishop of Valentia, was promoted in the beginning of the sixth century to the archbishopric of Vienna, which his father had also held for some years. His principal object was the refutation and conversion of the Arians, and during his conferences, for this purpose with the Arian bishops before Goudeband king of Burgundy, who was an Arian, he converted his son Sigismorid. Cave thinks he converted the king himself, and when he found him concealing his principles, urged him to a public profession of them. He wrote also in defence of pope Symmachus, and died in the year 523. His principal works were Letters, Sermons, and Poems his Letters, 87 in number, contain many curious particulars of the civil and ecclesiastical history of the times. Of his Homilies, one only is extant on Rogation day, in which he gives the origin of the days so called. In all his works, his style is harsh, obscure, and intricate. His poems were printed at Francfort in 1507, and at Paris and Lyons in 1508, 1509, and 1536 but his whole works were published at Paris by father Sirmond, in 1643, fol. and since that Luc d'Achery published in his Spicilegium, the conference with the Arian bishops.

llowing brief notices of others of this name: Jerome Avogadro, a patron of learning and learned men, who first edited the works of Vitruvius. Nestor-Denis Avogadro,

, of Verceil in Italy, lived under the government of Cosmo de Medicis, grand duke of Florence, whose piety and magnificence he celebrated in a poem in elegiac verse, consisting of two books. It was printed in the 12th volume of Lami’s “Delicice Eruditorum.” The late edition of the Dictioiinaire Historiqtie gives the following brief notices of others of this name: Jerome Avogadro, a patron of learning and learned men, who first edited the works of Vitruvius. Nestor-Denis Avogadro, a native of Novaro, who published a Lexicon, of which an edition was printed at Venice in 1488^ fol. To the subsequent editions were added some treatises by the same author, on the eight parts of speech, on prosody, &c. —Peter Avogadro, who lived at Verona about 1490, He wrote Literary Memoirs of the illustrious mqii of his country tin Essay on the origin of Mont-de-Piete in Italy, and another “De Origine gentis Rizzonae.” The marquis Maffei speaks in high praise of this author in his “Verona Illustrata.

uscripts. Here he became acquainted with, and was highly respected by, the emperor John Palaeologus, who found him afterwards at Ferrara when he went to assist at a

was born at Noto, a town of Sicily, in 1369. He applied himself to the study of the Greek language, and went to Constantinople to collect Greek manuscripts. Here he became acquainted with, and was highly respected by, the emperor John Palaeologus, who found him afterwards at Ferrara when he went to assist at a council assembled by Eugene IV. Aurispa bepame secretary to this pope and also to Nicholas V. his successor, who bestowed upon him two rich abbeys. He died at Rome in 1459, in the 90th year of his age. He translated part of the works of Archimedes, Hierocles’s Commentary on the Golden verses of Pythagoras, and published some poems and letters. His translation of Hierocles was printed at Basle in 1543, 8vo. By a part of the preface, quoted by Gesner, it appears that he made this translation when in his eightieth year.

th is uncertain he was living in 392, and lived to a great age. He hud several children by his wife, who died young. The emperor Thcodosius had a great esteem for Ausonius,

, an eminent poet of the fourth century, was the son of a physician, and born at Itourdeaux. Great care was taken of his eJucation, the whole family interesting themselves in it, either because his genius was very promising, or that the scheme of his nativity, which had been cast by his grandfather on the mother’s side, led them to imagine that he would rise to great honour. Whatever their motive, it is allowed that he made an uncommon progress in classical learning, and at the age of thirty was chosen to teach grammar at Bourdeaux, He was promoted some time after to be professor of rhetoric, in which office he acquired so great a reputation, that he ivas sent for to court to be preceptor to Gratian the emperor Valentinian’s son. The rewards and honours conferred on him for the faithful discharge of his office remind us of Juvenal’s maxim, that when fortune pleases she can liaise a man from a rhetorician to a consul. He was actually appointed consul by the emperor Gratian, in the year 379, after having filled other considerable posts; for, besides the dignity of questor, to which he had been nominated by Valentinian, he was made prefect of the pnetorium in Italy and Gaul after that prince’s death. His speech returning thanks to Gratian on his promotion to the consulship is highly commended. The time of his death is uncertain he was living in 392, and lived to a great age. He hud several children by his wife, who died young. The emperor Thcodosius had a great esteem for Ausonius, and pressed him to publish his poems. There is a great inequality in his productions; and in his style there is a harshness, which was perhaps rather the defect of the times Le lived in, than of his genius. Had he lived in Augustus’s reign, his verses, according to good judges, would have equalled the most finished of that age. He is generally supposed to have been a Christian some ingenious authors indeed have thought otherwise, and the indecency of many of his poems make us not very anxious to claim him. The editio princeps of his works was published at Venice, 1472, fol. of which there are four copies in this country, in the libraries of his majesty, the museum, earl Spencer, and Mr. Wodhull. De Bure was not able to find one in France. The two best editions, the first yery uncommon, are those of Amsterdam, 1671, 8yo, and Bipont, 1785, 8vo.

e the history of France from 1490 to 1508, with great fidelity, but M. Gamier says, that “Louis XII. who usually employed the most celebrated pens, chose, with less

, historiographer of France under Louis XII. abbot of Angle in Poitou, was originally of Saintonge, and of the same family from which, according to some authors, the famous Barbarossa descended. He wrote the history of France from 1490 to 1508, with great fidelity, but M. Gamier says, that “Louis XII. who usually employed the most celebrated pens, chose, with less than his ordinary discernment, Jean d‘Authon, to write the particular history of his reign’: for, though he had bestowed several benefices upon him though he made him commonly travel in the suite of the army, and gave orders to his ministers and generals to conceal nothing frorn Jiim of all that was worthy of being handed down to posterity, he was less happy in this respect than a great number of his predecessors. Authon is but a cold proser, nice in giving the particulars of little matters, but deficient in unfolding motives, &c.” Theodore Godefroi published the four first years of his history in 1620, 4to, and the two last which had appeared in 1615, in 4to, with “l'Histoire de Louis XII.” by Seyssel the three others, whieh have not yet been sent to the press, are now in the Imperial library. This historian died in January 1523, according to Moreri, or 1527 in Diet. Hist, which gives the following productions from his pen: 1. “Les Epistres envoyees au roy par les 6tats de France, avec certaines ballades et rondeaux,” Lyons, 1509, 4to. 2. “L'exil de Gennes le Superbe,1508, 4to. 3. te Diverses pieces sur la mort de Thomassine Espinolle (Spinola) ms."

, a philosopher who flourished about 340 years before the Christian oera. He was

, a philosopher who flourished about 340 years before the Christian oera. He was the preceptor of Arcesilas, the son of Seuthes. He wrote several treatises on astronomy, of which Joseph Auria, of Naples, translated into Latin the only ones extant, on the sphere, and the stars.

luntary application, or early pregnancy of genius, he merely complied with the desire of his father, who was a musician, in turning his thoughts, or rather employing

, an eminent French musician and composer, was born at Clermont in Auvergne, Oct. 4, 1713. Instead of giving any extraordinary proofs of voluntary application, or early pregnancy of genius, he merely complied with the desire of his father, who was a musician, in turning his thoughts, or rather employing his time, in that pursuit. About his eighteenth year, however, an entire change appeared to have taken place in his mind, which became suddenly seized with the most violent enthusiasm, and such was his application night and day, that he soon became a capital performer on the violin, and was in 1739 thought worthy of the honour of being admitted into his majesty’s chamber band. With no other help in composition than the works of Rameau, he composed a trio for two violins and a bass, which he presented to that celebrated author, who, flattered by such a mark of respect, offered the young composer his advice and friendship. Auvergne began to compose a number of works for the court and the opera, which were much admired. In 1766, having the direction of the spiritual concert entrusted to him, and being unable to treat with Mondonville, who asked an exorbitant price for his Motets, Auvergne, undismayed by the vast reputation which the Orpheus of Languedoc (as Mondonville was called) had acquired in that species of composition, turned his own talents to it, and with such success, that his “Te Deum,” “De Profundis,” and his “Miserere,” were considered as first-rate works. In 1753, he composed the music of the first comic opera that was exhibited in France, and thus prepared the way for that style in which Monsigny, Gretry, and Daleyrac have since so ably distinguished themselves. Auvergne was director of the opera from 1767 to 1775, and from 1785 to 1790. Although in this time he had not Studied to accumulate a fortune, he lived in very easy circumstances until the revolution, when he lost all his places, and was thrown into a state approaching to indigence. Jn 1796, he went to Lyons, and was consoled in liis age and poverty by his sisters and his second wife, and here he died Feb. 12, 1797, justly regretted hy all who knew him. Besides the music already mentioned, he composed the following operas, “Canente,” “Enee et Lavinie,” and “Hercule mourant,” all in his younger days, but the dates not specified “Les Amours de Tempe,1752Les Fetes d'Euterpe,1758; “Polyxene,1763; “La Venitienne.” He also retouched some former operas, and composed the music of several ballets performed at Versailles and.Fontainbieau. It seems remarkable that so popular a composer, and one who had contributed so much to “gladden life” in the gay metropolis of France, should have been left to end his days in obscurity and poverty.

, born in the Hainaut, lived some time with the abbé des Fontaines, who formed his taste. He entered afterwards into the light -horse-guards,

, born in the Hainaut, lived some time with the abbé des Fontaines, who formed his taste. He entered afterwards into the light -horse-guards, and was killed in the buttle of Dettingen, in 1743, at the age of 3 I He was a man of genius and imagination. His writings are 1. “Memoirs of madame de Barneveldt,” a romance, 2 vols. 12mo. 2. “An abridgment of the history of France and of the Roman history,” by question and answer, 2 vols. 12mo. which was recommended as useful to young persons. It used to be, and sometimes yet is, attributed to the abbe des Fontaines, who only revised it, but overlooked several inaccuracies in the dates and negligences in the style. 3. The three first volumes, and half of the fourth, of the “History of Paris,” in 5 vols. 12mo. 4. The eight first volumes of the “Lives of the illustrious men of France,” in 12mo. The ninth and the tenth were published in 1744, by his brother, canon of Prempntre. The work was continued by the abbe Pereau and M. Turpin. D'Auvigny’s part is written with spirit, and contains curious anecdotes and facts but little known. But the author prefers the ornaments of style to historical precision, and sometimes adopts the romantic tone. His cjiction is in general either laboriously inflated, or too negligent.

countrymen, Mr. Gascoigne. He relates that from some scattered letters and papers of this gentlemen, who was killed in the grand rebellion, he had learned that before

was a French astronomer, and a picmber of the old academy of France, into which he was received in 1666. He is principally known for having brought to perfection the micrometer, an instrument usually fitted to a telescope, in the focus of the objectglass, for measuring small angles or distances. This he published in 1666, but Mr. Townley, in the Philosophical Transactions, claims it for one of our countrymen, Mr. Gascoigne. He relates that from some scattered letters and papers of this gentlemen, who was killed in the grand rebellion, he had learned that before its breaking out, he had invented a micrometer, of as much effect as that made by M. Auzout, and had made use of it for some years not only in taking the diameters of the planets, and distances upon land, but in determining other matters of nice importance in the heavens, as the moon’s distance, &c. Mr. Gascoigne’s instrument also fell into the hands of Mr. Townley, who says farther, that by the help of it he could make above 40,000 divisions in a foot. The French writers endeavour to deny all this, and conclude with an assertion, as illiberal as it is false, that every nation has a zeal for its literary glory, but that in England alone this zeal is pushed to ardour and to injustice. Auzout, however, was an astronomer of acknowledged abilities. He died in 1691.

and entertained them at his house in Windsor-park, where he usually spent the summer. Walter Warner, who, at his request, wrote a treatise on coins and coinage, and

, a patron of learning, was the second son of William Aylesbury by his wife Anne, daughter of John Poole, esq. and was born in London in 1576. He was educated at Westminster school, and, in 1598, became a student of Christ church, Oxford where he distinguished himself by his assiduous application to his studies, especially the mathematics. In June 1605, he took his degree of M. A. After he quitted the university, he was employed as secretary to Charles earl of Nottingham, then lord high admiral of England, in which post he had an opportunity of improving his mathematical knowledge, as well as of giving many proofs of it. On this account when George Villiers, duke of Buckingham, succeeded the earl of Nottingham as high admiral, Mr. Aylesbury not onlv kept his employment, but was also, by the favour of that‘powerful duke, created a baronet, April 19, 1627, having been before made master of requests, and master of the mint. These lucrative employments furnished him with the means of expressing his regard for learned men. He not only made all men of science welcome at his table, and afforded them all the countenance he could but likewise gave to such of them as were in narrow circumstances, regular pensions out of his own fortune, and entertained them at his house in Windsor-park, where he usually spent the summer. Walter Warner, who, at his request, wrote a treatise on coins and coinage, and the famous Mr. Thomas Harriot, were among the persons to whom he extended his patronage, and Harriot left him (in conjunction with Robert Sidney and viscount Lisle) all his writings and all the Mss. he had collected. Mr. Thomas Allen of Oxford, likewise, whom he had recommended to the duke of Buckingham, confided his manuscripts to sir Thomas, who is said to have been one of the most acute and candid critics ef his time. By this means he accumulated a valuable library of scarce books and Mss. which were either lost at home during the civil wars, or sold abroad to relieve his distresses; for in 1642 his adherence to the king, occasioned his being turned out of his places, and plundered of his estates. This he bore with some fortitude, but the murder of his sovereign gave him a distaste of his country, and retiring with his family to Flanders, he lived for some time at Brussels, and afterwards at Breda, where in 1657 he died. He left a son William, who, at the request of Charles I. undertook to translate D’Avila’s History of the Civil Wars of France, which appeared in 1647 but in the second edition, published in 1678, the merit of the whole translation is given to sir Charles Cotterel, except a few passages in the first four books. The calamities of his country affected this gentleman too, and in 1657, when Cromwell fitted out a fleet to go on an expedition to the West Indies, and to carry a supply to the island of Jamaica, Mr. Aylesbury, from pure necessity, engaged himself as secretary to the governor, and died on the island soon after. His surviving sister, the countess of Clarendon, became heiress of what could be recovered of the family estate.

ed himself by his pregnant parts, to the marquis of Dorset (Henry Grey), afterwards duke of Suffolk, who honoured him with the title of his Scholar, and gave him an

, an eminent English prelate, descended from a very ancient and honourable family, seated at Aylmer-hall, in Norfolk, was born in 1521, and being a younger brother, was either recommended by his relations, or recommended himself by his pregnant parts, to the marquis of Dorset (Henry Grey), afterwards duke of Suffolk, who honoured him with the title of his Scholar, and gave him an exhibition at the university of Cambridge. When he had there attained competent learning, the marquis took him home, where he became tutor to his children, amongst whom was the lady Jane, who for some days was styled queen, and who, under Aylmer’s tuition, acquired the Latin and Greek tongues, reading and writing in the latter with ease and elegance, By his care also, she received right principles of religion, as he imbibed the opinions of the primitive reformers and having for his patrons the duke of Suffolk and the carl of Huntingdon, in the reign of Edward VI., was for some time the only preacherin Leicestershire; where he had great success in inculcating the, Protestant religion. When the celebrated Ascliam, in a visit to lady Jane in 1550, asked her how so young a lady (not then ahove fourteen) could have arrived at such perfection both in philosophy and the Greek language, she bore the following testimony to the merit of her tutor “1 will tell you,” said she, “and tell you truth, which, perchance, you will marvel at. One of the greatest benefits which ever God gave me, is that he sent so sharp and severe parents, and so gentle a schoolmaster. For when I am in presence either of father or mother, whether I speak, keep silence, sit, stand, or go eat, drink, be merry or sad be sewing, placing, dancing, or doing any thing else, I must do it, as it were, in such weight, measure, and number, and even so perfectly, as God made the world, or else, I am so sharply taunted, so cruelly threatened, yea, presently sometimes with pinches, nips, and bobs (or other ways, which I will not name, for the honour I bear them), so without measure misordereo”, that I think myself in hell, till time come that I must go to Mr. Elmer, who teachfeth me so gently, so pleasantly, with fair allurements to learning, that I think all the time nothing while I am with him and when I am called from him, 1 fall a weeping, because whatsoever I do else but learning, is full of grief, trouble, fear, and wholly misliking unto me and this my book hath been so much my pleasure, and bringeth daily to me more pleasure, and more yet, in respect to it, all other pleasures, in very deed, be but trifles and troubles unto me." Mr. Ascharn was so affected with this interview, that in a letter to lady Jane, dated the eighteenth of January, 1551, he speaks of it in rapture, and by a beautiful apostrophe, addressing himself to Mr. Ay liner, felicitates him on his having so ingenious a scholar, in a strain of compliment, which he says the great Sturmius made use of to him, speaking of his happiness, in having the lady Elizabeth for his pupil. In this letter it is, that he desires Mr. Aylmer, to whom be foresaw it would be shewn, to engage the lady Jane, to write a letter in Greek to himself, and another to Sturmius, and also desires they might continue to live in the same learned friendship and intercourse, which they had hitherto done.

of queen Mary, he boldly opposed that return to Popery, which he saw approaching. He was one of six$ who, in the midst of all the violence of that assembly, offered

The first preferment bestowed upon Aylmer, was the archdeaconry of Stow, in the diocese of Lincoln, which giving him a seat in the convocation, held in the first year of queen Mary, he boldly opposed that return to Popery, which he saw approaching. He was one of six$ who, in the midst of all the violence of that assembly, offered to dispute all the controverted points in religion, against the most learned champions, of the Papists. But when the supreme power began to employ force, archdeacon Aylmer withdrew^ and escaped abroad in almost a miraculous manner*. He resided first at Strasbourg, afterwards at Zurick in Switzerland, and there in peace followed his studies, employing all his time in acquiring knowledge, or in assist^ ing other men of study. His thoughts, though in a distant country, were continually employed in the service of England, and of Englishmen. He published (as Strype supposes) lady Jane Grey’s letter to Harding, who had been her father’s chaplain, and who apostatized. He assisted Fox in translating the History of English Martyrs into Latin, and also in the version of archbishop Cranmer’s Vindication of the book on the Sacrament, against Gardiner, bishop of Winchester, which, however, was never printed. During these employments he found leisure to visit most of the universities of Italy and Germany, and had an offer from the duke of Saxony, of the Hebrew professorship of Jena, which he refused, on the prospect of speedily returning home* It was during his exile likewise that he wrote the only work of consequence which he ever published, in answer to the famous Scotch reformer, John Knox. In 1556, John Knox printed, at Geneva, a treatise under this title “The first Blast against the monstrous regiment and empire of Women,” to shew that, by the laws of God, women could not exercise sovereign authority. The objects of this attack were the two queens, Mary of Lorrain, then regent of Scotland, and Mary queen of England. It was violent, but not unargumentative, and he could appeal with effect to the laws of France, and to the recent proposal of Edward VI. to adopt the same laWi He intended a second, and a third part; but finding it gave offence to many of his brethren, and being desirous to strengthen rather than invalidate the authority of Elizabeth, he relinquished his design. Still as this first tended to injure the Protestant religion in the minds of Princes, and those in authority, Mr. Aylmer resolved to employ his

* Fuller says that the ship in which and that Aylmer, who was a man of

* Fuller says that the ship in which and that Aylmer, who was a man of

pric of York/ Dr. Ayltner was made bishop of London, not without the furtherance of his predecessor, who was his intimate friend, and had beeii his fellow-exile. Yet,

After the accession of queen Elizabeth, Aylmer returned home, and was one of the eight divines appointed to dispute with as many popish bishops at Westminster, in the presence of a great assembly. In 1562, he obtained the archdeaconry of Lincoln, by the favour of Mr. secretary Cecil and in right of this dignity, sat in the famous synod held the same year, wherein the doctrine and discipline of the church, and its reformation from the abuses of popery, were carefully examined and settled. In this situation he continued for many years, and discharged the duty of a good subject to the government under which he lived, in church and state being one of the -queen’s justices of the peace, as also an ecclesiastical commissioner. In October, 1573, he accumulated the degrees of bachelor and doctor in divinity, in the university of Oxford. The next year the archbishop of Canterbury made choice of him, to answer a book written in Latin against the government of the church of England but after thoroughly considering it, Dr. Aylmer declined the task, which some in those days (perhaps unjustly) attributed to discontent, because he was not made a bishop. To this dignity he had been often named by Parker, then archbishop of Canterbury, but always prevented either by the interest of the archbishop’s enemies, or his own, the latter never failing to suggest, that in the same book where Aylmer had made his court to the queen, he had also shewn his spleen against episcopacy. At last, in the year 1576, on Dr. Edwin Sandys being promoted to the archbishopric of York/ Dr. Ayltner was made bishop of London, not without the furtherance of his predecessor, who was his intimate friend, and had beeii his fellow-exile. Yet, immediately after his promotion, bishop Aylmer found, or thought he found, cause to complain of the archbishop and although his grace assisted at his consecration, on the 24th of March, 3576, bishop Aylmer sued him for dilapidations, which after some years prosecution he recovered. In 1577, our bishop began his first visitation, wherein he urged subscriptions, which some ministers refused, and reviled such as complied, calling them dissemblers, and comparing them to Arians and Anabaptists, he was also extremely assiduous in public preaching, took much pains in examining such as came to him for ordination, and kept a strict eye over the Papists and Puritans in which he acted not only to the extent of episcopal authority, but wrote freely to the treasurer Burleigh, as to what he thought farther necessary. When the plague rageed in London, in the year 1578, our bishop shewed a paternal care of his clergy and people, and without exposing the former to needless perils, took care that these last should not be without spiritual comforts. In 1581 came out Campion’s book, shewing the reasons why he had deserted the reformed, and returned to the popish communion. It was written in very elegant Latin, and dedicated to the scholars of both universities and the treasurer Burleigh thought that it should be answered, and referred the care thereof to our bishop, who though he gave his opinion freely upon the subject, as to the mode in which it should be done, yet declined the task himself on account of the great business he had upon his hands, and it was undertaken and ably executed by Dr. Whitaker. Aylmer was indeed no great friend to controversy, which he thought turned the minds of the people too much from the essence of religion, made them quarrelsome and captious, indifferent subjects, and not very good Christians. On this account, he was more severe with the Puritans than the Papists, imprison ing one Woodcock, a stationer or bookseller, for vending a treatise, entitled “An Admonition to Parliament,” which tended to subvert the church as it was then constituted. He had likewise some disputes with one Mr. Welden, a person of a good estate and interest, in Berkshire, whom he procured to be committed by the ecclesiastical imssioners. These proceedings roused the Puritans, who treated him as a persecutor, and an enemy to true religion but this did not discourage the bishop, who thought the peace of the church was to be secured by the authority of its fathers, and therefore he executed his episcopal power, as far and as often as he thought necessary. Thus he suddenly summoned the clergy of London to his palace on Sunday, September 27, 1579, at one o'clock. On this summons forty appeared and the dean being likewise present, the bishop cautioned them of two things, one was, not to meddle with the Ubiquitarian controversy the other, to avoid meddling with the points treated in Stubb’s book, entitled “The Dfscovery of a gaping Gulph,” &c. written against the queen’s marriage with Monsieur, the French king’s brother, and in which it was suggested, that the queen wavered in her religion. This method being found very effectual, he summoned his clergy often, and made strict inquiries into their conduct, a practice as much approved by some, as censured by others and his unpopularity, perhaps, might occasion, in some measure, that violence with which he was prosecuted before the council, in May 1579, for cutting down his woods, when he was severely checked by the lord treasurer but notwithstanding his angry letters to that great nobleman, and his long and laboured defence of himself, he was, at length, by the queen’s command, forbidden to fell any more.

o be made use of in the public service. In 1581, the bishop had an angry contest with the lord Rich, who kept one Wright a puritan minister in his house, and would have

On the 6th of April, in the same year, there was a dreadful earthquake and in the dead of the night of the 1 st of May, it was felt again, which, as it exceedingly terrified the people, so the bishop, that he might turn their concern to a proper object, and at the same time exhibit to them reasonable grounds of comfort, composed certain prayers to be made use of in the public service. In 1581, the bishop had an angry contest with the lord Rich, who kept one Wright a puritan minister in his house, and would have compelled the bishop to license him to preach in his diocese but on a hearing before the ecclesiastical commissioners, Wright was committed to the Fleet, and others who had interfered in this affair, to other prisons. This increased the number of his enemies, of whom he had not a few before, who daily suggested that he was a violent man, and sought to vest too great a power in churchmen and these representations had such effect, that sometimes messages were sent to him, to abate somewhat of the rigour of his proceedings. His lordship, however, still supported the ecclesiastical commission, by his presence and authority; and though a milder course might have made him more popular, yet he thought it better to suffer himself, than that the church should. He began, however, to have many doubts concerning the treasurer, from whose hands his reproofs usually came but upqn the winding up of his cause before the council about felling of woods, he saw clearly, that he had no friend equal to the treasurer, who, though he endeavoured by his admonitions to prevent his falling into difficulties, yet generously exerted his utmost power to help him out of them, so far as was consistent with equity, and the good of the common weal. From this time forward, therefore, thebishop applied chiefly to the treasurer, for any favours he expected from court, particularly with regard to the business of his translation. He became exceedingly solicitous to be removed from London, either to Winchester or Ely; but, though he had many fair promises, his interest was insufficient, and in the mean time new informations, some with little, many with no cause at all, were exhibited against him, and gave him not a little uneasiness, although, on a thorough examination, his conduct escaped the censure of his superiors. In 1583 he performed his triennial visitation, and having discovered many scandalous corruptions in the ecclesiastical courts, especially in the business of commuting penances, he honestly represented what came to his knowledge to the privy council. About this time also he suspended certain ministers, accused of nonconformity and it appears, that upon a thorough examination of the matter, his lordship did impartial justice, in restoring one Mr. Giffard, whom he had twice suspended, when those who had charged him were able to make nothing out. In this year also he committed Mr. Thomas Cartwright, the celebrated Puritan minister, who had written against the hierarchy. Yet for this his lordship incurred the queen’s displeasure and a little after was informed that he stood accused to her majesty, for impairing the revenues of his bishopric, of which he purged himself, by exhibiting a state of the bishopric as it then stood, compared with the condition it was in when he became bishop. Other difficulties. he met with, on account of the share he had in executing her majesty’s ecclesiastical commission, from which there were Continual appeals to the privy council, where the lords who favoured the Puritans, did not fail to object to the bishop’s conduct, which contributed not a little to irritate his warm temper. In 1585 he composed a prayer to be used on account of the rainy unseasonable weather, which he recommended to private families, as well as directed to be read with the public prayers. He also used his interest to quiet the murmurs of the common people in London, against the crowds of strangers who fled hither, to avoid the persecutions raised against them, for embracing the Protestant religion. In the summer of the year 1586, the, bishop went his next triennial visitation, and at Maiden in Essex, narrowly escaped an outrageous insult, intended against him by some disaffected persons. In 1587, the bishop entered into a new scene of trouble, on account of one Mr. Robert Cawdry, schoolmaster, whom the lord Burleigh had presented to the living of South LufFenhara in Rutlandshire, where, after preaching sixteen years, he was convened before the ecclesiastical commission, and at length, the bishop sitting as judge, deprived. Cawdry would not submit to the sentence upon which the matter was re-examined by the ecclesiastical commission, at Lambeth, where to deprivation, degradation was added. Cawdry, however, still refusing to submit, made new and warm representations to the lord Burleigh, who favoured him as much as with justice he could but after near five years contest, the bishop’s and archbishop’s sentences were supported, both by the civil and common lawyers. In 1588, his lordship restored one Mr. Henry Smith, a very eloquent and much admired preacher, whom he had suspended for contemptuous expressions against the book of Common Prayer, which Smith denied. In 1589, he expressed his dislike of certain libels against the king of Spain, giving it as his reason, that on so glorious a victory, it was better to thank God, than insult men, especially princes. That year also he visited his diocese, though he was grown old and very infirm, and suspended one Dyke at St. Alban’s, though he had been recommended by the lord treasurer. In 1591 he caused the above-mentioned Mr. Cartwright to be brought before him out of the Fleet, and expostulated with him roundly, on the disturbance he had given the church. In 1592, he strongly solicited in favour of Dr. Bullingham, and Dr. Cole, that they might be preferred to bishoprics, but without success, which his lordship foresaw. For he observed when he applied for them, that he was not so happy as to do rmieh good for his friends yet he added, he would never be wanting in shewing his good will, both to them and to the church. About this time, casting his eye on Dr. Bancroft, a rising and very active man, he endeavoured to obtain leave to resign his bishopric to him, as a man every way fit for such a charge but in this also he was disappointed, which it seems lay heavy at his heart for even on his death-bed, he expressed his earnest desire that Bancroft might succeed him. In 1592, the bishop assisted at his son’s visitation, as archdeacon of London, and exerted himself with as much zeal and spirit as he had ever shewn in his life. His great age, and great labours, however, weighed him down by degrees, and he died June 3, 1594, and his body being brought from his palace at Fulham, was interred in St. Paul’s cathedral before St. George’s chapel, under a fair stone of grey marble, with an inscription which was demolished by the republicans in Cromwell’s time. Bishop Aylmer married Judith Bure&, or Buers, of a very good family in Suffolk, by whom he had a very numerous offspring, viz. seven sons, and two or three daughters. As to the personal qualities of the bishop, they were, as those of most men are, good and bad, the former, perhaps, too much magnified by his friends, as the latter were by his enemies. He was solidly and extensively learned in all things that became either a great churchman, or a polite man, to know. He was very well versed in the three learned languages, had read much history, was a good logician, and very well skilled in the civil law. As a divine, he had studied, and understood the scripture thoroughly could preach, not only rhetorically but pathetically and in the course of his life-time, never buried his talent . He was in his heart, from the conviction of his head, a Protestant, and opposed Popery warmly, from a just sense of its errors, which he had the courage to combat openly in the days of queen Mary, and the honesty to suppress in the reign of queen Elizabeth. With all this, and indeed with a temper occasionally soured and irritable, he was a good-natured, facetious man, one extremely diligent and painful in the several employments he went through of too generous a temper to be corrupted, and of much too stout a one to be brow-beaten. He was a magnificent man in his house, as appears by his household, which consisted of fourscore persons, to whom he was a liberal and kind master. After his fatigues he was wot to refresh himself, either with conversation or at bowls. As to his failings, his temper was without doubt warm, his expressions sometimes too blunt, and his zeal not guided by wisdom. His enemies charged him with an exorbitant love of power, which displayed itself in various extraordinary acts of severity, with covetousness, which prompted him to spoil his see, and injure a private man; with intemperate heat against Puritans, with a slight regard of the Lord’s day, and with indecencies in ordinary speech some of which charges must be allowed a foundation, while on the other hand they appear to have been greatly exaggerated. But upon the whole there must have been many errors in a conduct which his superiors so often reproved. At the time of his decease he left seven sons, and either two or three daughters. His sons were, first, Samuel, who was bred to the law. He was stiled, of Claydon-hall in the county of Suffolk, and was high-sheriff of that county in the reign of king Charles I. and by two wives left a numerous posterity. His second, Theophilus, a most worthy divine, archdeacon of London, rector of Much-Hadham in Hertfordshire, and doctor of divinity. He was chaplain to king James, an able and zealous preacher, and, like his father, zealous against the Puritans, but so charitable, that he left his own family in indifferent circumstances. He lived a true pattern of Christian piety, and died heroically, closing his own eyelids, and with these words in his mouth, “Let my people know that their pastor died undaunted, and not afraid of death I bless my God, I have no fear, no doubt, no reluctancy, but a sure confidence in the sin-overcoming itierits of Jesus Christ.” This happened January 1625. He was buried in his own parish church, and the excellent primate Usher preached his funeral sermon, no inconsiderable proof of his merit. His third, John, who for some eminent service was knighted, and styled sir John Aylmer, of Rigby in the county of Lincoln, knt. Fourth, fifth, and sixth, Zachary, Nathaniel, and Edmund, of whom we know nothing particularly, except that Zachary and Edmund were the warmest friends that age produced. When Edmund lay sick, Zachary continued with him night and day till his death, and when a person came to measure the body, in order to make a coffin, Zachary would be measured also, and in a very short space took possession of the coffin made for him at the same time with that of his deceased brother. These gentlemen seem to have been divines. His seventh, Tobel, i.e. God is good. Archbishop Whitgift was his godfather, and the reason he was thus named, was his mother’s being overturned in a coach, without receiving any hurt, when she was big with child. He wrote himself Tobel Aylmer, of Writtle, in the county of Essex, gentleman. He married a gentleman’s daughter in that county, and had by her several children. As to the bishop’s daughters, Judith, the eldest, married William Lynch, of the county of Kent, esq. the second, Elizabeth, married sir John Foliot of Perton, in the county of Worcester, knt. Either a third daughter, or else lady Foliot, took for her second husband Mr. Squire, a clergyman, a man of wit, but very debauched, and a great spendthrift, though he had large preferments. He made a very unkind husband to his wife, which her father, the bishop, so much resented, that, as Martin MarPrelate phrasss it, “He went to buffets with his son-inlaw, for a bloody-nose .” This Squire died poor, lerving a son named John, who was well educated, and provided for as a clergyman, at the ex pence, and by the procurement of his uncle, Dr. Theophilus Aylmer, which he repaid with the utmost gratitude. To all his children our bishop, by his will, bearing date the 22d of April, 1594, bequeathed large legacies, as also some to his grand-children, appointing his two sons, Samuel and Theophilus, his executors, with Dr. Richard Vaughan, who was also his relation.

family, anciently seated at Bocton Alof near Wye, in the county of Kent, in the reign of Henry III. who removed to Hornchurch, in the county of Essex, in that of Henry

, bart. V.P.A.S. and F.R.S. of Framfield in Sussex, was descended from a Saxon family, anciently seated at Bocton Alof near Wye, in the county of Kent, in the reign of Henry III. who removed to Hornchurch, in the county of Essex, in that of Henry IV. and to Sudbury in that of Edward IV. Sir William Ayloffe of Great Braxtead, in the county of Essex, was knighted by James I. May 1, 1603, and created a baronet, Nov. 25, 1612; and from his eldest son by his third wife, the late baronet was the fourth in descent, and fifth in title. His father Joseph, a barrister, who married a daughter of Bryan Ayliffe, an eminent merchant of London, and died in 1717, and his grandfather, were both of Gray’s Inn. He was born about 1703, received the early part of his education at Westminster school, admitted of Lincoln’s Inn 1724, and in the same year was entered a gentleman-commoner at St. John’s college, Oxford, which college he quitted about 1728; elected F.A.S. Feb. 10, 1731-2, one of the first council under their charter, 1751 vice-president, 17; and F.R.S. June 3, 1731. He prevailed on Mr. Kirby, painter in Ipswich, to make drawings of a great number of monuments and buildings in Suffolk, of which twelve were engraved, with a description, 1748, and others remain unpublished. He had at that time an intention to write a history of the county, and had drawn up proposals for that purpose but, being disappointed of the materials which he had reason to expect for so laborious a work, they were never published. On the building of Westminsterbridge he was appointed secretary to the commissioners, 1737 and on the establishment of the Paper-office on the respectable footing it at present is, by the removal of the state-papers from the old gate at Whitehall to new apartments at the Treasury, he was nominated the first in the commission for the care and preservation of them. In 1747 he circulated “Proposals for printing by subscription, Encyclopaedia; or, a rational Dictionary of Arts, Sciences, and Trade. By several eminent hands. Methodized, digested, and now publishing at Paris, by M. Diderot, fellow of the Imperial and Royal Academies of Paris and St. Petersburgh and, as to the mathematical part, by M. d'Alembert, member of the Royal Academy of Sciences at Paris and Berlin, aud F. R. S. Translated from the French, with additions and improvements;” in which was to be included a great variety of new articles, tending to explain and illustrate the antiquities, history ecclesiastical, civil, and military, laws, customs, manufactures, commerce, curiosities, &c. of Great Britain and Ireland by sir Joseph Ayloffe, bart. F. R. S. and of the Society of Antiquaries of London, and author of “The Universal Librarian.” Of this work a prospectus was published, in one large sheet, dated Dec. 14, 1751 and the first number of the work itself, June 11, 1752. This nuftiber being badly received by the public, the further prosecution of the business seems to have been dropped. See some account of it in the Gentleman’s Mag. 1752, p. 46. It was proposed to have been finished by Christmas 1756, in ten quarto volumes, price nine guineas, the last two to contain upwards of six hundred plates. In 1772 he published, in 4to, “Calendars of the Ancient Charters, &c. and of the Welsh and Scottish Rolls now remaining in the Tower ofLondon, &c.” (which was begun to be printed by the late Rev. Mr. Morant), and in the introduction gives a most judicious and exact account-of our public records. He drew up the account of the ehapel of London-bridge, of which an engraving was published by Vertue, 1748, and again by the Society of Antiquaries, 1777. His historical description of the interview between Henry VIII. and Francis I. on the Champ de Drap d'Or, from an original painting at Windsor, and his account of the paintings of the same age at Cowdray, were inserted in the third volume of the Archaeologia, and printed separately, to accompany engravings of two of these pictures by the Society of Antiquaries, 1775. His account of the body of Edward I. as it appeared on opening his tomb, 1774, was printed in the same volume, p. 376. Having been educated, as has been observed, at Westminster, he acquired an early affection for that venerable cathedral and his intimate acquaintance witfi every part of it displayed itself in his accurate description of five monuments in the choir, engraved in 1779 by the same society; who must reckon, among the many obligations which they owe to his zeal and attention to their interests, the last exertions of his life to put their affairs on the most respectable and advantageous footing, on their removal to their new apartments in Somerset Place. He superintended the new edition of Leland’s Collectanea, in 9 vols. 8vo, 1770, and also of the Liber Niger Scaccarii, in 2 vols. 8vo, 1771, to each of which he added a valuable appendix to the latter the charters of Kingston-on-Thames, of which his father was recorder. He also revised through the press a new edition of Hearne’s “Curious Discourses,1771, 2 vols. 8vo and likewise the “Registrum Roffense,” published by Mr. Thorpe in 1769, folio. At the beginning of the seventh volume of Somers’s Tracts is advertised, “A Collection of Debates in Parliament before the Restoration, from Mss. by sir Joseph Ayloffe, bart.” which is supposed never to have appeared. In January 1734, he married Mrs. Margaret Railton (daughter and heiress of Thomas Railton, esq. of Carlisle, in the county of Cumberland, and relict of Thomas Railton, esq. who died in the commission of the peace for the city of Westminster, Sept. 4, 1732) and by this lady he had one son of his own name, who died of the small-pox, at Trinity hall, Cambridge, at the age of twentyone, Dec. 19, 1756. Sir Joseph died at his house at Kennington-lane, Lambeth, April 19, 1781, aged seventy-two; and was buried in a vault in Henclon church, with his father and his only son. His extensive knowledge of our national antiquities and municipal rights, and the agreeable manner in which he communicated it to his friends and tjie public, made him sincerely regretted hy all who had the pleasure of his acquaintance. Such of his Mss. as had not been claimed by his friends, were sold by auction, February 27, 1782.

me and place of his birth we find him, early in life, in a menial capacity with sir William Ashurst, who was lord mayor in 1694, to whom, and in which year, he dedicated

, an eminent English penman of the seventeenth century. It is difficult to fix the time and place of his birth we find him, early in life, in a menial capacity with sir William Ashurst, who was lord mayor in 1694, to whom, and in which year, he dedicated his “Arithmetic made easy,” a book which was well received by the public, and has passed through several editions the twelfth was printed in 1714, with an addition in book-keeping by Charles Snell. In 1695, he published his “Tutor to Penmanship,” engraved by John Sturt, in oblong folio. It is dedicated to king William III. and though a very pompous book, is valuable on many accounts; the writing being plain and practical, and much more useful than his “A-la-­mode Secretary,” another writing-book he published from the hand of the same engraver. In 1700 he published his “Paul’s school round hand.” It is no more than a set of copies, ornamented but is clear and bold, and was engraved by Sturt. He lived then at the Hand and Pen in St. Paul’s Church-yard, and is said to have gained 800l. per annum by teaching and the sale of his works. We have another of his performances under the title of the “Penman’s Daily Practice,” which he calls a cyphering book it contains examples of all the hands now in use, in thirtyfour plates done by the same engraver, but has no date. He died about 1705, of an apoplexy.

, esq. a lieutenant in the first regiment of foot-guards, only son of the rev. Dr. Francis Ayscough (who was tutor to lord Lyttelton at Oxford, and at length dean of

, esq. a lieutenant in the first regiment of foot-guards, only son of the rev. Dr. Francis Ayscough (who was tutor to lord Lyttelton at Oxford, and at length dean of Bristol) by Anne, fifth sister to his lordship, who addressed a poem to the doctor from Paris, in 1728, printed in Dodsley’s second volume. And there are some verses to captain Ayscough in the second lord Lyttelton’s poems, 1780. Captain Ayscough was also author of Semiramis, a tragedy, 1777, and the editor of the great lord Lyttelton' s works. In September, 1777, he went to the continent for the recovery of his health, and wrote an account of his journey, which, on his return, he published under the title of “Letters from an Officer in the Guards to his Friend in England, containing some accounts of France and Italy, 1778,” 8vo. He received, however, but a temporary relief from the air of the continent. After lingering for a short time, he died Oct. 14, 1779, a few weeks only before his cousin, the second lord Lyttelton, whose family owes little to his character, or that of the subject of this short article. Two young men of more profligate morals have seldom insulted public decency, by calling the public attention to their many licentious amours and adventures.

erary history of his country, was the son of George Ayscough of Nottingham, a respectable tradesman, who unfortunately launched into speculations which impaired his

, a very useful contributor to the literary history of his country, was the son of George Ayscough of Nottingham, a respectable tradesman, who unfortunately launched into speculations which impaired his fortune. His son Samuel, after receiving a school education, assisted his father in the business of a farm for some time, and afterwards was reduced to work as a labouring miller for the maintenance of his father and sister. While at this humble occupation, which did not procure the very moderate advantage he expected, an old schoolfellow and friend, hearing of his distress, about 1770, sent for him to London, and obtained for him at first the office of an overlooker of some paviours in the street. Soon after, however, he assisted in the shop of Mr. Rivington, bookseller, of St. Paul’s Church-yard, and then obtained an employment in the British Museum, at a small weekly stipend. Here he discovered a degree of knowledge, which, if not profound, was highly useful, in arranging and cataloguing books and Mss. and his services soon recommended him to an increase of salary, and to some extra employment in regulating the libraries of private gentlemen, the profits of which he shared with his father, whom he sent for to town, and maintained comfortably until his death, Nov. 18, 1783.

his masters, that when in 1648, the greatest part of the navy went over to the prince of Wales, he, who then commanded the Lion, secured that ship for the parliament,

, an eminent English admiral in the last century, descended from a very good family in Lincolnshire, and entered early into the sea-service, where he obtained the character of an able and experienced officer, and the honour of knighthood from king Charles I. This, however, did not hinder him from adhering to the parliament, when by a very singular intrigue he got possession of the fleet, and so zealous he was in the service of his masters, that when in 1648, the greatest part of the navy went over to the prince of Wales, he, who then commanded the Lion, secured that ship for the parliament, which was by them esteemed an action of great importance. As this was a sufficient proof of his fidelity, he had the command given him in a squadron, that was employed to watch the motions of the prince of Wales and accordingly sailed to the coast of Ireland, where he prevented his highness from landing, and drew many of the seamen to that service from which they had deserted. The parliament next year sent him with a considerable number of ships, and the title of admiral, to the coast of Ireland, which commission he discharged with such vigour, that the parliament continued him in his command for another year, and ordered an immediate provision to be made for the payment of his arrears, and presented him with one hundred pounds. After the war was finished in Ireland, sir George Ayscue had orders to sail with a small squadron, to reduce the island of Barbadoes but his orders were countermanded, as the parliament received information, that the Dutch were treating with sir John Grenville, in order to have the isles of Scilly put into their hands, and therefore it was thought necessary to reduce these islands first. Blake and Ayscue were employed in this expedition, in the spring of 1651, and performed it with honour and success, sir John Grenville entering into a treaty with them, who used him very honourably, and gave him fair conditions, after which Blake returned to England, and Ayscue proceeded on his voyage to Barbadoes. The parliament were at first pleased, but when the conditions were known, Blake and Ayscue were accused of being too liberal. Blake resented this, and threatened to lay down his commission, which he said he was sure Ayscue would also do. Upon this, the articles were honourably complied with, and sir George received orders to sail immediately to the West Indies. Sir George continued his voyage, and arrived at Barbadoes October 26, 1651. He then found his enterprize would be attended with great difficulties, and such as had not been foreseen at home. The lord Willoughby, of Parham, commanded there for the king, and had assembled a body of 5,Ooo men for the defence of the island. He was a nobleman of great parts and greater probity, one who had been extremely reverenced by the parliament, before he quitted their party, and was Dow extremely popular on the island. Sir George, however, shewed no signs of concern, but boldly forced his passage into the harbour, and made himself master of twelve sail of Dutch merchantmen that lay there, and next morning he sent a summons to the lord Willoughby, requiring him to submit to the authority of the parliament of England, to which his lordship answered, that he knew no such authority, that he had a commission from king Charles II. to be governor of that island, and that he would keep it for his majesty’s service at the hazard of his life. On this, sir George thought it not prudent to land the few troops he had, and thereby discover his weakness to so cautious an enemy. In the mean time, he receivect a letter by an advice-boat from England, with the news of the king’s being defeated at Worcester, and one intercepted from lady Willoughby, containing a very particular account of that unhappy affair. He now summoned lord Willoughby a second time, and accompanied his summons with lady Willoughby’s letter, but his lordship continued firm in his resolution. All this time, sir George anchored in Speights bay, and stayed there till December, when the Virginia merchant fleet arriving, he made as if they were a reinforcement that had been sent him, but in fact, he had not above 2000 men, and the sight of the little army on shore made him cautious of venturing his men, till he thought the inhabitants had conceived a great idea of his strength. The Virginia ships were welcomed at their coming in, as a supply of men of war, and he presently ordered his men on shore: 159 Scotch servants aboard that fleet, were added to a regiment of 700 men, and some seamen, to make their number look more formidable. One colonel Allen landed with them on the 17th of December, and found lord Willoughby’s forces well entrenched, near a fort they had upon the sea- coast. They attacked him, however, and, in a sharp dispute, wherein about sixty men were killed on both sides, had so much the advantage, that they drove them to the fort, notwithstanding that colonel Allen, their commander, was killed by a musket shot, as he attempted to land. After other attempts, sir George procured colonel Moddiford, who was one of the most leading men on the place, to enter into a treaty with him, and this negociation succeeded so well, that Moddiford declared publicly for a peace, and joined with sir George to bring lord Willoughby, the. governor, to reason, as they phrased it but lord Willoughby never would have consented if an accident had not happened, which put most of the gentlemen about him into such confusion, that he could no longer depend upon their advice or assistance. He had called together his officers, and while they were sitting in council, a cannon-ball beat open the door of the room, and took off the head of the centinel posted before it, which so frighted all the gentlemen of the island, that they not only compelled their governor to lay aside his former design, but to retire to a. place two miles farther from the harbour. Sir George Ayscue, taking advantage of this unexpected good fortune, immediately ordered all his forces on shore, as if he intended to have attacked them in their entrenchments, which struck such a terror into some of the principal persons about the governor, that, after rhature deliberation on his own circumstances, and their disposition, he began to alter his mind, and thereupon, to avoid the effusion of blood, both parties appointed commissaries to treat. Sir George named captain Peck, Mr. Searl, colonel Thomas Moddiforcl, and James Colliton, esq. the lord Willoughby, sir Richard Peers, Charles Pirn, esq. colonel Ellice, and major Byham, who on the 17th of January agreed on articles of rendition, which were alike comprehensive and honourable. The lord Willoughby had what he most desired, indemnity, and freedom of estate and person, upon which, soon after, he returned to England. The islands of Nevis, Antigua, and St. Christopher, were, by the same capitulation, surrendered to the parliament. After this, sir George, considering that he had fully executed his commission, returned with the squadron under his command to England, and arriving at Plymouth on the 25th of May, 1652, was received with all imaginable testimonies of joy and satisfaction by the people there, to whom he was well known before, as his late success also served not a little to raise and heighten his reputation. It was not long after his arrival, before he found himself again obliged to enter upon action for the Dutch war which broke out in his absence, was then become extremely warm, and he was forced to take a share in it, though his ships were so extremely foul, that they were much fitter to be laid up, than to be employed in any farther service. On the 21st of June, 1652, he came to Dover, with his squadron of eleven sail, and there joined his old friend admiral Blake, but Blake having received orders to sail northward, and destroy the Dutch herring fishery, sir George Ayscue was left to command the fleet in the Downs. Within a few days after Blake’s departure he took five sail of Dutch merchantmen, and had scarcely brought them in before he received advice that a fleet of forty sail had been seen not far from the coast, upon which he gave chace, fell in amongst them, took seven, sunk four, and ran twenty-four upon the French shore, all the rest being separated from their convoy. The Dutch admiral, Van Tromp, who was at sea- with a great fleet, having information of sir George Ayscue’s situation, resolved to take advantage of him, and with no“less than one hundred sail, clapped iji between him and the river, and resolved to surprize such ships as should attempt to go out or, if that design failed, to go in and sink sir George and his squadron. The English admiral soon discovered their intention, and causing a signal to be made from Dover castle, for all ships to keep to sea, he thereby defeated the first part of their project. However, Van Tromp attempted the second part of his scheme, in hopes of better success, and on the 8th of July, when it was ebb, be began to sail towards the English fleet but, the wind dying away, he was obliged to come to an anchor about a league off, in order to expect the next ebb. Sir George, in the mean time, caused a strong platform to be raised between Deal and Sandown castles, well furnished with artillery, so pointed, as to bear directly upon the Dutch as they came in the militia of the county of Kent were also ordered down to the sea-shore notwithstanding which preparation, the Dutch admiral did not recede from his point, but at the next ebb weighed anchor, and would have stood intothe port but the wind coming about south-west, and blowing directly in his teeth, constrained him to keep out, and being straightened for time, he was obliged to sail away, and leave sir George safe in the harbour, with the small squadron he commanded. He was soon after ordered to Plymouth, to bring in under his convoy five East- India ships, which he did in the latter end of July and in the first week of August, brought in four French and Dutch prizes, for which activity and vigilance in his command he was universally commended. In a few days after this, intelligence was received, that Van Tromp’s fleet was seen off the back of the isle of Wight, and it was thereupon resolved, that sir George with his fleet of forty men of war, most of them hired merchantmen, except flag ships, should stretch over to the coast of France to meet them. Accordingly, on the 16th of August, between one and two o'clock at noon, they got sight of the enemy, who quitted their merchantmen, being fifty in number. About four the fight began, the English Admiral with nine others charging through their fleet; his ships received most damage in the shrouds, masts, sails, and rigging, which was repaid the Dutch in their hulls. Sir George having thus passed through them, got the weather-gage, and charged them again, but all his fleet not coming up, and the night already entered, they parted with a drawn battle. Captain Peck, the rear-admiral, lost his leg, of which, soon after, he died. Several captains were wounded, but no ship lost. Of the Dutch, not one was said to be lost, though many were shot through and through, but so that they were able to proceed on their voyage, and anchored the next day after, being followed by the English to the isle of Bassa; but no farther attempt was made by our fleet, on account, as it was pretended, of the danger of the French coasts, from whence they returned to Plymouth- Sound to repair. The truth of the matter was, some of sir George’s captains were a little bashful in this affair, and the fleet was in so indifferent a condition, that it was absolutely necessary to refit before they proceeded again to action. He proceeded next to join Blake in the northern seas, where he continued during the best part of the month of September, and took several prizes and towards the latter end of that month he returned with general Blake into the Downs, with one hundred and twenty sail of men of war. On the 27th of that mojith a great Dutch fleet appeared, after which, Blake with his fleet sailed, and sir George Ayscue, pursuant to the orders he had received, returned to Chatham with his own ship, and sent the rest of his squadron into several ports to be careened. Towards the end of November, 1652, general Blake lying at the mouth of our river, began to think that the season of the year left no room to expect farther action, for which reason he detached twenty of his ships to bring up a fleet of colliers from Newcastle, twelve more he had sent to Plymouth, and our admiral, as before observed, with fifteen sail, had proceeded up the river in order to their being careened. Such was the situation of things, when Van Tromp appeared with a fleet of eighty- five sail. Upon this Blake sent for the most experienced officers on board his own ship, where, after a long consultation, it was agreed, that he should wait for, and fight the enemy, though he had but thirtyseven sail of men of war, and a few small ships. Accordingly, on the 29th of November, a general engagement ensued, which lasted with great fury from one in the afternoon till it was dark. Blake in the Triumph, with his seconds the Victory and the Vanguard, engaged for a considerable time near twenty sail of Dutch men of war, and they were in the utmost danger of being oppressed and destrdyed by so unequal a force. This, however, did not hinder Blake from forcing his way into a throng of enemies, to relieve the Garland and Bonadventure, in doing which he was attacked by many of their stoutest ships, which likewise boarded him, but after several times beating them off, he at last found an opportunity to rejoin his fleet. The loss sustained by the English consisted in five ships, either taken or sunk, and several others disabled. The Dutch confess, that one of their men of war was burnt towards the end of the fight, and the captain and most of his men drowned, and also that the ships of Tromp and Evertson were much disabled. At last, night having parted the two fleets, Blake supposing he had sufficiently secured the nation’s honour and his own, by waiting the attack of an enemy, so much superior, and seeing no prospect of advantage by renewing the fight, retired up the river but sir George Ayscue, who inclined to the bolder but less prudent counsel, was so disgusted at this retreat, that he laid down his commission. The services this great man had rendered his country, were none of them more acceptable to the parliament, than this act of laying down his command. They had long wished and waited for an opportunity of dismissing him from their service, and were therefore extremely pleased that he had saved them this trouble however, to shew their gratitude for past services, and to prevent his falling into absolute discontent, they voted him a present of three hundred pounds in money, and likewise bestowed upon him three hundred pounds per annum in Ireland. There is good reason to believe, that Cromwell and his faction were as well pleased with this gentleman’s quitting the sea-service for as they were then meditating, what they soon afterwards put in execution, the turning the parliament out of doors, it could not but be agreeable to them, to see an officer who had so great credit in the navy, and who was so generally esteemed by the nation, laid aside in such a manner, both as it gave them an opportunity of insinuating the ingratitude of that assembly to so worthy a person, and as it freed them from the apprehension of his disturbing their measures, in case he had continued in the fleet; which it is highly probable might have come to pass, considering that Blake was far enough from being of their party, and only submitted to serve the protector, because he saw no other way left to serve his country, and did not think he had interest enough to preserve the fleet, after the defection of the army, which perhaps might not have been the case, if sir George Ayscue had continued in his command. This is so much the more probable, as it is very certain that he never entered into the protector’s service, or shewed himself at all willing to concur in his measures though there is no doubt that Cromwell would have been extremely glad of so experienced an officer in his Spanish war. He retired after this to his country-seat in the county of Surrey, and lived there in great honour and splendor, visiting, and being visited by persons of the greatest distinction, both natives and foreigners, and passing in the general opinion of both, for one of the ablest sea-captains of that age. Yet there is some reason to believe that he had a particular correspondence with the protector’s second son, Henry; since there is still a letter in being from him to secretary Thurloe, which shews that he had very just notions of the worth of this gentleman, and of the expediency of consulting him in all such matters as had a relation to maritime power. The protector, towards the latter end of his life, began to grow dissatisfied with the Dutch, and resolved to destroy their system without entering immediately into a war with them. It was with this view, that he encouraged the Swedes to cultivate, with the utmost diligence, a maritime force, promising in due time to assist them with a sufficient number of able and experienced officers, and with an admiral to command them, who, in point of reputation, was not inferior to any then living. For this reason, he prevailed on sir George, by the intervention of the Swedish ambassador and of Whitelock, and sir George from that time began to entertain favourable thoughts of the design, and brought himself by degrees to think of accepting the offer made him, and of going over for that purpose to Sweden and although he had not absolutely complied during the life of the protector, he closed at last with the proposals made him from Sweden, and putting every thing in order for his journey, towards the latter end of the year 1658, and as soon as he had seen the officers embarked, and had dispatched some private business of his own, he prosecuted his voyage, though in the very depth of winter. This exposed him to great hardships, but on his arrival in Sweden, he was received with all imaginable demonstrations of civility and respect by the king, who might very probably have made good his promise, of promoting him to the rank of high-admiral of Sweden, if he had not been taken off by an unexpected death. This put an end to his hopes in that country, and disposed sir George Ayscue to return home, where a great change had been working in his absence, which was that of restoring king CharJes It. It does not at all appear, that sir George had any concern in this great affair but the contrary may be rather presumed, from his former attachment to the parliament, and his making it his choice to have remained in Sweden, if the death of the monarch, who invited him thither, had not prevented him. On his return, however, he not only submitted to the government then established, but gave the strongest assurances to the administration, that he should be at all times ready to serve the public, if ever there should be occasion, which was very kindly taken, and he had the honour to be” introduced to his majesty, and to kiss his hand. It was not long before he was called to the performance of his promise for the Dutch war breaking out in 1664, he was immediately put into commission by the direction of the duke of York, who then commanded the English fleet. In the spring of the year 1665, he hoisted his flag as rear-admiral of the blue, under the earl of Sandwich, and in the great battle that was fought the third of June in the same year, that squadron had the honour to break through the centre of the Dutch fleet, and thereby made way for one of the most glorious victories ever obtained by this nation at sea. For in this battle, the Dutch had ten of their largest ships sunk or burned, besides their admiral Opdam’s, that blew up in the midst of the engagement, by which the admiral himself, and upwards of five hundred men perished. Eighteen men of war were taken, four fire-ships destroyed, thirteen captains, and two thousand and fifty private men made prisoners and this with so inconsiderable loss, as that of one ship only, nnd three hundred private men. The fleet being again in a condition to put to sea, was ordered to rendezvous in Southwold-bay, from whence, to the number of sixty sail, they weighed on the fifth of July, and stood over for the coast of Holland. The standard was borne by the gallant earl of Sandwich, to whom was viceadmiral sir George Ayscue, and sir Thomas Tyddiman rear-admiral, sir William Perm was admiral of the white, sir William Berkley vice-admiral, and sir Joseph Jordan rear-admiral. The blue flag was carried by sir Thomas ^Vllen, whose vice and rear, were sir Christopher Minims, and sir John Harman. The design was, to intercept de Ruyter in his return, or, at least, to take and burn the Turkey and East-India fleets, of which they had certain intelligence, but they succeeded in neither of these schemes; de Ruyter arrived safely in Holland, and the Turkey and India fleets took shelter in the port of Bergen in Norway. The earl of Sandwich having detached sir Thomas Tyddiman to attack them there, returned home, and in his passage took eight Dutch men of war, which served as convoys to their East and West India fleets, and several merchantmen richly laden, which finished the triumphs of that year. ^The plain superiority of the English over the Dutch at sea, engaged the French, in order to keep up the war between the maritime powers, and make them do their business by destroying each other, to declare on the side of theweakest, as did the king of Denmark also, which, nevertheless, had no effect upon the English, who determined to carry on the war against the allies, with the same spirit they had done against the Dutch alone. In the spring, therefore, of the year 1666, the fleet was very early at sea, under the command of the joint admirals for a resolution having been taken at Court, not to expose the person of the duke of York any more, and the earl of Sandwich being then in Spain, with the character of ambassador-extraordinary, prince Rupert, and old general Monk, now duke of Albemarle, were appointed to command the fleet; having under them as gallant and prudent officers as ever distinguished themselves in the English navy, and, amongst these, sir William Berkley commanded the blue, and sir George Ayscue the white squadron. Prince Rupert, and the duke of Albemarle, went on board the fleet, the twenty-third of April, 1666, and sailed in the beginning of May. Towards the latter end of that month, the court was informed, that the French fleet, under the command of the duke of Beaufort, were coming out to the assistance of the Dutch, and upon receiving this news, the court sent orders to prince Rupert to sail with the white squadron, the admirals excepted, to look out and fight the French, which command that brave prince obeyed, but found it a mere bravado, intended to raise the courage of their new allies, and thereby bring them into the greater danger. At the same time prince Rupert sailed from the Downs, fthe Dutch put out to sea, the wind at north-east, and a fresh gale. This brought the Dutch fleet on the coast of Dunkirk, and carried his highness towards the Isle of Wight but the wind suddenly shifting to the south-west, and blowing hard, brought both the Dutch and the duke to an anchor. Captain Bacon, in the Bristol, first discovered the enemy, and by firing his guns, gave notice of it to the English fleet. Upon this a council of war was called, wherein it was resolved to fight the enemy, notwithstanding their great superiority. After the departure of prince Rupert, the duke had with him only the red and blue squadrons, making about sixty sail, whereas the Dutch fleet consisted of ninety-one men of war, carrying 4716 guns, and 22,460 men. It was the first of June when they were discerned, and the duke was so warm for engaging, that he attacked the enemy before they had time to weigh anchor, and, as de Ruyter himself says in his letter, they were obliged to cut their cables and in the same letter he owns, that to the last the English were the aggressors, notwithstanding their inferiority and other disadvantages. This day’s fight was very fierce and bloody for the Dutch, confiding in their numbers, pressed furiously upon the English fleet, while the English officers, being men of determined resolution, fought with such courage and constancy, that they not only repulsed the Dutch, but renewed the attack, and forced the enemy to maintain the fight longer than they were inclined to do, so that it was ten in the evening before their cannon were silent. The following night was spent in repairing the damages suffered on both sides, and next morning the fight was renewed by the English with fresh vigour. Admiral Van Tromp, with vice-admiral Vander Hulst, being on board one ship, rashly engaged among the English, and were in the utmost danger, either of being taken or burnt. The Dutch affairs, according to their own account, were now in a desperate condition but admiral de Ruyter at last disengaged them, though not till his ship was disabled, and vice-admiral Vander Hulst killed. This only changed the scene for de Ruyter was now as hard pushed as Tromp had been before; but a reinforcement arriving, preserved him also, and so the second day’s fight ended earlier than the first. The duke finding that the Dutch had received a reinforcement, and that his small fleet, on the contrary, was much weakened, through the damages sustained by some, and the Joss and absence of others of his ships, took, towards the evening, the resolution to retire, and endeavour to join prince Rupert, who was coming to his assistance. The retreat was performed in good order, twenty- six or twentyeight men of war that had suffered least, brought up the rear, interposing between the enemy and the disabled ships, three of which, being very much shattered, were burnt by the English themselves, and the men taken on board the other ships. The Dutch fleet followed, but at a distance. As they thus sailed on, it happened on the third day that sir George Ayscue, admiral of the white, who commanded the Royal Prince (being the largest and heaviest ship of the whole fleet) unfortunately struck upon the sand called the Galloper, where being threatened by the enemy’s fire-ships, and hopeless of assistance from his friends (whose timely return, the near approach of the enemy, and the contrary tide, had absolutely rendered impossible), he was forced to surrender. The Dutch admiral de Ruyter, in his letter to the States-general, says, in few words, that sir George Ayscue, admiral of the white, having run upon a sand -bank, fell into their hands, and that after taking out the commanders, and the men that were left, they set the s’mp on fire. But the large relation, collected by order of the States out of all the letters written to them upon that occasion, informs us, that sir George Ayscue, in the Royal Prince, ran upon the Galloper, an unhappy accident, says that relation, for an officer who had behaved very gallantly during the whole engagement, and who only retired in obedience to his admiral’s orders. The unfortunate admiral made signals for assistance but the English fleet continued their route so that he was left quite alone, and without hope of succour in which situation he was attacked by two Dutch fire-ships, by which, without doubt, he had been burnt, if lieutenant-admiral Tromp, who was on board the ship of rear-admiral Sweers, had not made a signal to call off the fire-ships, perceiving that his flag was already struck, and a signal made for quarter, upon which rear-admiral Sweers, by order of Tromp, went on board the English ship, and brought off sir George Ayscue, his officers, and some of his men, on board his own vessel, and the next morning sir George was sent to the Dutch coast, in order to go to the Hague in a galliot, by order of general de Ruyter. The English ship was afterwards got off the sands, notwithstanding which, general de Ruyter ordered the rest of the crew to be taken out, and the vessel set on fire, that his fleet might he the less embarrassed, which was accordingly done. But in the French relation, published by order of that court, we have another circumstance, which the Dutch have thought fit to omit, and it is this, that the crew gave np the ship against the admiral’s will, who had given orders /or setting her on fire. There were some circumstances which made the loss of this ship, in this manner, very disagreeable to the English court, and perhaps this may be the reason that so little is said of it in our own relations. In all probability general de Ruyter took the opportunity of sending sir George Ayscue to the Dutch coast the next morning, from an apprehension that he might be retaken in. the next day’s fight. On his arrival at the Hague he was very civilly treated but to raise the spirits of their people, and to make the most of this dubious kind of victory, the states ordered sir George to be carried as it were in triumph, through the several towns of Holland, and then confined him in the castle of Louvestein, so famous in the Dutch histories for having been the prison of some of their most eminent patriots, and from whence the party which opposed the prince of Orange were styled the Louvestein faction. As soon as sir George Ayscue came to this castle, he wrote a letter to king Charles II. to acquaint him with the condition he was in, which letter is still preserved in the life of the Dutch admiral, de Ruyter. How long he remained there, or whether he continued a prisoner to the end of the war, is uncertain, but it is said that he afterwards returned to England, and spent the remainder of his days in peace. Granger observes very justly, that it is scarcely possible to give a higher character of the courage of this brave admiral, than to say that he was a match for Van Tromp or de Ruyter.

n. An early enthusiasm for the fine arts procured him the friendship of the celebrated artist Mengs, who was first painter to the king of Spain. After the death of Charles

, a Spanish statesman and writer, was born in 1731, at Barbanales, near Balbastro in Aragon. An early enthusiasm for the fine arts procured him the friendship of the celebrated artist Mengs, who was first painter to the king of Spain. After the death of Charles III. A zara constructed, in honour of his memory, a temple, in an antique form, in the church of St. James, which, although not faultless, discovered very considerable talents and taste in architecture. He was, however, soon employed in political concerns, and was sent to Rome, under the pontificate of Clement XIII. as ecclesiastical agent at the chancery of Rome. He was afterwards attached to the Spanish embassy, and took a very active part in various important negociations between the courts of Spain and Rome. In 1796 he was employed in a more difficult undertaking, to solicit the clemency of the conqueror of Italy in behalf of Rome, where the French nation had been insulted, and he at least acquired the esteem of general Buonaparte. About the same time he became acquainted with Joseph Bonaparte, then French ambassador at Rome. Being afterwards sent to Paris, in a diplomatic character, he was favourably received, and found some relief from the recollection that he had left behind him his valued friends, his fine library, and museum of paintings and antiques. During this mission he experienced alternate favour and disgrace, being recalled by his court, exiled to Barcelona, and sent again to Paris with the rank of ambassador. His health, however, was now much impaired, and when he was indulging the hope of being able to return to Italy, and pass the rest of his time in the enjoyment of his friends and favourite pursuits, his constitution suddenly gave way, and he expired January 26, 1797. He left a very considerable fortune in furniture, pictures, busts, &c. but appears to have lost his other property. He translated, 1. Middleton’s life of Cicero, and some fragments of Pliny and Seneca, under the title of “Historia della Vida di M. T. Ciceroni,” Madrid, 1790, 4 vols. 4to and also published, 2. “Introduzione alia storia naturale e alia Geografia fisica di Spagna,” Parma, 1784, 2 vols. 8vo. 3. “Opere di Antonio-Raffaele Mengs,” Parma, by Bodoni, 1780, 2 vols. 4to, of which a copious account may be seen in the Monthly Review, vol. LXV. 1781. This was afterwards translated into English, and published 1796, 2 vols. 8vo.

a thousand auditors. In the warmth of dispute he threw a candlestick at the head of his antagonist, who died in consequence. Azon was then taken up, and tried, although

, or Azo Portius, a celebrated lawyer of the twelfth century, distinguished himself first at Bologna, about 1193. He had studied under John Bosiani of Cremona, and acquired such reputation, that he was called “Master of the Law,” and “the Source of Law.” The envy, however, which such merit attracted, made him leave Italy, and go to Montpellier, where he succeeded Placentinus. He was afterwards recalled to Bologna, and became yet more celebrated. It is said that he had a thousand auditors. In the warmth of dispute he threw a candlestick at the head of his antagonist, who died in consequence. Azon was then taken up, and tried, although the accident happened without any evil intent The action, however, might be pardoned according to the intent of the law ad bestias de pœnis, which moderates the punishment to any person who excels in any science or art. Azon, whether from the length of his imprisonment, or from his mind being occupied or abstracted, cried out, ad bestias, ad bestias, meaning that his acquittal would be found in that law. But this being reported to the judges, who were ignorant of it, they imagined that he insulted them, and treated them like beasts, and not only condemned him to death, but deprived him of the honour of burial. This sentence was executed in 1200, or according to some, in 1225. Others deny that this was the end of Azon, and treat the story as what it very much resembles, a fiction. Contius published his Law Commentaries" in 1577.

although in his eightieth year, to plead the cause of Bartholomew de Caranza, archbishop of Toledo, who was accused of heresy before the inquisition, and whose cause,

, commonly called Navarre (doctor Navarrus), was born of a noble family, Dec. 13, 1491, at Varasayn, near Pampeluna in Navarre. He was first educated, and took the habit, in the monastery of regular canons at Roncevaux, and afterwards studied at Alcala and at Ferrara, where he made such progress in law, as to be employed in teaching that science at Toulouse and Cahors. Some time after, he returned to Spain, and was appointed first professor of canon law at Salamanca, an office he filled with high reputation for fourteen years, at the end of which John III. king of Portugal, chose him law-professor of his new-founded university at Coimbra, and gave him a larger salary than had ever been enjoyed by any French or Spanish professor. After filling this chair also, with increasing reputation, for sixteen years, he was permitted to resign, and went first into Castile, and afterwards to Rome, on purpose, although in his eightieth year, to plead the cause of Bartholomew de Caranza, archbishop of Toledo, who was accused of heresy before the inquisition, and whose cause, first argued in Spain, was by the pope’s order removed to Rome. Azpilcueta exerted himself to the utmost, but without success, which we cannot be surprised at when we consider that the inquisitors were his opponents and although they could prove nothing against Caranza, they contrived that he should die in prison. Azpilcueta, however, was honourably received at Rome pope Pius V. appointed him assistant to cardinal Francis Alciat, his vice-penitentiary, and Gregory XIII. never passed his door without a visit, or met him in the street, without enjoying some conversation with him. He was much consulted, and universally esteemed for learning, probity, piety, and chanty. Antonio informs us that he used to ride on a mule through the city, and relieve every poor person he met, and that the creature of itself would stop at the sight of a poor person until its master relieved him. He died June 21, 1586, then in his ninetyfourth year. His works, which are either on morals or common law, were published, Rome, 1590, 3 vols. Lyons, 1591, Venice, 1602.

born at Haerlem, Feb. 20, 1633, and at a very early age placed under the care of his uncle Piemans, who painted in the manner of Velvet Bruegfcel, and soon inspired

, an eminent Dutch painter, was born at Haerlem, Feb. 20, 1633, and at a very early age placed under the care of his uncle Piemans, who painted in the manner of Velvet Bruegfcel, and soon inspired his nephew with a taste for the art. Baan afterwards studied under Bakker at Amsterdam, with whom he practised assiduously every particular from which he could receive improvement, spending the whole day at the pencil, and the evenings in designing. At that time the works of Vandyck and Rembrandt were in great vogue, and after much consideration he appears td have leaned towards an imitation of Vandyck, whom, some thought, he equalled. Houbraken says he xvas invited by Charles II. to come to England, where he made portraits of the king, queen,- and principal nobility at court, and was much admired for the elegance of his attitudes, and for his clear, natural, and lively tone of colouring. After continuing some time in England, he went to the Hague, and there painted a noble portrait of the duke of Zell, for which he received a thousand Hungarian ducats, amounting to near 500l. He then painted for the, duke of Tuscany, who placed his portrait among those of other famous painters in the Florence gallery. When Louis XIV. was at Utrecht, he sent for him, but Baan declined the invitation for political reasons. This did not lessen him, however, in the opinion of that monarch, who frequently consulted him on the purchase of pictures. These, marks of distinction, and his fame as a painter, created him. many enemies, one of whom, an artist of Friesland, formed the execrable design of assassinating him, and came to Amsterdam for that purpose. After being long disappointed in an opportunity in the streets, he asked permission to see Baan’s paintings, and while the latter was showing them, drew a poignard to stab him, but a friend of Baan’s, who happened to enter the room at the instant, laid hold of his arm the villain, however, escaped, and could not afterwards be found. Baan was of an amiable disposition, Son­cial and obliging. He died at Amsterdam in 1702.

His style is clear, neat, and methodical, without any of the jargon of the schools. La Blandiniere, who continued this work by adding ten volumes, does not deserve

, a native of Angers, born in 1651, was canon, grand vicar, and dean, of the faculty of theology in that city, and much noted for his learning and virtues. He arranged and transcribed, into 18 vols. the “Conferences” of the diocese of Angers, a work much esteemed in France. His style is clear, neat, and methodical, without any of the jargon of the schools. La Blandiniere, who continued this work by adding ten volumes, does not deserve so much praise. Babin published also, in 1679, but without his name, “An account of the proceedings of the university of Angers, respecting Jansenism and Cartesianism,” 4to. He died Dec. 19, 1734, in his eightythird year.

, or Babrius, was a Greek poet who turned Esop’s fables into choliambics, that is, verses with

, or Babrius, was a Greek poet who turned Esop’s fables into choliambics, that is, verses with an iambic foot in the fifth place, and a spondee in the sixth or last. Suidas frequently quotes him, but the age and country in which he lived are unknown. Avienus the fabulist, in Prsef. Fab. seems to intimate, that Babrius was prior to Phaedrus, who wrote under the reign of Augustus or Tiberius. Mr. Tynvhitt, the learned author of the “Dissertatio de Babrio,” published at London in 1776, produces a passage from the Homeric lexicon of Apollonius, which appears to be a quotation from Babrius, and as Apollonius is supposed to have lived about the time of Augustus, or some what earlier, Babrius must have written before that period. From the fragments published in the above-mentioned work, Babrius appears to have been a valuable writer his representations are natural, his expressions lively, and his versification harmonious.

ng himself a Christian, in the reign of Decius, he was put in prison and died there. St. Chrysostom, who wrote a panegyric upon Baby las, relates that he was brought

, a Christian bishop and martyr, of the third century, became bishop of Antioch in the year 238, and governed that see thirteen years. It is said he died for maintaining the Christian faith, but authors are not agreed about the time or manner of his martyrdom. Eusebius and St. Jerom say, that upon his professing himself a Christian, in the reign of Decius, he was put in prison and died there. St. Chrysostom, who wrote a panegyric upon Baby las, relates that he was brought out of prison and publicly executed. This is supposed to have taken place in the year 250. His relics were highly respected at Antioch, where two churches were built in honour of his memory, and it is said, that when his relics were brought thither, the oracle of Apollo was struck dumb.

to conduct the” Giornale de Letterati." In this he was encouraged and assisted by Gaudentio Roberti, who was eminent in polite literature. Bacchini accordingly began

, a very learned Italian scholar of the seventeenth century, was born Aug. 31, 1651, at Borgo-san-Donino, in the duchy of Parma. In 1653 his father went to reside at Parma, where he spared no expence in the education of this son, although his fortune was considerably reduced by family imprudence. For five years he studied the classics, under the tuition of the Jesuits, and in his sixteenth year entered the order of St. Benedict, on which occasion he adopted the name of that saint, in lieu of Bernardine, his baptismal name. Soon after, his father died, leaving his widow and three children with very little provision. Bacchini, however, pursued his studies, and took lesson in scholastic philosophy from Maurice Zapata; but by the advice of Chrysogonus Fabius, master of the novices of his convent, he studied mathematics, as the foundation of a more useful species of knowledge than the physics and metaphysics of the ancients. He afterwards applied to divinity with equal judgment, confining his researches to the fathers, councils, and ecclesiastical history. When he had completed his course, his abbé wished him to teach philosophy, but he had no inclination to teach that scholastic philosophy which he did not think worth learning and having obtained leave, on account of his health, to retire to a monastery in the country, he remained there two years, during which he studied the science of music, and on his recovery began to preach, agreeably to the desire of his superiors. In 1677, Arcioni, abbe of St. Benedict at Ferrara, having appointed him. his secretary, he was obliged to follow him to Arezzo, Venice, Placentia, Padua, and Parma. While at Piacentia, in 1679, he pronounced a funeral oration on Margaret de Medicis, mother of the duke of Parma, which was printed there. In 1681 he formed an acquaintance with Magliabecchi, the cardinal Noris, and many other eminent men of the age. In 1683, on account of his health, he solicited permission to resign his office as secretary to the abbe“, and as public preacher, which was granted; and having his time again in his own hands, he began to arrange the library belonging to his monastery, and to consult the fathers and sacred critics, and studied with assiduity and success the Greek and Hebrew languages. In 1635 he was appointed counsellor of the inquisition at Parma, and ne^t year had a visit of three days from father Mabillon and father Germain, and about the same time began to conduct the” Giornale de Letterati." In this he was encouraged and assisted by Gaudentio Roberti, who was eminent in polite literature. Bacchini accordingly began the Parma journal, in imitation of that published at Rome, and continued it monthly, but without his name, until 1690. But afterwards, when at Modena, he resumed it for 1692 and 1693, after which, the death of Roberti, who defrayed all the expence, obliged him again to discontinue it. In 1695, however, Capponi engaged to furnish the books and all necessary expences, and he edited itfor 1696 and 1697, when it was concluded. The whole make nine small volumes 4to, the first five printed at Parma, and the rest at Modena.

same year he travelled over various parts of Italy, visiting chiefly the libraries and the learned, who received him with the respect due to his talents. At Florence

In 1696 he published his monastic history, under the title of “DelP Istoria del Monasterio di S. Benedetto di Polirone nella Stato di Mantoua Libri cinque,” Modena, 1696, 4to. This was to have been succeeded by a second volume, but some unwelcome truths in the first having given offence, what he had prepared remained in manuscript The same year he travelled over various parts of Italy, visiting chiefly the libraries and the learned, who received him with the respect due to his talents. At Florence he passed some days with his friend Magliabecchi at Mount Cassin, and at St. Severin, the libraries were laid open, with permission to copy what he pleased and the cardinal d'Aguirre wished much to have procured him a place in the Vatican library, but being unsuccessful, Bacchini returned to Modena, where the duke made him his librarian. While putting the books in order here, he found the lives of the bishops of Ravenna by Agnelli (see Agnelli), which he committed to the press, with chronological dissertations and remarks, and the whole was ready for publication in 1702, but the censors at Rome hesitated so long in granting their permission, that it was not published before 1708. In the course of preparing this work, he wrote a dissertation on ecclesiastical hierarchy, entitled “De Ecclesiasticae Hierarchise origine dissertatio,” Mutina (i.e. Modena), 1703, 4to. In 1704 he was elected prior of the monastery of Modena, and in 1705 he published, under the name of the abbe and monks of the monastery of Parma, “Isidori Clarii ex Monacho Episcopi Fulginatis Epistolse ad amicos, hactenus ineditac,” Modena, 1705. Two years after, he was made chancellor of his order, and in 1708 was elected, in the general chapter, abbé of the monastery of St. Mary at Ragusa. In 1711 and 1719, other promotions of a similar kind were conferred upon him, but he was obliged to remove from place to place on account of his health, injured by a complication of disorders, which at last proved fatal, at Bologna, Sept. 1, 1721. Bacchini, according to the report of all his biographers, was one of the most learned men of his time few equalled and none surpassed him in Italy. His learning was universal, and his taste exquisite. "When young he was much admired for his pulpit eloquence, and it was thought would have proved one of the first preachers of his time, if his delicate temperament could have permitted that exertion. He was critically skilled in Greek and Hebrew, ancient and modern philosophy, and mathematics, but was perhaps most deeply conversant in sacred and profane history and chronology, and he was remarkably expert in decyphering ancient manuscripts. Few men, it may be added, were more admired in their time, or could enumerate among their friends so many men of high rank and learning; of the latter, Bacchini lived in habits of intimacy with Ciampini, Magliabecchi, Muratori, Gimma, Fontanini, Mabillon, Montfaucon, and the marquis Scipio Maffei, and in all his intercourse with the great or the learned, he preserves the character of a modest and humble man.

duke’s concert, and in a trial of skill, he obtained a victory over the celebrated French organist, who had previously challenged and conquered all the organists of

, an eminent German musician, was born at Eisenach in 1685, and made such proficiency in his art that at the age of eighteen, he was appointed organist of the new church of Arnstadt. In 1708, he settled at Weimar, where he was appointed court musician and director of the duke’s concert, and in a trial of skill, he obtained a victory over the celebrated French organist, who had previously challenged and conquered all the organists of France and Italy. This happened at Dresden, to which Bach went on purpose to contend with this musical Goliath. He afterwards became master of the chapel to the prince of Anhalt Cotben, and to the duke of Weissenfels. As a performer on the organ, as well as a composer for that instrument, he long stood unrivalled. He died at Leipsic in 1754, and left four sons all eminent musicians, of whom some account is given by Dr. Burney in his History of Music, vol. IV. and in his Musical Tour in Germany.

t Hohendorp, and sent in his twelfth year to Leipsic, where he was educated under Gesner and Ernest, who was particularly fond of him, and encouraged his studies with

, an eminent lawyer and critic, was born in 1721 at Hohendorp, and sent in his twelfth year to Leipsic, where he was educated under Gesner and Ernest, who was particularly fond of him, and encouraged his studies with a fatherly care. Having gone through a course of classical learning, philosophy, and mathematics, he applied to the study of law, and in 1750, he was created doctor in that faculty and professor of law, to which in 1753, was added the place of ecclesiastical assessor at Leipsic. All these offices he discharged with the highest public reputation and personal esteem, but was cut off by a premature death in 1756. He was a man of extensive learning, critically acquainted with Greek and Latin, and well versed in history and antiquities. His principal publications were, 1. “Dissertatio de Mysteriis Eleusinis,” Leipsic, 1745, 4to. 2. “Divus Trajanus, sive de legibus Trajani cornmentarius,1747, 8vo. 3. “Historia jurisprudent! Romany, 1754, 8vo. 4.” Xenophontis Oeconomicum,“1749, 8vo. 5.” JBrissonius de formulis,“1754, fol. 6.” Bergeri qeconomia Juris,“1755, 4tq. 7.” Opuscula ad historian! etjurisprudentiam spectantia," collected and published by Christ. Adolph. Klotz, Halle, 1767, 8vo.

ufficiently to admire. But Bacici’s chief excellence lay in portrait-painting. He drew that of a man who had been dead twenty years. He began by chalking out a head

, surnamed the Painter, born at Genoa in 1639, went to Rome about his fourteenth year, where he placed himself with a dealer in pictures, at whose house he had frequent opportunities of seeing Bernini, of whom he received good advice in his art and assistance in his fortune. His first essays were the strokes of a masterly pencil, and he was thenceforward employed in capital works among others the cupola of Jesus at Rome, a grand and complicated performance, which it is impossible sufficiently to admire. But Bacici’s chief excellence lay in portrait-painting. He drew that of a man who had been dead twenty years. He began by chalking out a head from his own imagination then, retouching his work by little and little, according to the suggestions of those who had seen the person while alive, he at length succeeded in finishing a portrait acknowledged to be a Complete resemblance. Bacici painted with so much ease, that his hand in a considerable degree kept pace with the impetuosity Df his genius. His ideas were great and bold, sometimes fantastical his figures have an astonishing relief. He was a good colourist, and excellent in foreshortening, but he is reproached with incorrectness in his drawing, and a bad taste in his draperies. Nevertheless his works are much esteemed. He died in 1709.

, a painter, born at Antwerp in 1530, learned the principles of painting from his father, who was a much inferior artist. After his father’s death, he lived

, a painter, born at Antwerp in 1530, learned the principles of painting from his father, who was a much inferior artist. After his father’s death, he lived in the house of Jacomo Palermo, a dealer in pictures, who avariciously took care to keep him incessantly employed, and sent his paintings to Paris to be disposed of, where they were much admired. He had a clean light manner of pencilling, and a tint of colour that was extremely agreeable. The judicious were very eager to purchase them at high prices, of which, however, the poor artist was not suffered to avail himself; and although his merit was universally allowed, Palermo took care that his name and his circumstances should not be known. He died in this obscure and depressed condition in 1560, only 30 years old.

, a younger son of Samuel Backhouse of Swallowfield in Berkshire, esq. (who died in 1626), was born in that county in 1593, became a commoner

, a younger son of Samuel Backhouse of Swallowfield in Berkshire, esq. (who died in 1626), was born in that county in 1593, became a commoner of Christ church, Oxford, in 1610, in his seventeenth year, left it without a degree, and attached himself to the study of chemistry and astrology then so much in vogue. He adopted the celebrated Ash mole as his son, and imparted to him those absurd secrets which were to produce wonders. Mr, Backhouse died May 30, 1662, and was buried in Swallowfield church. He published a translation from the French of “The pleasant Fountain of Knowledge,1644-, 8vo this was written by John de la Fountainein 1413; “The Complaint of Nature,” and “The Golden Fleece,” a translation from Solomon Trismosin, master to Paracelsus. Mr. Aubrey speaks of this gentleman in his Collection of Hermetic Philosophy, chap. XII.

louring. One of these masters was IJenry Dubbels, whose knowledge of his art was very extensive, and who was very communicative of what he knew. From him Backhuysen

, a very celebrated Dutch painter, was born in 1631, in the city of Embden his father was secretary of state, and his grandfather had held a post in administration. The first sixteen years of his life were employed in studies suitable to the intentions of his family, which were to breed him up to commerce, and for that purpose he was sent to Amsterdam, where it would appear he first caught an inclination for painting. The earliest instructions he received in this art were from Albert Van Everdingen, but he acquired his principal know r Jedge by frequenting the painting-rooms of different great masters, and observing their various methods of touching and colouring. One of these masters was IJenry Dubbels, whose knowledge of his art was very extensive, and who was very communicative of what he knew. From him Backhuysen obtained more real benefit, than from all the painters of his time, and he had not availed himself long of such an instructor before he became the subject of general admiration, so that even his drawings were sought after, and one of his earliest performances was sold for one hundred florins. It was observed of him, that while he was painting, he would not suffer even his most intimate friends to have access to him, lest his fancy might be disturbed, and the ideas he had formed in his mind might be interrupted. He studied nature attentively in all her forms in gales, calms, storms, clouds, rocks, skies, lights and shadows and he expressed every subject with so sweet a pencil, and such transparence and lustre, as placed him above all the artists of his time in that style, except the younger Vandervelde. It was a frequent custom with Backhuysen whenever he could procure resolute mariners, to go out to sea in a storm, in order to store his mind with grand images, directly copied from nature, of such scenes as would have filled any other head and heart with terror and dismay and the moment he landed, he always impatiently ran to his palette, to secure those incidents of which the traces might, by delay, be obliterated. He perfectly understood ttie management of the chiaro-scuro, and strictly observed the truth of perspective. His works may be easily distinguished by an observant eye, from the freedom and neatness of his touch, from the clearness and natural agitation or quiescence of the water, from a peculiar tint in his clouds and skies, and also from the exact proportions of his ships, and the gracefulness of their positions.

guilders, and a considerable present. This picture they afterwards presented to the king of France, who placed it in the Louvre. No painter was ever more honoured by

For the burgomasters of Amsterdam he painted a picture, with a multitude of large vessels, and a view of the city at n distance, for which they gave him thirteen hundred guilders, and a considerable present. This picture they afterwards presented to the king of France, who placed it in the Louvre. No painter was ever more honoured by the visits of kings and princes than Backhuysen the king of Prussia was one of the number; and the czar Peter took delight to see him paint, and often endeavoured to draw, after vessels which he had designed. Backhuysen was remarkably assiduous and yet it seems astonishing to consider the number of pictures which he finished, and the exquisite manner in which they are painted. He is said to have had some taste for poetry, and such was his industry that at his leisure hours he taught writing in the families of the principal merchants. He was the greater part of his life much afflicted with the stone and gravel, yet reached a very advanced age, as his death did not happen till 1709. Strutt places him among his engravers, as having published some etchings of the Y, a small arm of the sea near Amsterdam.

and that his interest, clashing with that of the two 'Cecils, and the earls of Leicester and Essex, who formed the two principal parties in queen Elizabeth’s reign,

His progress in his professional studies, however, was rterer interrupted, and his practice became considerable. In 1588, he discharged the office of reader at Gray’s Inn, and such was his fame, that the queen honoured him by appointing him her counsel learned in the law extraordinary, but whatever reputation he derived from this appointment, and to a young man of only twenty-eight years of age, it must have been of great importance, it is said he derived from her majesty very little accession of fortune. As a candidate for court-preferment, and a lawyer already distinguished by acknowledged talents, it might be expected that the road to advancement would have been easy, especially if we consider his family interest, as the son of a lordkeeper, and nephew to William lord Burleigh, and first cousin to sir Robert Cecil, principal secretary of state. But it appears that his merit rendered his court-patrons somewhat jealous, and that his interest, clashing with that of the two 'Cecils, and the earls of Leicester and Essex, who formed the two principal parties in queen Elizabeth’s reign, was rather an obstruction to him, as he forsook its natural channel in the Cecils, and attached himself and his brother Anthony to the earl of Essex. Sir Robert Cecil is consequently represented as preventing his attaining any very high appointment, although, that he might not seem to slight so near a relation, he procured him the reversion of the place of register of the court of Star-chamber, which, however, he did not enjoy until the next reign, nearly twenty years after. This made him say, with some pleasantry, that “it was like another man’s ground buttalling upon his house, which might mend his prospect, but did not fill his barn.” It was in gratitude for obtaining for him thb reversion that, in 1592, he published “Certain observations upon a libel entitled A Declaration of the true causes of the great Troubles,” in which he warmly vindicates the lord treasurer particularly, and his own father; and the rest of queen Elizabeth’s ministers occasionally. This is thought to have been his first political production.

ted to justify the government in a very unpopular measure, and to turn the public censure from those who had ruined the earl of Essex, and had never done Mr. Bacon any

His other patron, Robert earl of Essex, proved a warm, steady, and indefatigable friend, and earnestly strove to make him queen’s solicitor, in 1594, although unsuccessfully, from the superior influence of the Cecils. He endeavoured, however, to make him amends for his disappointment out of his own fortune. This, it might be supposed, demanded on the part of Mr. Bacon, a high sense of obligation, and. such he probably felt at the time but it is much to be lamented, that he afterwards sullied his character by taking a most forward and active part in bringing that unfortunate nobleman to the block for he not only appeared against him as a lawyer for the crown, but after his death, endeavoured to perpetuate the shame of it, by drawing a declaration of the treasons of the earl of Essex, which was calculated to justify the government in a very unpopular measure, and to turn the public censure from those who had ruined the earl of Essex, and had never done Mr. Bacon any good. It is but fair, however, that we should give the outline of the apology which he found it necessary to make for his conduct. It amounts to this, that he had given the earl good advice, which he did not follow that upon this a coldness ensued, which kept them at a greater distance than formerly that, however, he continued to give his advice to the earl, and laboured all he could to serve him with the queen that in respect to his last unfortunate act, which was, in truth, no better than an act of madness, he had no knowledge or notice whatever that he did no more than he was in duty bound to do for the service of the queen, in the way of his profession and that the declaration was put upon him altered, after he had drawn it, both by Uie ministers and the queen herself. Such an apology, however, did not satisfy the public at that time, and the utmost investigation of the affair since has only tended to soften some parts of his conduct, without amounting to a complete justification.

or from a jealousy of his high talents; and among other accusations, they represented him as a man, who, by applying too much of his time to other branches of knowledge,

Enemies he certainly had, whether from this cause, or from a jealousy of his high talents; and among other accusations, they represented him as a man, who, by applying too much of his time to other branches of knowledge, could not but neglect that of his profession but this appears to have been a foolish calumny. Most of his works on law were written, although not published, in this reign. About the year 1596, he finished his “Maxims of the Law.” As these are now published, they make only the first part of what are styled “The Elements of the Common Law of England.” The second treatise was entitled “The Use of the Law for preservation of our persons, goods, and good name, according to the laws and customs of this land,” a work of great value to students. His “Maxims of Law” he dedicated to queen Elizabeth, but, for whatever reason, the work was not published in his lifetime. The next year he published a work of another kind, entitled “Essays, or Counsels Civil and Moral.” This work is well known, and has been often reprinted. The author appears to have had a high opinion of its utility and of the excellent morality and wisdom it inculcates there probably never has been but one opinion. Some of these essays had been handed about in manuscript, which he assigns as the reason why he collected and published them in a correct form. About the close of the succeeding year, 1598, he composed his “History of the Aliena tion Office,” which was not published till many years after his decease, indeed not until the publication of his works in 1740, when it was copied from a ms. in the Inner Temple library. It is needless to mention some smaller instances of his abilities in the law, which, nevertheless, were received by the learned society of which he was a member, with all possible marks of veneration and esteem, and which they have preserved with the reverence due to so eminent an ornament of their house. As a farther proof of their respect, they chose him double reader in the year 1600, which office he discharged with his usual ability. He distinguished himself likewise, during the latter part of the queen’s reign, in the house of commons, where he spoke often, and with so much impartiality as to give occasional umbrage to the ministers. To the queen, however, he preserved a steady loyalty, and after her decease, composed a memorial of the happiness of her reign, which did equal honour to her administration, and to the capacity of its author. He transmitted a copy of this to Thuanus, who made use of it in his history, but Mr. Bacon contented himself with enjoining that it should be printed after his’ decease. It is a work of much elegance and ability.

nist, sir Robert Cecil, now created earl of Salisbury, and by sir Edward Coke, the attorney-general, who affected to undervalue his talents, and who certainly had reason

On the accession of king James I. Mr. Bacon appears to have paid court to him, by the intervention of some of his English and some of his Scotch friends, and by drawing up the form of a proclamation, which, though it was not used, was considered as an instance of his duty and attachment. Accordingly, on July 23, 1603, he was introduced to the king at Whitehall, and received the honour of knighthood. He was also continued in the same office he held under the queen, but a representation respecting the grievous exactions of purveyors, which the house of commons employed him to draw up, attracted the king’s more particular attention, and on Aug. 25, 1604, his majesty constituted him, by patent, one of his counsel learned in the law, with a fee of forty pounds a year, which is said to have been the first act of royal power of that nature. He granted him the same day, by another patent, a pension of sixty pounds a year, for special services received from his brother Anthony Bacon and himself. His farther promotion, however, was still retarded by his old antagonist, sir Robert Cecil, now created earl of Salisbury, and by sir Edward Coke, the attorney-general, who affected to undervalue his talents, and who certainly had reason to fear his reputation. To these, however, he contrived to carry himself with decent respect, although not without occasional expostulations with both,

bly. About this time he married Alice, daughter of Benedict Barnham, esq. alderman of London, a lady who brought him an ample fortune, but by whom he never had any children.

In the mean time he gave evidence of the steady prosecution of his studies by publishing, in 1605, the first specimen of his great work, in his book “Of the Advancement of Learning,” a performance of much value even in its detached state. He continued, however, his diligence in parliament, and among other topics, endeavoured to second the views the king had entertained of an union between England and Scotland but his efforts for the crown were more successful in Westminster-hall than in that assembly. About this time he married Alice, daughter of Benedict Barnham, esq. alderman of London, a lady who brought him an ample fortune, but by whom he never had any children. In 1607, he succeeded in his application for the solicitorship, on a vacancy, and with that his practice encreased most extensively, there being few causes of importance in which he was not concerned. He assured the king, before he obtained this employment, that it would give him such an increase of capacity, though not of zeal, to serve his majesty, that what he had done in times past should seem as nothing, in comparison with the services he should render for the future and in this respect he is said to have kept his word, for in the session of parliament hold in the year in which he was made solicitor, he ran through a great variety of business, and that of a nature which required a man not only of great abilities but of great policy, and of equal reputation. He was, in the first place, employed by the house of commons to represent to the king the grievances under which the nation laboured and though the paper relating to them was couched in terms not very agreeable to the king’s temper, sir Francis, by his accompanying address, so abated their harshness as to perform this difficult commission with universal applause. He was likewise employed by the house at a conference with the lords, to persuade them to join in an application to the crown, for the taking away the ancient tenures, and allowing a certain and competent revenue in lieu of them and in his speech on this occasion, sir Francis Bacon set the affair in so clear a light, as excited that spirit, which at length procured the dissolution of the court of Wards, a point of the highest consequence to the Jiberties of this kingdom. He likewise satisfied the house at a time when they were much out of temper at the manner in which the king’s messages were conveyed to them and procured their acquiescence in the supplies by a well-timed speech, which must have convinced the king of what importance his services were likely to prove. Amidst all these political and professional engagements, he found leisure to digest the plan of the second part of his great work, which he transmitted to some judicious friends for their opinion. This piece was entitled “Cogitata et Visa,” and contained the ground-work or plan of his “Novum Organum,” so essential a part of his “Instauration,” that it sometimes bears that title. Bishop Andrews and sir Thomas Bodley w r ere two of the persons whose advice he solicited on this occasion, and their answers are printed in his works, where we have likewise a small discourse in English, under the Latin title of “Filum Labyrinthi,” which was the original draught of the “Cogitata et Visa.” While availing himself of the opinions of his learned contemporaries, he published in 1610, his celebrated treatise “Of the Wisdom of the Ancients,” a work which received and has ever retained the justest applause. It is not easy to say which is most conspicuous in this, his diligence in procuring the materials, or his judgment in disposing of them.

this being in some instances; resisted, the attorney-general had to prosecute a Mr. Oliver St. John, who was among the most refractory. But these are circumstances which

Such, indeed, was the weight of his character, that he stood in no need of support from the king’s ministers the earl of Salisbury was now dead, and it does not appear that he had any dependance on the earl of Somerset, the reigning favourite, but kept at a distance from him when he was in his highest power. Matters, however, were so mismanaged by Somerset, that the attorney-general had much difficulty and less success in preserving the king’s interest in the house of commons, where an opposition arose to his majesty’s measures so violent, that the parliament was dissolved, and not called again for a considerable time. Voluntary subscriptions were set on foot to supply the wants of government; and this being in some instances; resisted, the attorney-general had to prosecute a Mr. Oliver St. John, who was among the most refractory. But these are circumstances which properly belong to the history of this reign.

s appears to have acted an impartial part in the discharge of his duty as attorney-general. The king who appeared deeply interested in bringing these offenders to justice,

In the mean time, Somerset was falling in the king’s estimation, and his place was supplied by Mr. George Villiers, afterwards the duke of Buckingham. The rise of this favourite was rapid and surprizing and sir Francis Bacon is said to have conceived a good opinion of him, became his friend, and certainly gave him very salutary advice. His promotion was followed % by the trial of the earl and countess of Somerset, for being accessary to the murder of sir Thomas Overbury. In this affair, sir Francis appears to have acted an impartial part in the discharge of his duty as attorney-general. The king who appeared deeply interested in bringing these offenders to justice, was as eager afterwards to grant them a pardon but sir Francis interfered in neither case farther than the duties of his office required.

m, against whom he had made a decree, surmising he had wrong done him, the general case with clients who lose their cause, presented a libellous petition to the king

With his colleagues in administration, or in the law departments, he appears to have endeavoured to live upon good terms. Buckingham he contrived to keep in apparent humour, although he frequently refused to put the seal to what he thought improper grants and he even agreed better with sir Edward Coke than was expected, always representing that judge to the king in the most favourable light. About this time, however, an attempt was made to the prejudice of the chancellor, which might have given him some warning of his fall. One Wrenbam, against whom he had made a decree, surmising he had wrong done him, the general case with clients who lose their cause, presented a libellous petition to the king against him, the suggestions of which were thoroughly examined, and it clearly appeared that the chancellor had acted as became him, and that he had in truth been very much injured by this Wrenham the suggestions, however, appear to have produced those effects on some minds which afterwards were displayed more conspicuously.

of lords. When it came to be debated there, Buckingham presented a letter from the lord chancellor, who was then sick, in which he desired four things of their lordships

The end of his political life, however, was now approaching, and was precipitated by means in which he had a considerable share, by advising his majesty to call a parliament, and grant redress of public abuses. In the course of investigating these, on the loth of March 1620-1, the committee appointed to inquire into the abuses in the courts of justice, reported that two charges of corruption had been brought against the lord chancellor; a farther inquiry was ordered by the house of commons, which produced stronger circumstances, and the complaint was sent up to the house of lords. When it came to be debated there, Buckingham presented a letter from the lord chancellor, who was then sick, in which he desired four things of their lordships first, that they would maintain him in their good opinion till his cause was heard secondly, that they would give him a convenient time, as well in regard of his ill state of health, as of the importance of the charge, to make his defence; thirdly, that they would allow him to except against the credit of the witnesses against him, to cross-examine them, and to produce evidence in his own defence and fourthly, that in case there came any more petitions of the like nature, that their lordships would not take any prejudice at their number, considering they were against a judge that made two thousand orders, and decrees in a year. Their lordships returned a respectful answer to this letter but within a few days, their own committee reported above twenty instances, in which he had taken bribes to the amount of several thousands of pounds. Of all this, the proof was so clear, as to determine the chancellor to relinquish his intended defence, and to throw himself upon the mercy of the house. This not being explicit, he sent a second full and particular confession and submission to the house, in which he acknowledged most, but extenuated some, of the many instances of corruption with which he had been charged, and once more threw himself entirely on the mercy of his peers. The lords having heard this paper read, a committee of lords were sent to him, who told him that the lords do conceive it to be an ingenuous and full confession, and demanded of him, whether it be his own hand that is subscribed to the same and whether he will stand to it or not To which the lord chancellor answered, “My lords, it is my act, my hand, my heart. I beseech your lordships to be merciful to a broken reed.

ent in the Tower, however, he was discharged, and in some measure regained his favour with the king, who, on the prorogation of parliament, was pleased to consult him,

In consequence of these proceedings, his lordship delivered up the great seal to his majesty, and the house of peers adjudged, that lord viscdunt St. Albans, lord chancellor of England, shall undergo fine and ransom of fortythousand pounds, that he shall be imprisoned in the Tower during the king’s pleasure, that he shall for ever be incapable of any office or employment in the state or commonwealth, and that he shall never sit in parliament, or come within the verge of the court. After a short confinement in the Tower, however, he was discharged, and in some measure regained his favour with the king, who, on the prorogation of parliament, was pleased to consult him, as to the proper methods of reforming the courts of justice, and taking away other grievances which that parliament had inquired into and his lordship accordingly drew up a memorial, which is extant in his works. Other marks of favour and indulgence were shewn him, which, amidst the anguish of a blasted character, so far appeased his troubled mind, that he resumed his studies with his accustomed vigour. In the spring of the succeeding year, 1622, he published his history of, Henry VII. which has not added so much to his reputation as his other works. When the new parliament was called, in which the house of commons shewed great zeal for his majesty’s service, he composed “Considerations of a war with Spain,” and likewise “Heads of a Speech” for his friend sir Edward Sackville, upon the same subject and these services were so well received, that upon an application to the king for a full pardon, he easily obtained it. In the warrant directed for this purpose to the attorney-general, his majesty took notice of his lordship’s having already satisfied justice by his sufferings, and. that himself being always inclined to temper justice with mercy, and likewise calling to remembrance his former good services, and how well and profitably he had spent his time since his troubles, he was graciously pleased to remove from him that blot of ignominy which yet remained upon him, of incapacity and disablement, and to remit to him all penalties whatsoever, inflicted by that sentence.

ers he commended to sir Humphrey May, chancellor of the Duchy, and the bishop of Lincoln (Williams), who succeeded him as lord keeper, and acknowledged the honour of

In consequence of this pardon, his lordship was summoned to the second parliament in the succeeding reign of Charles I. but his infirmities did not allow him to take his seat. He foresaw that his end was drawing near, although he escaped the great plague, in the spring of 1625. Having sufficiently established the fame of his learning and abilities, by his writings published by himself, he committed, by his will, several of his Latin and philosophical compositions, to the care of sir William Bos well, his majesty’s agent in Holland, where they were afterwards published by Gruter. His orations and letters he commended to sir Humphrey May, chancellor of the Duchy, and the bishop of Lincoln (Williams), who succeeded him as lord keeper, and acknowledged the honour of that trust, which letters he enjoined to be preserved, but not to be divulged, as touching too much on persons and matters of state. By this judicious care of his, most of his papers were preserved, and the greatest part of them at different times have been printed and published. The severe winter which followed the infectious summer of 1625, brought him very low; but the spring reviving his spirits, he made a little excursion into the country, in order to try some experiments in natural philosophy; in which journey he was taken so ill, that he was obliged to stop at the earl of Arundel’s house at Highgate, about a week, and there he expired, April y, 1626, and was privately buried in the chapel of St. Michael’s church, within the precincts of Old Verulam where a monument was erected to his memory by sir Thomas Meautys, his faithful friend and indefatigable servant in all his troubles.

in the first class of modern philosophers. He unquestionably belonged to that superior order of men, who, by enlarging the boundaries of human knowledge, have been benefactors

If, however, we contemplate his personal character and his mental powers, he must appear to be one of the greatest and wisest men that ever contributed to human knowledge. The only thing, says Brucker, to be regretted in the writings of Bacon is, that he has increased the difficulties necessarily attending his original and profound researches, by too freely making use of new terms, and by loading his arrangement with an excessive multiplicity and minuteness of divisions. But an attentive and accurate reader, already not unacquainted with philosophical subjects, will meet with no insuperable difficulties in studying his works, and, if he be not a wonderful proficient in science, will reap much benefit as well as pleasure from the perusal. In fine, adds this judicious writer, lord Bacon, by the universal consent of the learned world, is to be ranked in the first class of modern philosophers. He unquestionably belonged to that superior order of men, who, by enlarging the boundaries of human knowledge, have been benefactors to mankind and he may not improperly be styled, on account of the new track of science which he employed, the Columbus of the philosophical world.

a merit which is rather useful than necessarv a distinction which will not be misunderstood by those who know to what caprices the success of modern artists is often

Mr. Bacon’s private characfer is entitled to much praise. He vyas a man of unfeigned piety and extensive benevolence. Prosperity had not corrupted him, although it appeared to superficial observers that he was cautious in matters of expence, which they were apt to impute to motives which never entered into his mind. The want of education, he supplied by useful reading, and without the more ostensible attainments of a scholar, his conversation as far as it regarded common life and common topics, had none of those deficiencies which academical education is supposed to supply. In his temper, the irritability of the artist was corrected by much meekness and forbearance, and he had that noble candour which never denies just praise to a rival or contemporary. With respect to his attainments in his profession, they might be said to be all his own. Having arrived at the highest rank of English artists in sculpture, he lias amply proved that foreign travel confers a merit which is rather useful than necessarv a distinction which will not be misunderstood by those who know to what caprices the success of modern artists is often indebted.

2d of December 1558, with the title of lord keeper. He was also of the privy council to her majesty, who had much regard to his advice. The parliament met Jan. 23, but

, lord keeper of the great seal in the reign of queen Elizabeth, descended from an ancient and honourable family in Suffolk. His rather was Robert Bacon of Drinkstxm in that county, esq. and his mother was Isabel, the daughter of John Gage of Pakenhain in the said county, esq. Nicholas, their second son, was born in 1510, at Chislehurst in Kent. After having received the first rudiments of learning, probably at home, or in the neighbourhood, he was sent when very young to Corpus Christi college in Cambridge, where having improved in all branches of useful knowledge, he went to France, in order to give the last polish to his education. On his return he settled in Gray VInn, and applied himself with such assiduity to the study of the law, that on the dissolution of the monastery of St. Edmund’s-Bury in Suffolk, he had a grant from king Henry VIII. in the thirty-­sixth year of his reign, of the manors of Redgrave, Botesdale, and Gillingham, with the park of Redgrave, and six acres of land in Worthanf, as also the tithes of Redgrave to hold in capite by knight’s service, a proof of the estimation in which he was held by his majesty. In the thirtyeighth of the same king, he was promoted to the office of attorney in the court of wards, a place both of honour and profit, and his patent was renewed in the first year of Edward VI. and in 1552, which was the last year of his reign, Mr. Bacon was elected treasurer of Gray’s-Inn. His great moderation and consummate prudence, preserved him through the dangerous reign of queen Mary. In the very dawn of that of Elizabeth he was knighted, and the great seal of England being taken from Nicholas Heath, archbishop of York, was delivered to sir Nicholas Bacon, on the 22d of December 1558, with the title of lord keeper. He was also of the privy council to her majesty, who had much regard to his advice. The parliament met Jan. 23, but was prorogued on account of the queen’s indisposition to the 25th, when the lord keeper opened the session with a most eloquent and solid speech. Some of the queen’s counsellors thought it necessary that the attainder of the queen’s mother should be taken off; but the lord keeper thought the crown purged all defects, and in compliance with his advice, two laws were made, one for recognizing the queen’s title, the other for restoring her in blood as heir to her mother. The principal business of this session was the settlement of religion, in which no man had a greater share than the keeper, and he acted with such prudence as never to incur the hatred of any party. On this account he was, together with the archbishop of York, appointed moderator in a dispute between eight Protestant divines, and eight Popish bishops and the latter behaving very unfairly in the opinion of both the moderators, and desiring, to avoid a fair disputation, to go away, the lord keeper put that question to each of them, and when all except one insisted on going, his lordship dismissed them with this memorandum, “For that ye would not that we should hear you, perhaps you may shortly hear of us” and accordingly for this contempt, the bishops of Winchester and Lincoln were committed to the tower, and the rest were bound to appear before the council, and not to quit the cities of London and Westminster without leave. The whole business of the session, than which there was none of greater importance during that reign, was chiefly managed by his lordship, according to his wise maxim, “Let us stay a little, that we may have done the sooner.” From this time he stood as high in the favour of the queen as any of her ministers, and maintained a cordial interest with other great men, particularly with those eminent persons, who had married into the same family with himself, viz. Cecil, Hobby, Rowlet, and Killigrew. By their assistance he preserved his credit at court, though he sometimes differed in opinion from the mighty favourite Leicester, who yet once bad fair his ruin, when certain intrigues were carried on respecting the succession. Some statesmen, and particularly the earl of Leicester, pretended to favour the title of the queen of Scots, but others were more inclined to the house of Suffolk. The queen sometimes affected a neutrality, and sometimes shewed a tenderness for the title of the Scottish queen. In 1564, when these disputes were at the height, Mr. John Hales, clerk of the Hanaper, published a treatise which seems to have been written a considerable time before, in favour of the Suffolk line, and against the title of the queen of Scots. This book was complained of by the bishop of Ross, ambassador from the queen of Scots, and Ross being warmly supported by the earl of Leicester, Hales was committed to prison, and so strict an inquiry made after all who had expressed any favour for this piece, that at last the lord-keeper came to be suspected, which drew upon him the queen’s displeasure, and he was forbidden the court, removed from his seat at council, and prohibited from meddling with any affairs but those of the chancery nay, Camden says he was confined . At last, however, Cecil, who is suspected to have had some share in the above treatise, with much difficulty restored him to the queen’s good opinion, as appears by her setting him at the head of that commission, granted in the year 1568, for hearing the difference between the queen of Scots, and her rebellious subjects; and in 1571, we find him again acting in the like capacity, though very little was done before the commissioners at either time, which was what queen Elizabeth chiefly desired, and the covering her inclination with a decent appearance of justice, was perhaps not a little owing to the address of the lord-keeper. Afterwards he continued at the head of her majesty’s councils, and had a great hand in preventing, by his moderation, some violent measures afterwards proposed. The share, however, that he had in the business of the duke of Norfolk, and his great care for promoting the Protestant religion, created him many bitter enemies among the Papists both at home and abroad, who though they were able to do him no great hurt, yet published some libels, particularly “A Detection of certain practices, &c.” printed in Scotland, about 1570, and “A treatise of Treason,” both which gave him considerable uneasiness, although the queen expressed her opinion, by a proclamation, ordering them to be burnt. As a statesman, he was remarkable for a clear head, and acute understanding; and while it was thought of some other great men that they seemed wiser than they were, yet the common voice of the nation pronounced, that sir Nicholas Bacon was wiser than he seemed. His great skill lay in balancing factions, and it is thought he taught the queen that secret, the more necessary to her because the last of her family, and consequently without many of the usual supports of princes. In the chancery he distinguished himself by a very moderate use of power, and the respect he shewed to the common law. At his own request, an act of parliament was made, to settle and establish the power of a lord -keeper, though he might probably have taken away all need of this, by procuring the title of lord chancellor: but according to his motto, which was Mediocra firma, he he was content to be safe, and did not desire to be great*. In that court, and in the star-chamber, he made use, on proper occasions, of set speeches, in which he was peculiarly happy, and gained the reputation of a witty and a weighty speaker. His great parts and great preferment were far from raising him in his own opinion, as appears from the modest answer he gave* queen Elizabeth, when she told him his house at Redgrave was too little for him, “Not so, madam,” returned he, “but your majesty has made me too great for my house.” Yet to shew his respect for her majesty’s judgment, he afterwards added wings to this house. His modesty in this respect was so much the greater, since he had a great passion for building, and a very fine taste, as appeared by his house and gardens at Gorhambury near St. Alban’s, now the seat of lord viscount Grimston. Towards the latter end of his life, he became very corpulent, which made queen Elizabeth say merrily, that “sir Nicholas’s soul lodged well. To himself, however, his bulk was very inconvenient after walking from Westminster-hall to the star-chamber, which was but a very little way, he was usually so much out of breath, that the lawyers forbore speaking at the bar till he recocovered himself, and gave them notice by knocking” with his staff. After having held the great seal more than twenty years, this able statesman and faithful counsellor was suddenly removed from this life, as Mallett informs us, by the following accident “He was under the hands of his barber, and the weather being sultry, had ordered a window before him to be thrown open. As he was become very corpulent, he presently fell asleep, in the cur­* After he had been some monthsact of parliament, which declares, in office, as keeper of the great seal,” That the common law always was, he began to doubt to what degree his that the keeper of the great seal always authority extended, which seems to had, as of right belonging to his office, have been owing to the general terms the same authority, jurisdiction, excused upon the delivery of the great cution of laws, and all other customs, Heal, of which we have various in- as the lord chancellor of England lawstances in Rymer’s Foedera. Upon fully used.“What the true reason this, he first applied himself to the was that made his lordship so uneasy, queen, from whom he procured a pa- is not perhaps known to posterity. tent, bearing date at Westminster, the But sir Henry Spelman has observed, 14th of April, in the first year of her that for the benefit of that wise counreign, whereby she declares him te seller sir Nicholas Bacon, the authobare as full powers as if he were rity of the keeper of the great seal hancellor of England, and ratifies all was by this law declared to be in all that he had already done. This, how- respects the same with that of th ever, did not fully satisfy him but chancellor, four years afterwards he procured an rent of fresh air that was blowing in upon him, and awaked after some time distempered all over. c Why,‘ said he to the servant, < did you suffer me to sleep thus exposed’ The fellow replied, ‘ That he durst not presume to disturb him.’ * Then,‘ said the lord keeper, * by your civility I lose my life,’ and so removed into his bed-chamber, where he died a few days after.” But this story seems doubtful, for all writers agree, that sir Nicholas Bacon died Feb. 20, 1579, when the weather could not be very sultry. On the 9th of March following he was buried with great solemnity, under a sumptuous monument erected by himself in St. Paul’s church, with an inscription written by the celebrated Buchanan. Camden’s character of him is just and plain “Vir praepinguis, ingenio acerrimo, singulari prudentia, summa eloquentia, tenaci memoria, et sacris conciliis alterum columen” i. e. A man of a gross body, but most quick wit, singular prudence, supreme eloquence, happy memory, and for judgment the other pillar of the state. His son’s pharacter of him is more striking. He was “a plain man, direct and constant, without all finesse and doubleness and one that was of a mind that a man, in his private proceedings and estate, and in the proceedings of state, should rest upon the soundness and strength of his own courses, and not upon practice to circumvent others, according to the sentence of Solomon, * Vir prudens advertit ad gressus suos stultus autem divertit ad dolos’ insomuch that the bishop of Ross, a subtle and observing man, said of him, that he could fasten no words upon him, and that it was impossible to come within him, because he offered no play; and the queen mother of France, a very politic princess, said of him, that he should have been of the council of Spain, because he despised the occurrents, and rested upon the first plot.” Nor is Puttenham’s short account to be overlooked “I have come to the lord keeper, and found him sitting in his gallery alone, with the works of Quintilian before him. Indeed he was a most eloquent man, of rare wisdom and learning, as ever I knew England to breed, and one that joyed as much in learned men and 0'.;d wits, from whose lippes Ihave seen to proceed more i;rave and natural eloquence than from all the orators of Oxford and Cambridge.

ttled, likewise, upon the college, an annuity of twenty pounds, for the maintenance of six scholars, who are to be chosen out of the grammar school at Redgrave, near

Sir Nicholas ranks among the liberal benefactors to the university of Cambridge, and particularly to Corpus college, in which he was educated. He presented to the public library one hundred and three Greek and Latin books, and on the college he bestowed two hundred pounds towards erecting a new chapel, and engaged other friends to contribute to the same purpose. He settled, likewise, upon the college, an annuity of twenty pounds, for the maintenance of six scholars, who are to be chosen out of the grammar school at Redgrave, near Botesdale in Suffolk. This school was founded by himself, and he allotted thirty pounds per annum for the support of it; he founded also Cursitor’s or Bacon’s Inn in Chancery-lane and for the furtherance of religion, he appointed two annual sermons in St. Paul’s cathedral-, allotting four marks per annum for the payment of the preachers. Nor must we omit some notice of his intention, in Henry VIII.'s time, to found a seminary of ministers of state out of the revenues of the dissolved monasteries.His majesty had intended to found a house for the study of the civil law, and the purity of the Latin and French tongues. He ordered, therefore, sir Nicholas Bacon, and two others, Thomas Denton, and Robert Gary, to draw out the plan and statutes of such a house, which they accordingly brought to the king in writing. The intention of it was, that there should be frequent pleadings and other exercises in the Latin and French languages, and that when the students had attained to some degree of ripeness, they should be sent out with our ambassadors, and trained up in the knowledge of foreign affairs, by which means the institution would become a nursery for public ministers. Others of the students were to be employed in writing the history of the national transactions both at home and abroad, including, particularly, embassies, treaties, arraign rnents, and state trials. But before they were to be permitted to write on these subjects, they were to take an oath before the lord chancellor, that they would do it truly, without respect of persons, and without any corrupt views. This design, however, miscarried, probably owing to Henry’s extravagant dissipation of the revenues of the dissolved monasteries.

inshed, at the end of his second volume, p. 1589, ranks sir Nicholas Bacon in the catalogue of those who have written something concerning the history of England. Mr.

Bishop Tanner has enrolled sir Nicholas Bacon among the writers of this country, on account of the following pieces, preserved in different manuscript collections. “An oration to the queen, exhorting her to Marriage;” “a speech to the lord mayor of London” “a speech to the serjeant called to a judge” “an oration touching the queen’s Marriage and Succession to the Crown” “his speech to the queen, when she made him lord keeper” “his speech in the star-chamber, 1568” “his speech to sir Thomas Gargrave, elected speaker for the commons house of parliament;” “his speech at the council table, concerning aid required by the Scots to expel the French out of Scotland” “his speech concerning an Interview between queen Elizabeth and the Scottish queen, 1572;” “his speech to the lords and commons in parliament, in the beginning” “his speech to Mr. Bell when he was called to be judge.” All these are in the Norwich manuscripts of More, 228 and are, we suppose, at present, in the public library of Cambridge. “Several speeches of lord keeper sir Nicholas Bacon, from 1558 to 1571 inclusive,” in Mr. Ralph Thoresby’s collection “a discourse upon certain points touching the Inheritance of the Crown, conceived by sir Anthony Brown, and answered by sir Nicholas Bacon,” published in 1723. “Three letters to Dr. Parker,” in Corpus Christi college, Cambridge mentioned by Strype, in his life of the archbishop. One of these, entitled “a letter of Mr. Nicholas Bacon, counsellor at law, to Parker, dean of Stoke college, in answer to certain cases put to him relating to the said college,” Mr. Strype has published at length. Holinshed, at the end of his second volume, p. 1589, ranks sir Nicholas Bacon in the catalogue of those who have written something concerning the history of England. Mr. Masters refers to a comment of sir Nicholas’s on the twelve minor prophets, dedicated to his son Anthony. And Mr. Strype has printed an excellent letter of advice, which was written by the lord keeper, a little before his death, to the queen, on the situation of her affairs. Many of his apophthegms are among those of lord Verulam, and many of his speeches are in the Parliamentary History.

ed “The Snipe,” in which the friar is himself, and Peter is his fellow-collegian, Peter Zinzam, M.D. who died Nov. 9, 1781. This ballad is preserved in the “Oxford Sausage.”

, rector of Balden in Oxfordshire, and vicar of Bramber in Sussex, was of Magdalen college, Oxford, where he took the degree of M. A. April 17, 1722; B. D. April 29, 1731 D.D. December 7, 1735. He possessed an exquisite fund of humour, was a famous punster, and wrote ai) admirable poem called the “Artificial Kite,” first printed in 1719, and preservedin the Gentleman’s Magazine for 1758. In 1757 he published five dramatic performances, viz. J. “The Taxes.” 2. “The Insignificants.” 3. “The trial of the Time-killers.” 4. “The moral Q,uack.” 5. “The Oculist.” None of these, however, were intended for the theatre. He was also the author of a very humorous ballad, entitled “The Snipe,” in which the friar is himself, and Peter is his fellow-collegian, Peter Zinzam, M.D. who died Nov. 9, 1781. This ballad is preserved in the “Oxford Sausage.” Dr. Bacon died at Balden, Jan. 10, 1783, in the eighty-third year of his age.

had a great effect on the mind of his master, and inclined him to give satisfaction to his nobility, who were then, generally speaking, disaffected. This seasonable

, an eminent English divine of the thirteenth century, was born, according to the most probable conjectures, about 1168, but where is not known. He studied, however, at Oxford, where he distinguished himself by the quickness of his parts and his assiduous application. Thence according to the custom of that age, tie removed to Paris, and acquired such learning as the age afforded. After his return, of which we have no date, he settled at Oxford, and read divinity lectures. His colleague in this office was Dr. Edmund Rich, in our histories commonly styled Edmund Abingdon a man famous for literature, and yet, in the opinion of Leland, inferior to our Bacon. This Dr. Rich had been chosen by the canons of Salisbury, treasurer of their church, and in 1233, becoming archbishop of Canterbury, his friend Robert Bacon succeeded him as treasurer of the cathedral church of Salisbury. The same year he gained great reputation by a sermon preached before his royal master, king Henry III. at Oxford, whither his majesty came, in order to hold a general council of his lords. In this discourse, Bacon plainly told the king the mischiefs to which himself and his subjects were exposed, by his reposing too great a confidence in Peter de Rupibus, bishop of Winchester, and other foreigners and this honest sermon had a great effect on the mind of his master, and inclined him to give satisfaction to his nobility, who were then, generally speaking, disaffected. This seasonable service rendered to the nation, did more to secure his memory from oblivion, than his many years laborious reading, or even his learned writings.

her elder brother, or more probably, as Leland imagines, uncle of Roger Bacon. Robert was the person who initiated Edmund archbishop of Canterbury in the study of divinity,

Dr. Pegge, whose excellent life of bishop Grosseteste we have seen since the above article was written, thinks that Robert Bacon was either elder brother, or more probably, as Leland imagines, uncle of Roger Bacon. Robert was the person who initiated Edmund archbishop of Canterbury in the study of divinity, but Bulaeus, in his history of the university of Paris, says he was himself the scholar of that saint, which Dr. Pegge doubts. However, he wrote “Edmund’s life,” and is noticed by Leland, as the particular acquaintance and intimate of bishop Grosseteste. Matthew of Westminster gives him and Fishakel the character of being two such as were not exceeded by any in Christendom, or even equalled, especially as preachers. Dr. Pegge observes, that this character is the more extraordinary as coming from a monk, and that from the latter part of it, as well as from the list of Robert’s productions, it appears that his excellence lay in theology, a particular which constitutes an essential difference in the character of him and Roger Bacon, who was eminently skilled in the mathematics and philosophy, as well as divinity, and perhaps more so.

, a learned English monk of the Franciscan order, who flourished in the thirteenth century, was born near Ilchester

, a learned English monk of the Franciscan order, who flourished in the thirteenth century, was born near Ilchester in Somersetshire, in 1214, and was descended of a very ancient and honourable family. He received the first tincture of letters at Oxford, where having gone through grammar and logic, the dawnings of his genius gained him the favour and patronage of the greatest lovers of learning, and such as were equally distinguished by their high rank, and the excellence of their knowledge. It is not very clear, says the Biographia Britannica, whether he was of Merton college, or of Brazen-nose hall, and perhaps he studied at neither, but spent his time at the public schools. The latter is indeed more probable than that he studied at Merton college, which did not then exist. It appears, however, that he went early over to Paris, where he made still greater progress in all parts of learning, and was looked upon as the glory of that university, and an honour to his country. In those days such as desired to distinguish themselves by an early and effectual application to their studies, resorted to Paris, where not only many of the greatest men in Europe resided and taught, but many of the English nation, by whom Bacon was encouraged and caressed. At Paris he did not confine his studies to any particular branch of literature, but endeavoured to comprehend the sciences in general, fully and perfectly, by a right method and constant application. When he had attained the degree of doctor, he returned again, to his own country, and, as some say, took the habit of the Franciscan order in 1240, when he was about twenty-six years of age but others assert that he became a monk before he left France. After his return to Oxford, he was considered, by the greatest men of that university, as one of the ablest and most indefati^ gable inquirers after knowledge that the world had ever produced and therefore they not only shewed him all due respect, but likewise conceiving the greatest hopes from his improvements in the method of study, they generously contributed to his expences, so that he was enabled to lay out, within the compass of twenty years, no less than two thousand pounds in collecting curious authors, making trials of various kinds, and in the construction of different instruments, for the improvement of useful knowledge. But if this assiduous application to his studies, and the stupendous progress he made in them, raised his credit with the better part of mankind, it excited the envy of some, and afforded plausible pretences for the malicious designs of others. It is very easy to conceive, that the experiments he made in all parts of natural philosophy and the mathematics, must have made a great noise in an ignorant age, when scarcely two or three men in a whole nation were tolerably acquainted with those studies, and when all the pretenders to knowledge affected to cover their own ignorance, by throwing the most scandalous aspersions on those branches of science, which they either wanted genius to understand, or which demanded greater application to acquire, than they were willing to bestow. They gave out, therefore, that mathematical studies were in some measure allied to those magical arts which the church had condemned,and thereby brought suspicions upon men of superior learning. It was owing to this suspicion that Bacon was restrained from reading lectures to the young students in the university, and at length closely confined and almost starved, the monks being afraid lest his writings should extend beyond the limits of his convent, and be seen by any besides themselves and the pope. But there is great reason to believe, that though his application to the occult; sciences was their pretence, the true cause of his ill-usage was, the freedom with which he had treated the clergy in, his writings, in which he spared neither their ignorance nor their want of morals. But notwithstanding this harsh feature in the character of the times, his reputation continued to spread over the whole Christian world, and even pope Clement IV. wrote him a letter, desiring that he would send him all his works. This was in 1266, when our author was in the flower of his 4 age, and to gratify his holiness, collected together, greatly enlarged and ranged in some order, the several pieces he had written before that time, and sent them the next year by his favourite disciple John of London, or rather of Paris, to the pope. This collection, which is the same that himself entitled Opus Majus, or his great work, is yet extant, and was published by Dr. Jebb, in 1773. Dr. Jebb had proposed to have published all his works about three years before his edition of the Opus Majus, but while he was engaged in that design, he was informed by letters from his brother at Dublin, that there was a“manuscript in the college library there, which contained a great many treatises generally ascribed to Bacon, and disposed in such order, that they seemed to form one complete work, but the title was wanting, which l,iad been carelessly torn off from the rest of the manuscript. The doctor soon found that it was a collection of those tracts which Bacon had written for the use of pope Clement IV. and to which he had given the title of Opus Majus, since it appeared, that what he said of that work in his Opus Tertium, addressed to the same pope, exactly suited with this; which contained an account of almost all the new discoveries and improvements that he had made in the sciences,. Upon this account Dr. Jebb laid aside his former design, and resolved to publish only an edition of this Opus Majus. The manuscripts which he made use of to complete this edition, are, 1. ms. in the Cotton library, inscribed^” Jul. D. V.“which contains the first part of the Opus Majus, under the title of a treatise” Jl)e utijitate Scientiarnii). “2. Another ms. in the same library, marked” Tib. C. V." containing the fourth part of the Opus Majus, in which is shewn the use of the mathematics in the sciences and affairs of the world in the ms. it is erroneously called the fifth part. 3. A ms. in the library belonging to Corpus Christi in Cambridge, containing that portion of the fourth part which treats of geography. 4. A ms. of the fifth part, containing a treatise upon perspective, in the earl of Oxford’s library. 5. A ms. in the library of Magdalen college, Cambridge, comprehending the same treatise of perspective. 6. Two Mss. in the king’s library, communicated to the editor by Dr. Richard Bentley, one of which contains the fourth part of Opus Majus, and the other the fifth part. It is said that this learned book of his procured him the favour of Clement IV. and also some encouragement in the prosecution of his studies but this could not have lasted long, as that pope died soon after, and then we find our author under fresh embarrassments from the same causes as before; but he became in more danger, as the general of his order, Jerom de Ascoli, having heard his cause, ordered him to be imprisoned. This is said to have happened in 1278, and to prevent his appealing to pope Nicholas III. the general procured a confirmation of his sentence from Rome immediately, but it is not very easy to say upon what pretences. Yet we are told by others, that he was imprisoned by Reymundus Galfredus, who was general of his order, on account of some alchemistical treatise which he had written, and that Galfredus afterwards set him at liberty, and became his scholar. However obscure these circumstances may be, it is certain that his sufferings for many years must have brought him low, since he was sixty-four years of age when he was first put in prison, and deprived of the opportunity of prosecuting his studies, at least in the way of experiment. That he was still indulged in the use of his books, appears very clearly from the great use he made of them in the learned works he composed.

cardinal of St. Cecilia, was elected pope, and four years after, was succeeded by cardinal Savelli, who took the name of Honoring IV. in the year 1285. Both reigns

Pope Nicholas III. dying in the year 1280, Simon de Brie, cardinal of St. Cecilia, was elected pope, and four years after, was succeeded by cardinal Savelli, who took the name of Honoring IV. in the year 1285. Both reigns were full of troubles and very short so that in all this time our author could find no opportunity of applying to the holy see for the mitigation of the sentence pronounced against him- But when he had been ten years in prison, Jerom de Ascoli, who had condemned his doctrine, was chosen pope, and assumed the name of Nicholas IV. As he was the first of the Franciscan order that had ever arrived at this dignity, was reputed a person of great probity and much learning, our author, notwithstanding what had before happened, resolved to apply to him for his discharge and in order to pacify his resentment, and at the same time to shew both the innocence and the usefulness of his studies, he addressed to him a very learned and curious treatise, “On the means of avoiding the infirmities of Old Age,” printed first at Oxford, 1590, and translated and published by Dr. Richard Browne, under the title of “The cure of Old Age and preservation of Youth,” London, 1683, 8vo. It does not appear, however, that his application had any effect on the contrary, some writers say that he caused him to be more closely confined. But towards the latter end of his reign, Bacon, by the interposition of some noblemen, obtained his release, and returned to Oxford, where, at the request of his friends, he composed “A compendium of Theology,” which seems to have been his last work, and of which there is a copy in the royal library. He spent the remainder of his days in peace, and dying in the college of his order, on the 11th of June 1292, as some say, or in 1294, as others assert, was interred in the church of the Franciscans. The monks gave him the title of “Doctor Mirabilis,” or the Wonderful Doctor, which he deserved, in whatever sense the phrase is taken.

hose discoveries, which have bestowed such high reputation on those of our own and of other nations, who have brought them into common use. In geography also he was

He was certainly the most extraordinary man of his time. He was a perfect master of the Latin, Greek, and Hebrew, and has left posterity such indubitable marks of his critical skill in them, as might have secured him a very high character, if he had never distinguished himself in any other branch of literature. In all branches of the mathematics he was well versed, and there is scarcely any part of them, on which he has not written with a solidity and clearness, which have been deservedly admired by the greatest masters in that science. In mechanics particularly, the learned Dr. Freind says, that a greater genius had not arisen since the days of Archimedes. He understood likewise the whole science of optics, with accuracy and is very justly allowed to have understood, both the theory and practice of those discoveries, which have bestowed such high reputation on those of our own and of other nations, who have brought them into common use. In geography also he was admirably well skilled, as appears from a variety of passages in his works, which was the reason that induced the judicious Hackluyt to transcribe a large discourse out of his writings, into his Collection of Voyages and Travels. But his skill in astronomy was still more remarkable, since it appears, that he not only pointed out that error which occasioned the reformation in the calendar, and the distinction between the old stile and the new, but also offered a much more effectual and perfect reformation, than that which was made in the time of pope Gregory XIII. There are also remaining some works of his relating to chronology, which would have been thought worthy of very particular notice, if his skill in other sciences had not made his proficiency in this branch of knowledge the less remarkable. The history of the four great empires of the world, he has treated very accurately ind succinctly, in his great work addressed to pope Clelent IV. He was so thoroughly acquainted with Cheistry at a time that it was scarcely known in Europe, id principally cultivated among the Arabians, that Dr. Freind ascribes the honour of introducing it to him, who speaks in some part or other of his works, of almost every operation now used in chemistry. Three capital discoveries lade by him deserve to be particularly considered. The first is, the invention of gun-powder, which, however confidently ascribed to others, was unquestionably known to him, both as to its ingredients and effects. The second is that which commonly goes under the name of alchemy, or the art of transmuting metals, of which he has left many treatises, some published, and some still remaining in ms. which, whatever they may be thought of now, contain a multitude of curious and useful passages, independently of their principal subject. The third discovery in chemistry, not so deserving of the reader’s attention, was the tincture of gold for the prolongation of life, of which Dr. Freind says, he has given hints in his writings, and has said enough to shew that he was no pretender to this art, but understood as much of it as any of his successors. That he was far from being unskilled in the art of physic, we might rationally conclude, from his extensive knowledge in those sciences, which are connected with it: but we have a manifest proof of his perfect acquaintance with the most material and useful branches of physic, in his Treatise of Old Age, which, as Dr. Freind, whose authority on that subject cannot well be disputed, observes, is very far from being ill written; and Dr. Brown, who published it in English, esteemed it one of the best performances that ever was written. In this work he has collected whatever he had met with upon the subject, either in Greek or Arabian writers, and has added a great many remarks of his own. In logic and metaphysics he was excellently well versed, as appears by those parts of his works, in which he has treated of these subjects; neither was he unskilled in philology and the politer parts of learning. In ethics, or moral philosophy, he has laid down some excellent principles for the conduct of human life. But, as his profession required a particular application to theology, it appears, that he made all his other studies subservient thereto. He had the highest deference for the Holy Scriptures, and thought that in them were contained the principles of true science, and of all useful knowledge. He therefore pressed the study of them in their original languages, and an assiduous application to the several branches of learning, which he thought necessary for the thorough understanding of them,

, the only Protestant who went back to popery that was made bishop in the reign of Louis

, the only Protestant who went back to popery that was made bishop in the reign of Louis XIV. was born at Castelgeloux, in Gascony. After having quitted his religion, he entered himself of the Franciscan order, was then made bishop of Glandeve, and afterwards of Pamiers, where he died in 1694, at the age of ninety-four. His Latin poem on the Education of a Prince, 1671, 4to, procured him the episcopal dignity, by the interest of the duke of Montausier. This poem was reprinted in 8vo, in 1685, with notes, and the addition of some odes by the same author. He published also " Carmen pancgyricum/' Toulouse, 1667, 4to, dedicated to pope Clement IX.

ef for the death of his son-in-law, Charpentier, a professor of medicine in the university of Paris, who was executed for being concerned in the league, or insurrection

, king’s advocate in the exchequer of Paris, flourished about the close of the sixteenth century, and was profoundly skilled in the municipal and civil law. He wrote many treatises on different branches of these laws, which were first published in 1608, and again in 1688, with the commentaries of Claude de Ferrieres, A third, and improved edition was printed at Lyons, 1744, 2 vols. fol. He died in April 1597, of grief for the death of his son-in-law, Charpentier, a professor of medicine in the university of Paris, who was executed for being concerned in the league, or insurrection against the succession of Henry IV.

t from Lord (a real letter on his own case) A clerical character, aimed at a free-thinking Lecturer, who made some noise at that time. These, it must be confessed, are

On his quitting Barnstaple, he removed to South Moulton, where he had a congregation willing enough to receive his doctrines as he pleased to dispense them, but too few to be able to provide for him many of the comforts of life. In this retirement, his mind, ever active, and well stored with miscellaneous literature, turned its views to some employment in the learned world. During the progress of the London Review, which terminated in 1730, he occasionally corresponded with the editor, Dr. Kciirick and contended with that sceptic, a man of no mean talents, on different points of Christianity. He occasionally also wrote some articles in that Review, which are yet distinguishable by their spirit and intelligence. He was before this period an occasional correspondent in the Westminster Magazine, where, in 1774, he wrote "An essay on modern Education: Anecdotes of Mr. John Wesley, with, two of his original letters A Shandean letter A scription of a desperate case The Presbyterian Parson’s Soliloquy The Expostulation An improved copy, occasioned by a most horrid murder: An essay on Infidelity Extracts of a letter sent by a clergyman to his friend, after having met with ill treatment from Lord (a real letter on his own case) A clerical character, aimed at a free-thinking Lecturer, who made some noise at that time. These, it must be confessed, are trifles, but discover much vivacity of imagination, and a turn for poetry which might have been cultivated with advantage.

phica Britannica.” The whole of these letters and papers fell afterwards into Dr. Priestley’s hands, who published them upon Mr. Wesley’s death.' Dr. Whitehead, the

While at Barnstaple, Mr. Badcock became acquainted with a daughter of Mr. Samuel Wesley, master of Tiverton-school, and elder brother of the celebrated John Wesley from her he received a considerable quantity of papers, consisting chiefly of letters and pieces of poetry. Some of these he published entire, as already mentioned, in the Westminster Magazine for 1774, and from the whole, with some oral communications, he drew up that account of the family which was published in N. XX. of the “Bibliotheca Topographica Britannica.” The whole of these letters and papers fell afterwards into Dr. Priestley’s hands, who published them upon Mr. Wesley’s death.' Dr. Whitehead, the biographer of Wesley, seems ­to think there is some mystery in this transaction, which he confesses he was not able to clear up.

Among his other literary labours, Mr. Badcock frequently gave assistance to authors who were about to publish, but had diffidence in their own abilities.

Among his other literary labours, Mr. Badcock frequently gave assistance to authors who were about to publish, but had diffidence in their own abilities. One instance of this kind occasioned a temporary controversy a few years ago. When professor White of Oxford was appointed Bampton lecturer, he formed the plan of a course of lectures, which induced him to apply to Mr. Badcock, with whose talents he had become acquainted, for some assistance his application was accordingly effectual, and Mr. Badcock, to whom the subjects to be treated were familiar, contributed very considerably to the first, third, fourth, seventh, and eighth lectures, and supplied many of the ndtes. There was certainly nothing in this, but what one man of learning may owe to another, without detracting much from his own character. But Dr. White unfortunately neglected to make the usual complimentary acknowledgements of assistance, in his preface and upon Mr. Badcock’s death, the late Dr. Gabriel of Bath published a pamphlet tending to prove that Mr. Badcock’s contributions were so large as to leave Dr. White the reputation only of having preached and published these very popular lectures. Dr. White, however, answered this charge in such a manner as to vindicate his literary fame from the attempts made to diminish it.

ntimate acquaintance, his conformity was sincere. But whatever were his views, or the views of those who wished to see him among the defenders of the established church,

It has been supposed that his acquaintance with the bishop of Exeter, Dr. Ross, and the most respectable clergymen of his diocese, might have led him to examme the foundation of dissent audit might have appeared to him, as it has to very many of sound judgment and acknowledged abilities, that this foundation was groundless. He was led to conform by no promise, and, at best, by very distant views of advancement. It is, indeed, impossible to read the heart of man but, if it can be read by an intimate acquaintance, his conformity was sincere. But whatever were his views, or the views of those who wished to see him among the defenders of the established church, they were disappointed by a premature death, In the spring of 1787, he was ordained deacon by bishop Ross, and, by a very distinguished compliment, received priest’s orders the following week. The title upon which he was ordained was the curacy of Broad Clyst, near Exeter, and he afterwards preached, as assistant to Dr. Gabriel, in the Octagon chapel, Bath. He was much afflicted with head-aches, which frequently interrupted his public services. In May, 1788, he was attacked by an illness which proved fatal on the 19th of that month, while on a visit to his friend sir John Chichester, bart. in Queen- street, May-Fair.

who, as founder of Clare-hall, Cambridge, is justly entitled to

, who, as founder of Clare-hall, Cambridge, is justly entitled to a place among the benefactors of learning, was descended from a knightly family, seated at Great Badew, or Badow, near Chelmsford, in the county of Essex. From this place, they took their surname and here, probably, Richard de Badew was born. In 1326, he was chancellor of the university of Cambridge and having purchased two tenements in Miln-street, of Nigel Thornton, a physician, he laid there, in the year abovementioned, the foundation of a building, to which was given the name of University hall. Stow differs from this account, in asserting that the twq houses of old belonged to the chancellor and university. Badew, however, placed a principal in this hall, who was to take care of th pensioners that came to live there at their own expence or, as others say, at the charge of the university for, as yet, it was not endowed, and this, it must be confessed, suits rather better with the term pensioner. University hail continued in this condition for the space of sixteen years, and then by an accidental fire Was burnt down. Richard de Badew being unable to rebuild it, it lay for a few years in ruins. But one of the late pensioners having a great interest with Elizabeth, daughter of sir Gilbert de Clare, earl of Gloucester, and third sister and co-heir of sir Gilbert de Clare, the last earl of Gloucester and Hertford, of that name and family, he prevailed upon her to undertake what de Badew was not able to perform. Accordingly this lady, after the resignation of Walter Thaxted the principal, and with the consent of Richard de Badew, rebuilt that hall, and endowed it, in the year 1347, with revenues for one master, ten fellows, and ten scholars, and at the same time named it Clare hall. When she founded it, king Edward III. gave licence of mortmain to the master and scholars to take lands and tenements, to the value of forty pounds a year. The revenues of this hall have been augmented since by several benefactors. It was again rebuilt in 1638, and the magnificent chapel in 1763. It contains a master, ten senior fellows, fifteen juniors, and three lay- fellows.

vices by taking him as a partner in the business, but also gave him his daughter Thalia in marriage, who was also a learned lady. After the death of his father-in-law,

, or in Latin, Jodocus Badius Ascensius, an eminent French printer, was born in 1462, at Assche, a village in the territory of Brussels, from which he derived the name Ascensius. He first studied at Ghent, then at Brussels, and lastly at Ferrara in Italy. He made great progress in the languages, and principally in the Greek, which he learned at Lyons and at Paris. He printed a great many books, and usually in the frontispiece had a printing press as his mark. He is also the author of some books, among which are <c Sylva moralis contra vitia“” Psalterium B. Mariae versibus“” Epigrammatum Lib. I“* f Navicula stultarum mulierum” “VitaThomce a Kempis” “De Grammatica” “De conscribendis Epistolis.” He wrote also commentaries on Horace, Virgil, Juvenal, Lucan, Sallust, Valerius Maximus, Quintilian, Aulus Gellius, and soiue parts of Cicero’s works. At Paris he taught Greek, and' explained the poets at Lyons. His high reputation in these studies induced Treschel, the famous printer, to engage him as corrector of his press, not only secured his valuable services by taking him as a partner in the business, but also gave him his daughter Thalia in marriage, who was also a learned lady. After the death of his father-in-law, in 1500, he was engaged by Gagnin, the royal librarian, to visit Paris, where he removed with his family, and established an excellent printing office, by the name of Praelum Ascensianum, from which many good editions issued, although his type was not so much admired as that of the Stephens’s. He died in 1535. His son Conrad Badius settled at Geneva, having embraced Calvinism, and was both a printer and an author. Two of his daughters were married to eminent printers, one to Michel Yascosan, and the other to Robert Stephens.

, a senator of Venice, who died an 1580, has left various treatises on the civil law, which

, a senator of Venice, who died an 1580, has left various treatises on the civil law, which were printed at Venice in 1593, and reprinted at Boulogne in 1744. His son Peter Badoaro, was also celebrated for his knowledge of law, and died in 1591. His “Orationi Civili,” were published in 1593, if this be not, as we suspect, a production of the father. Frederick Badoaro, of the same family, was distinguished for his learning, and talents as a negociator. He was Venetian ambassador at the court of Charles V. and Philip II. and was the founder, of the academy known by the name of Delia Fama, at Venice. He died in 1593. From the three concurring events under this year, it is probable, there are some mistakes in this account, which we have taken from the Diet. Hist.

epts he made an extraordinary progress in a short time, and proved the best designer of any of those who were educated with him in that illustrious school. He possessed

, an eminent Italian painter, born at Parma, according to Basan, in 1581, was a disciple of Annibai Caracci, by whose admirable precepts he made an extraordinary progress in a short time, and proved the best designer of any of those who were educated with him in that illustrious school. He possessed a lively imagination, and a singular readiness of hand' and it was concluded by all who saw his performances, that he would have arrived at a high degree of merit, if he had not died in the very bloom of life, and if he had applied himself with more assiduity to his profession. Basan’s account, however, makes him reach his sixty-sixth year, but it does not appear on what authority. Badofocchi is to be ranked among engravers also, and there are many etchings by him, in a slight, free, masterly style. They are generally more finished than those of Guido but the extremities are by no means so finely drawn. Amongst the best, is Raphael’s Bible, from the pictures of Raphael in the Vatican, small plates, lengthways, engraved canjointly with Lanfranchi. This is a well-known work.

church of the Holy Virgin at Copenhagen, and to the brother of this lady, the count de Griffenfeld, who had great interest at court. Bagger, however, filled this high

, bishop of Copenhagen, was born at Lunden in 1646. His father Olaus Bagger taught theology in the school of Lunden, but sent his son to Copenhagen for education. He afterwards travelled to Germany, the Netherlands, and England, studying under the most able masters in divinity and the oriental languages, and then returned to Copenhagen. When Lunden became a part of the Swedish dominions, the king established an academy there, and Bagger was appointed to teach the oriental languages. He had scarcely begun to give lessons, however, when by the advice of his friends of Copenhagen, he solicited and obtained, in 1674, the office of first pastor of the church of the Holy Virgin in that metropolis. In 1675, after the usual disputation, he got the degree of doctor, and on the death of John Wandalin, bishop of Zealand or Copenhagen, he was appointed to succeed him, at the very early age of twenty-nine. His promotion is said to have been in part owing to his wife Margaret Schumacher, the widow of Jacob Fabri, his predecessor, in the church of the Holy Virgin at Copenhagen, and to the brother of this lady, the count de Griffenfeld, who had great interest at court. Bagger, however, filled this high office with reputation, as well as that of dean of theology, which is attached to the bishopric of Copenhagen. He revised the ecclesiastical rites which Christian V. had passed into a law, as well as the liturgy, epistles, and gospels, collects, &c. to which he prefixed a preface. He also composed and published several discourses, very learned and eloquent, some in Latin, and others in the Danish tongue. He died in 1693, at the age of 47. By his second wife, he left a son Christian Bagger, who became an eminent lawyer, and in 1737 rose to be grand bailly of Bergen, and a counsellor of justice.

ishing part. These were not, however, the failings of his time. He is best known at present to those who study Italian poetry by “The Arragonians,” a tragedy, and “The

, an Italian poet, a man of opulence as well as fame by his writings, and esteemed among the good poets of his age. His failing is said to have been that of being difficult to please in his own compositions, which he filed and polished till he wore off the strength of the metal. He knew how to draw an exact outline, and to give a strong colouring, but he held his pencil too long, and was over-anxious in the finishing part. These were not, however, the failings of his time. He is best known at present to those who study Italian poetry by “The Arragonians,” a tragedy, and “The Judgment of Paris.” We have no dates of his birth or death, except that he was famed as a poet, about 1590, and Erythraeus (Le Koux) says that he died an old man.

l it be thought an objection of much consequence, that he did not stand high in the opinion of those who contended for such innovations as in his opinion endangered

Dr. Bagot was a man of great learning, an accomplished scholar, and of the most gentle and amiable manners. As a patron, he deserves much praise for bestowing the ample patronage of his see, with great disinterestedness and impartiality, among the learned and meritorious clergy of his diocese, acquainted with the language and manners of the district. His publications were not very numerous. In the “Pietas et Gratulatio Univ.Oxon. 1761,” on the accession, of his present majesty, are some English blank verses, by him and he also contributed some verses on his majesty’s marriage, and on the birth of the prince of Wales, all which are inserted in vol. VIII. of Nichols’s poems. In ]772, when the question of subscription to the thirty-nine articles was agitated, he published “A defence of subscription to the XXXIX Articles, as it is required in the university of Oxford.” This was anonymous, and occasioned by a pamphlet, also anonymous, entitled “Reflections on the impropriety and expediency of Lay Subscription in the university of Oxford.” In 1779 he preached and published the Radcliffe Infirmary sermon, and in 1730 his principal work appeared, “Twelve discourses on the Prophecies,” preached at the Warburtonian lecture in Lincoln’s Inn chapel. The earnestness with which he contends in these discourses for the essential doctrines of the church, was again apparent in his next publication, “A letter to the Rev. W, Bell, D. D.” on the subject of his late publications upon the authority, nature, and design of the Lord’s Supper,“1781, 8vo. In this Dr. Bagot objects to the Socinian tendency of Dr. Bell’s arguments and about the same time he reprinted, with a short preface, Dr. Isaac Barrow’s” Discourse on the doctrines of the Sacrament," which is now one of the tracts dispersed by the Society for promoting Christian Knowledge. His other publications were, a sermon before the house of lords, Jan. 30, 1783 one for the Norwich hospital; and two others before the Society for promoting Christian Knowledge, 17 88, and the Society for propagating the Gospel, 1790. A small pamphlet against the Anabaptists, and a charge delivered when bishop of Norwich, were printed by Dr. Bagot, but not generally published. In all his works he displays a fervent zeal for the principles of religion and of loyalty, joined with much knowledge of the true grounds of both nor will it be thought an objection of much consequence, that he did not stand high in the opinion of those who contended for such innovations as in his opinion endangered the whole fabric of church government and doctrine.

Fanshaw, ambassador in Spain and Portugal, and on his return was made chaplain to archbishop Stern, who gave him the prebend of Southwell and rectory of Castleton in

, D.D. brother of the above, was also born at Broughton in 1632, and educated at Westminster school, and elected student of Christ-church in 1651, of which he was M. A. 1657. He was chaplain to sir Richard Fanshaw, ambassador in Spain and Portugal, and on his return was made chaplain to archbishop Stern, who gave him the prebend of Southwell and rectory of Castleton in Synderick. In 1667 he held the prebend of Barnaby in York cathedral, and in 1668, that of Friday Thorp. He took the degree of B.D. 1668, and D.D. 1671. In 1672 he was made chaplain to the lord treasurer Danby, and rector of St. Botolph’s church, Bishopsgate, London, which he exchanged for Houghton-le-Spring. In 1680 he was installed a prebendary of Durham, and died at Houghton, Dec. 30, 1709. He was of a totally different character from his brother. He published “Diatribae, or discourses upon select texts, against Papists and Socinians,” London, 1680, 8vo, and several single sermons.

, one of those German writers who have of late years disgraced the profession of religion and

, one of those German writers who have of late years disgraced the profession of religion and philosophy, was born in 1741, at Leipsic, where his father was a clergyman, and educated this son for the church, but with so little success that he soon left college, and enlisted in the army. Being bought off, however, he returned to the university, and in 1761 was admitted to the degree of M. A. Soon afterwards he became catecbist in his father’s church, was a popular preacher, and in 1765 published sermons and some controversial writings, which evinced that he possessed both learning and genius. From his early days he appears to have been of a debauched turn, with a propensity to satire which no considerations could restrain and these two qualities, which he persisted in all his life, laid the foundation of what he termed his misfortunes, although they were no other than the contempt which his infamous conduct and impious doctrines have a natural tendency to produce in every well-ordered society. His life became a series of adventures too numerous for the plan of this work but the principal were these.

tled at Halle, as the keeper of a tavern and billiard table, and lived in open adultery with a woman who was his assistant, and for whom he turned his wife and daughter

On his return he obtained the castle of count Leining Hartzburgh at Heidesheim, for his Pkilanthropinum^ and in 1778 it was consecrated by a solemn religious festival. His conduct here, however, was too obnoxious both in principle and practice, to permit him a long continuance, and his shocking treatment of his wife contributed to render the scheme abortive. His academy became in debt, and he took to flight, but was imprisoned at Dienheim. On his release he settled at Halle, as the keeper of a tavern and billiard table, and lived in open adultery with a woman who was his assistant, and for whom he turned his wife and daughter out of doors.

an eminent French critic, was born at Neuville near Beauvais in Picardy, June 13, 1649. His father, who was poor, and unable to give him a learned education, sent him

, an eminent French critic, was born at Neuville near Beauvais in Picardy, June 13, 1649. His father, who was poor, and unable to give him a learned education, sent him to a small school in the neighbourhood, where he soon learned all that was taught there, and desirous of more, went frequently to a neighbouring convent, where, by his assiduities in performing little menial offices, he ingratiated himself with them, and by their interest was presented to the bishop of Beauvais. The bishop placed him in the college or seminary of that name, where he studied the classics with unwearied assiduity, borrowing books from his friends, and it is even said he took money privately from his father, in order to buy books. In the course of his reading, which was accurate and even- critical, he formed, about the age of seventeen, a commonplace book of extracts, which he called his “Juvenilia,” in two large volumes, very conducive to his own improvement, and afterwards to that of M. de Lamoignon, his patron’s son. He then studied philosophy, but with less relish, his predilection being in favour of history, chronology, and geography; yet in defending Ins philosophical theses, he always proved his capacity to be fully equal to his subject. In 1670 he went to one of those higher seminaries, formerly established by the French bishops for the study of divinity, which he pursued with his usual ardour and success, although here his early taste discovered itself, in his applying with most eagerness to the fathers and councils, as more nearly connected with ecclesiastical history. So intent was he on researches of this kind, that he fancied himself solely qualified for a life of studious retirement, and had a design of going, along with his brother Stephen, to the abbey La Trappe, but this was prevented by the bishop of Beauvai? bestowing upon him, in 1672, the appointment of teacher of the fifth form in the college, from which, in 1674, he was promoted to the fourth. This produced him about sixty pounds a-year, with part of which he assisted his poor relations, and laid out the rest in books, and had made a very good collection when he left the college. Among other employments at his leisure hours he compiled two volumes of notices of authors who had disguised their names, of which the preface only has been published.

gave him the vicarage of Lardieres, which netted only 30l. yearly, yet with this pittance, Baillet, who maintained a brother, and a servant, contrived to indulge his

In 1676, he received holy orders, and passed his examinations with high approbation. Monnoye, one of his biographers, mentions a circumstance very creditable to his superiors, that, although they were satisfied with his learning, they would not have admitted him into orders, if they had not discovered that he was superior to the vanity which sometimes accompanies a reputation for learning. The bishop of Beauvais now gave him the vicarage of Lardieres, which netted only 30l. yearly, yet with this pittance, Baillet, who maintained a brother, and a servant, contrived to indulge his humanity to the poor, and his passion for books, to purchase which he used to go once a year to Paris. His domestic establishment was upon the most temperate scale, no drink but water, and no meat, but brown bread, and sometimes a little bacon, and a few herbs from his garden boiled in water with salt, and whitened with a little milk. The cares of his parish, however, so much interrupted his favourite studies that he petitioned, and obtained another living, the only duties of which were singing at church, and explaining the catechism. A higher and more grateful promotion now awaited him, as in 1680, he was made librarian to M. Lamoignon, not the first president of the parliament, as Niceron says, for he was then dead, but his son, who at that time was advocate-general. To this place he was recommended by M. Hermant, a doctor of the Sorbonne, who told Lamoignon that Baillet was the proper person for him, if he could excuse his awkwardness. Lamoignon answered that he wanted a man of learning, and did not regard his outward appearance. To Baillet such an appointment was so gratifying that for some time he could scarcely believe M. Hermant to be serious. When he found it confirmed, however, he entered upon his new office with alacrity, and one of his first employments was to draw up an index of the library, which extended to thirty-five folio volumes, under two divisions, subjects and author’s names. The Latin preface to the index of subjects, when published, was severely, but not very justly censured by M. Menage, as to its style. After this, he completed four volumes of his celebrated work “Jugemens des Savans,” and gave them to the bookseller with no other reserve than that of a few copies for presents. The success of the work was very great, and the bookseller urged him to finish the five volumes that were, to follow. He did not, however, accomplish the whole of his design, which was to consist of six parts. I. In the first he was to treat of those printers, who had distinguished themselves by their learning, ability, accuracy, and fidelity. Of critics, that is, of those who acquaint us with authors, and their books, and in general those, who give an account of the state of literature, and of all that belongs to the republic of letters. Of philologists, and all those who treat of polite literature. Of grammarians and translators of all kinds. II. Poets, ancient and modern writers of romances and tales in prose rhetoricians, orators, and writers of letters, either in Latin, or in any of the modern languages. III. Historians, geographers, and chronologists of all sorts. IV. Philosophers, physicians, and mathematicians. V. Authors upon the civil and canon law, poJitics, and ethics. VI. Writers on divinity particularly the fathers, school-divinity heretics, &c. He published, however, only the first of these divisions, and half of the second, under the title of “Jugemens des Savans sur les principaux ouvrages des Auteurs,” Paris, 1685, 12mo. It is, in fact, a collection of the opinions of others, with seldom those of the author, yet it attracted the attention of the literary world, and excited the hostility of some critics, particularly M. Menage, to whom, indeed, Baillet had given a previous provocation, by treating him rather disrespectfully. The first attack was by father Commire, in a short poem entitled “Asinus in Parnasso,” the Ass on Parnassus, followed afterwards by “Asinus ad Lyram,” and “Asinus Judex,” all in defence of Menage and the poets and an anonymous poet wrote “Asinus Pictor.” It does not appear, however, that these injured the sale of the work; and in 1686, the five other volumes, upon the poets, were published, with a preface, in which the author vindicates himself with ability. M. Menage now published his “Anti-Baillet,” in which he endeavoured to point out Baillet' s errors and another author attacked him in “Reflexions sur le Jugemens des Savans, [envoy 6ez a l'auteur par un Academicien,1691, with Hague on the title, but really in France, and, according to Niceron, written by father Le Tellier, a Jesuit, all of which order resented Baillet' s partiality to the gentlemen of Port Royal. The editor of the Amsterdam edition of the “Jugemens,” attributes this letter to another Jesuit, a young man not named. Of these censures some are undoubtedly just, but others the cavils of caprice and hypercriticism.

work, for which he had made copious collections, with a view to discover the names of those authors who have used fictitious ones. In 1678 he had written in Latin “Elenchus

In 1688, Baillet published his very amusing work, “Les Enfans devenus celebres par leurs etudes et par leurs ecrits,” Paris, 2 vols. 12mo. This collection of examples of young geniuses was thought well calculated to excite emulation, and soon became a very popular book, the professors of the universities, and other teachers of youth, strongly recommending it. His next work was of a singular cast. Conceiving that when Menage wrote his “Anti-Baillet” he meant a personal, as well as a critical attack, he began to form a catalogue of all works published with similar titles, beginning with the Anti-Cato of Cassar, the most ancient of the Anti’s, and concluding with trie AntiBaillet. This was published in 1689. “Des Satyres personelles, Traite historique et critique de celles, qui portent le titre d'Anti,” Paris, 2 vols. 12mo. The industrious Marchand, however, has given a very long catalogue of Anti’s omitted by Baillet, in his vol. I. under the article Anti-Garasse. Bailiet afterwards prepared a more useful work, for which he had made copious collections, with a view to discover the names of those authors who have used fictitious ones. In 1678 he had written in Latin “Elenchus Apocalypticus Scriptorum Cryptonymorum,” but of this he published only a preliminary treatise in French, “Auteurs degnisez sous des noms etraiigers, &c. tome I. contenant le traite preliminaire, sur le changement et la supposition des noms parmi les Auteurs,” Paris, 1620, 12mo. His design resembled that of Placcius in his treatise “De Anonymis et Pseudonymis,” and they had some communication together on the subject. Niceron attributes Baillet’s suppression of this work to the fear of giving offence, which might surely have been avoided if he had left contemporary writings to some future editor. In 1691, he wrote the “Life of Des Cartes,” in 2 vols. 4to, which was criticised in “Reflexions cl' un Academicien sur la Vie de M. des Cartes, envoyees a un de ses amis en Hollande,” ascribed, by Le Long, to Gallois, and by Marchand, to Le Tellier. The chief fault, is that very common one, in single lives, of introducing matters very slightly, if at all, connected with the history of the principal object, and from much that is in this work, Des Cartes might be supposed a warlike general, or a controversial divine. It succeeded so well, however, that a second edition was prevented only by his death but before that event he abridged it in one volume 12mo, and also wrote the life of Richer, doctor of the Sorbonne, which was not printed until several years after his death, at Liege, 1714, 12mo.

, known also by the name of La Riviere, who flourished in the latter part of the sixteenth century, was

, known also by the name of La Riviere, who flourished in the latter part of the sixteenth century, was a native of Falaise in Normandy, and physician in ordinary to Henry IV. He acquired considerable reputation for learning, but, as he practised on the principles of Paracelsus, he was involved in disputes with his brethren, and frequently obliged to vindicate his method. Besides medicine, he was well versed in philosophy and the belles lettres, and was an excellent naturalist. He died at Paris, Nov. 5, 1605. When feeling the approaches of death, he sent for all his servants, and distributed his money and property among them, on condition that they immediately left the house, which was so punctually complied with, that when the physicians came on their next visit, they found the doors open, and their patient by himself, with no property left hut the bed he lay upon. When the physicians remarked this circumstance to him, he answered that he must now go likewise, “as his baggage was sent off before him, 17 and immediately expired. Pierre de l'Etoile, however,^ in his journal of Henry IV. represents him as a true penitent, and compares him to the thief on the cross. His works are” Demosterion, sive CCC Aphorismi, continentes summam doctrinae Paruecelsse,“Paris, 1573, 8vo.” Resp*onsio ad questiones propositas a medici* Parisiensibus,“Paris, 1579, 8vo.” Traite-de la Peste,“1580.” Traite* de Tantiquite et singularite de la grande Bretagne Armorique," Rennes, 1587, 4to.

While he was in this station, he had, for some years, the care of the education of Lord Montgomery, who, at length, carried him with him to Kilwinning; to which church

, an eminent Presbyterian divine of the seventeenth century, was born at Glasgow in the year 1599. His father, Mr. Thomas Baillie, was a citizen of that place, and son to Baillie of Jerviston. Our Robert Baillie was educated in the university of his native city where, having taken his degrees in arts, he turned his thoughts to the study of divinity and, receiving orders from archbishop Law, he was chosen regent of philosophy at Glasgow. While he was in this station, he had, for some years, the care of the education of Lord Montgomery, who, at length, carried him with him to Kilwinning; to which church he was presented by the earl of Eglintoun. Here he lived in the strictest friendship with that noble family, and the people connected with it; as he did also with his ordinary the archbishop of Glasgow, with whom he kept up an epistolary correspondence. In 1633, he declined, from modesty, the offer of a church in Edinburgh. Being requested in 1637, by his friend the archbishop, to preach a sermon before the assembly at Edinburgh, in recommendation of the canon and service book, he refused to do it; and wrote a handsome letter to the archbishop, assigning the reasons of his refusal. In 1638 he was chosen by the presbytery of Irvine, a member of the famous assembly at Glasgow, which was a prelude to the civil war. Though Mr. Baillie is said to have behaved in this assembly with great moderation, it is evident that he was by no means deficient in his zeal against prelacy and Arminianism. In 1640 he was sent by the covenanting lords to London, to draw up an accusation against archbishop Laud, for his obtrusions on the church of Scotland. While he was in England, he wrote the presbytery a regular account of public affairs, with a journal of the trial of the earl of Strafford. Not long after, on his return, he was appointed joint professor of divinity with Mr. David Dickson, in the university of Glasgow, and his reputation was become so great, that he had before this received invitations from the other three universities, all of which he refused. He continued in his professorship till the Restoration but his discharge of the duties of it was interrupted for a considerable time, by his residence in England for, in 1643, he was chosen one of the commissioners of the church of Scotland to the assembly of divines at Westminster. Though he never spoke in the debates of the assembly, he appears to have been an useful member, and entirely concurred in the principles and views of its leaders. Mr. Baillie returned again to his own country in the latter end of 1646. When, after the execution of Charles I. Charles II. was proclaimed in Scotland, our professor was one of the divines appointed by the general assembly to wait on the king at the Hague; upon which occasion, March 27, 1649, he made a speech in the royal presence, expressing in the strongest terms his abhorrence of the murder of the late king and, in his sentiments upon this event, it appears that the Presbyterian divines of that period, both at home and abroad, almost universally agreed. After the restoration of Charles II. Mr. Baillie, Jan. 23, 1661, by the interest of the earl of Lauderdale, with whom he was a great favourite, was made principal of the university of Glasgow, upon the removal of Mr. Patrick Gillespie, who had been patronised by Cromwell. It is said by several writers, that Mr. Baillie had the offer of a bishopric, which he absolutely refused. Though he was very loyal, and most sincerely rejoiced in his majesty’s restoration, he began, a little before his death, to be extremely anxious for the fate of Presbytery. His health failed him in the spring of 1662. During his illness he was visited by the new-made archbishop of Glasgow, to whom he is said to have addressed himself in the following words “Mr, Andrews (I will not call you my lord), king Charles would have made me one of these lords but I do not find in the New Testament, that Christ has any lords in his house.” Notwithstanding this common-place objection to the hierarchy, he treated the archbishop very courteously. Mr. Baillie died in July 1662, being 63 years f age. By his first wife, who was Lilias Fleming, of the family of Cardarroch, in the parish of Cadder, near Glasgow, he had many children, five of whom survived him, viz. one son, and four daughters. The posterity of his son, Mr. Henry Baillie, who was a preacher, but never accepted of any charge, still inherit the estate of Carnbrae, in the county of Lanerk, an ancient seat of the Baillies. Mr. Baillie’s character ha% been drawn to great advantage, not only by Mr. Woodrow, but by an historian of the opposite party. His works, which were very learned, and acquired him reputation in his own time, are 1. “Opus Historicum et Chronologicum,” Amsterdam, 1668, fol. 2. “A Defence of the Reformation of the Church of Scotland, against Mr. Maxwell, bishop of Ross.” 3. “A Parallel betwixt the Scottish Service-Book and the Romish Missal, Breviary,” &c. 4. “The Canterburian Self-Conviction.” 5. “Queries anent the Service-Book.” 6. “Antidote against Arminianism.” 7. “A treatise on Scottish Episcopacy.” 8. “Laudensium.” 9. “Dissuasive against the Errors of the Times, with a Supplement.” 10. “A Reply to the Modest Enquirer,” with some other tracts, and several sermons upon public occasions but his “Opus Historicum et Chronologicum,” was his capital production. The rest of his writings, being chiefly on controversial and temporary subjects, can, at present, be of little or no value. But his memory is perhaps yet more preserved by a very recent publication, “Letters and Journals, carefully transcribed by Robert Aiken containing an impartial account of public transactions, civil, ecclesiastical, and military, both in England and Scotland, from 1637 to 1662 a period, perhaps, the most remarkable that is to be met with in the British History. With an Account of the Author’s life, prefixed and a Glossary annexed,” Edinburgh, 1775, 2 vols. 8vo. The chief correspondents of Mr. Baillie were, Mr. William Spang, minister first to the Scotch Staple at Campvere, and afterwards to the English Congregation in- Middleburgh in Zealand, who was his cousin -german Mr. David Dickson, professor of Divinity, first at Glasgow, then at Edinburgh and Messrs, Robert Ramsay and George Young, who were ministers in Glasgow. There are, in this collection, letters to several other persons but Mr. Spang was the gentleman with whom Mr. Baillie principally corresponded. The journals contain a history of the general assembly at Glasgow, in 1638; an account of the earl of Stafford’s trial the transactions of the general assembly and parliament, in 1641 and the proceedings of thegeneral assembly, in 1643.

astronomer, was born in Paris, Sept. 25, 1736. His father was the fourth in succession of his family who followed the profession of a painter and young Bailly was also

, an eminent French astronomer, was born in Paris, Sept. 25, 1736. His father was the fourth in succession of his family who followed the profession of a painter and young Bailly was also destined to painting, and had already made some progress in the art, when he showed a decided inclination for the study of the belles-lettres. Poetry was the first object that engaged his attention he even produced some tragedies which were praised by Lanoue, not however without advising his young friend to attend rather to science and Lacaille essentially contributed to direct his attention to the study of Natural Philosophy accordingly, in the year 1762, he presented to the academy “Observations on the Moon,” which Lacaille had made him draw up with all the particularity of detail required* by the new state of astronomy, and which were quoted by him with approbation, in the sixth volume of the Ephemerides.

of Jupiter, the difficulty and importance of which had already attracted the notice of the academy, who proposed it as a prize subject in April 1764. Le Grange, who

Bailly began about this period also to turn his attention to the theory of the satellites of Jupiter, the difficulty and importance of which had already attracted the notice of the academy, who proposed it as a prize subject in April 1764. Le Grange, who now stood first among tha geometricians of Europe, was one of the candidates for the prize. The theory of Clairaut was employed by Bailly in calculating the same perturbations the united efforts of these two philosophers for the first time made us acquainted with the singular derangements of these little planets, by constructing new tables of them, for all former attempts had been merely empirical.

Bailly presented his book to Voltaire, who, in his letter of thanks, proposed a few objections this introduced

Bailly presented his book to Voltaire, who, in his letter of thanks, proposed a few objections this introduced a correspondence, from which resulted two interesting volumes; his “Lettre sur Porigine des Sciences,” and his “Lettre sur PAtlantide de Platon,” and on the antient history of Asia, published in 1777 and 1779.

e and the humanity of the author. He proposed the erection of four different hospitals and Breteuil, who was then minister, and had great reliance on Bailly, had finally

The academy having nominated in 1786, commissioners to examine a plan by Poyet, architect, for a new Hotel Dieu, Bailly drew up their report in 250 pages octavo which is a valuable instance both of the professional knowledge and the humanity of the author. He proposed the erection of four different hospitals and Breteuil, who was then minister, and had great reliance on Bailly, had finally resolved on executing his plan, when the revolution of 1789 drove him from the ministry.

l assembly, Bailly was still continued president, and distinguished himself considerably. He it was, who on the 20th, of the same month, conducted the asse-nbly to the

On April the 26th, 1789, the electors of Paris as*. sembled for the nomination of deputies for the statesgeneral, appointed Bailly for their secretary. There were assembled, on this important occasion, many academicians, but none, except Bailly, was a member of all the academies. His talent for writing was well known the interesting reports that he had made on the subject of the hospitals and animal magnetism, had powerfully excited the attention of the public his character stood equally high for calmness of temper and strictness of morals, so that no one possessed so many claims as himself to that important office. The choice of the public was too flattering to be resisted and from that time he was lost for ever to astronomy. The motives that occasioned his first appointment soon advanced him to the dignity of deputy and president of the tiers etat, which assembled on the 5th of May at Versailles. The several deputies from the communes having constituted themselves on the 17th of June, a national assembly, Bailly was still continued president, and distinguished himself considerably. He it was, who on the 20th, of the same month, conducted the asse-nbly to the tennis-court, and he still continued to preside, when, on the 27th, the two other orders united themselves to the tiers-etat. He resigned his office on July 22d, and the duke of Orleans was appointed his Sik> cessor.

d he was induced to resign his situation on account of the opposition raised by the democratic party who wished to substitute Petion, the declining state of his health

Bailly was mayor of Paris from July 15, 1789, to November 16th, 1791, that is, uvo years and a half. At the conclusion of this period he was induced to resign his situation on account of the opposition raised by the democratic party who wished to substitute Petion, the declining state of his health not allowing him to engage in active measures to secure his continuance in office. He spent the year 1792 and part of 1793 in travelling, and writing an account of those extraordinary events which he had witnessed, and in which he had been a distinguished actor. These memoirs, which are not carried lower than October 2, 1789, were published in 1804. The edition in two volumes published in 1790 by Debure, of his speeches and memoirs, contains only those that were written before Sept. 1789. When the remainder of them shall be collected, they will add much interest to his character and conduct. During his journey he was by no means ignorant of the plans that were forming against him, and several opportunities offered of quitting France Cato said ingrata patria mea, nee ossa habebis. Bailly, more firm than Cato, preferred the example of Socrates, and refused to abandon his country.

riend Raymond Gaye. She was of an age proper to inspire the regard and attachment of a man of worth, who was not to be influenced by the ordinary motives of beauty or

Bailly married, in 1787, Jeanne le Seigneur, the widow of his intimate friend Raymond Gaye. She was of an age proper to inspire the regard and attachment of a man of worth, who was not to be influenced by the ordinary motives of beauty or fortune, especially since he had eight nephews, whom he educated with all the care of a father.

academy, by the metropolis, in the highest situations, in the most respectable public bodies: those who knew him the best loved him the most, and in his own family

In person Bailly was tall, of a sedate but striking countenance, and his temper, though firm, was joined to much sensibility. His disinterestedness appeared frequently, and in a very striking manner, towards his relations and during his magistracy, he expended a considerable part of his income in administering to the necessities of the poor. Few men of letters have eminently distinguished themselves in so many different ways, and no one has ever united so many titles of respect with such various and general applause; but his highest and greatest fame is derived from his virtue, which always remained unblemished, unsuspected, and admired by the academy, by the metropolis, in the highest situations, in the most respectable public bodies: those who knew him the best loved him the most, and in his own family he was almost adored.

astronomy, which had been his favourite study from his earliest years. By the advice of his friends, who thought his abilities too great for the obscurity of a country

, an eminent physician and astronomer, born in 1582, at Ashby de la Zouch, Leicestershire, was educated at the public school of that town; and from thence went to Emanuel college in Cambridge, under the tuition of Dr. Joseph Hall, afterwards bishop of Norwich. When he had taken his degrees of bachelor and master of arts, he went, back to Leicestershire, where he taught a grammar-school for some years, and at the same time practised physic. He employed his leisure hours in the mathematics, especially astronomy, which had been his favourite study from his earliest years. By the advice of his friends, who thought his abilities too great for the obscurity of a country life, he removed to London, where he was admitted a fellow of the college of physicians. His description of the comet, which appeared in 1618, greatly raised his character. It was by this means he got acquainted with sir Henry Savile, who, in 1619, appointed him his first professor of astronomy at Oxford. Upon this he removed to that university, and was entered a master commoner of Merton college; the master and fellows whereof appointed him junior reader of Linacer’s lecture in 1631, and superior reader in 1635. As he resolved to publish correct editions of the ancient astronomers, agreeably to the statutes of the founder of his professorship; in order to make himself acquainted with the discoveries of the Arabian astronomers, he began the study of the Arabic language when he was above 40 years of age. Some time before his death, he removed to a house opposite Merton college, where he died in 1643. His body was conveyed to the public schools, where an oration was pronounced in his praise by the university orator; and was carried from thence to Merton college church, where it was deposited near the altar. His published works are, 1. “An astronomical description of the late Comet, from the 18th of November 1618, to the 16th of December following,” London, 1619, 4to. This piece was only a specimen of a large work, which the author intended to publish in Latin, under the title of “Cometographia.” 2. “Procli sphæra. Ptolomæi de hypothesibus Planetarum liber singularis.” To which he added Ptolemy’s “Canon regnorum.” He collated these pieces with ancient manuscripts, and has given a Latin version of them, illustrated with figures, 1620, 4to. 3. “Canicularia; a treatise concerning the dog-star and the canicular days.” Published at Oxford in 1648, by Mr. Greaves, together with a demonstration of the heliacal rising of Sirius, or the dog-star, for the parallel of Lower Egypt. Dr. Bainbridge undertook this work at the request of archbishop Usher, but left it imperfect; being prevented by the breaking out of the civil war, or by death.

logy, that had long prevailed in the schools; and, under the auspicious name of that famous prelate, who was his darling guide, he had the courage to condemn, in an

, was born at Melun, in the territory of Ath, in 1513. The emperor Charles V. made choice of him to be professor of divinity in the university of Louvain. He was afterwards chancellor of that body, guardian of its privileges, and inquisitor-general. The university, in concert with the king of Spain, elected him deputy to the council of Trent, whiere he acquired reputation. He had already published several small pieces, but was destined to be involved in controversy. Like the other followers of Augustin, he had an invincible aversion to that contentious, subtle, and intricate manner of teaching theology, that had long prevailed in the schools; and, under the auspicious name of that famous prelate, who was his darling guide, he had the courage to condemn, in an open and public manner, the tenets commonly received in the church of Rome, with respect to the natural powers of man, and the merit of good works.

y his will founded a college for education. His nephew, James Baius, likewise doctor of Louvain, and who died in 1614, left behind him a tract on the Eucharist, printed

This bold step drew upon Baius the indignation of some of his academical colleagues, and the heavy censures of several Franciscan monks. Whether the Jesuits immediately joined in this opposition, and may be reckoned among the first accusers of Baius, is a matter unknown, or at most, uncertain, but it is evident that, even at the rise of this controversy, they abhorred the principal tenets of Baius, which he had taken from Augustm, and adopted as his own. In 1567, he was accused at the court of Rome, and seventy-six propositions drawn from his writings, were condemned by pope Pius V. in a circular letter expressly composed for that purpose. The principal doctrines maintained in these propositions were, that unregenerate men have no ability to perform what is spiritually good, and that no man’s best works are meritorious of eternal life. The pope’s condemnation, however, was issued out in an artful and insidious manner, without any mention being made of the name of the author for the fatal consequences that had arisen from the rash and inconsiderate measures employed by the court of Rome against Luther, were too fresh in the remembrance of the prudent pontiff to permit his falling into new blunders of the same nature. The person and functions of Baius, therefore, were spared, while his tenets were censured. About thirteen years after this transaction, instigated by Tolet, the Jesuit doctor, Gregory XIII. confirmed the sentence, and again condemned the propositions. Dreading further severity, or more probably because his condemnation was vague and ambiguous, Baius submitted but others exclaimed against the papal decisions, as manifestly unjust. Baius’s doctrine was propagated with no inconsiderable zeal, in the flourishing universities of Douay and Louvaine. When the Jesuits Lessius and Hamelius attempted to preach a scheme of predestination, different from that of Augustin, the doctors of these universities condemned their opinions in 1587 and 1588. The bishops of the Low Countries prepared to do the same, but pope Sixtus V. suspended their proceedings, and by imposing silence on both parties, hushed the controversy. Even at this day, many“divin of the Romish communion, and particularly the Jansenists declare openly that Baius was unjustly treated, and that the two edicts of Pius and Gregory are absolutely destitute of all authority. He died the 16th of September 1589, at the age of 76. We have his controversial tracts against Maniix, 1579 and 1582, 2 vols. 8vo. His entire works were collected in 1696, in 4to, at Cologn, and the following year were prohibited by the pope. His style is greatly superior to that of the divines of his time, being simple and close. Baius had studied the fathers with such care, that it is affirmed he read St. Augustin over nine times a proof of his patience, if not of his judgment. Baius by his will founded a college for education. His nephew, James Baius, likewise doctor of Louvain, and who died in 1614, left behind him a tract on the Eucharist, printed at that city in 1605, 8 vo, and a catechism in folio, Cologn, 1620. The opinions of Michael Baius did not die with him. Cornelius Jansenius revived a great number of them in his book, entitled” Augustinus."

, an eminent physician, was the son of the Rev. George Baker, who died in 1743, being then archdeacon and registrar of Totness.

, an eminent physician, was the son of the Rev. George Baker, who died in 1743, being then archdeacon and registrar of Totness. He was born in 1722, educated at Eton, and was entered a scholar of King’s college, Cambridge, in July 1742, where he took his degree of B. A. 1745, and M. A. 1749. He then began the study of medicine, and took the degree of doctor in 1756. He first practised at Stamford, but afterwards settled in London, and soon arrived at very extensive practice and reputation, and the highest honours of his faculty, being appointed physician in ordinary to the Jking, and physician to the queen. He was also a fellow of the Royal and Antiquary Societies, created a baronet Aug. 26, 1776, and in 1797 was elected president of the College of Physicians, London. Besides that skill in his profession, and personal accomplishments, which introduced him into the first practice, and secured him a splendid fortune, he was a good classical scholar and critic, and his Latin works are allowed to be written in a chaste and elegant style. He died June 15, 1809, in his eighty-eighth year, after having passed this long life without any of the infirmities from which he had relieved thousands.

de for a few weeks with Mr. John Forster an attorney. Mr. Forster had a daughter of eight years old, who was born deaf and dumb. Mr. Baker, possessed with the idea that

, an ingenious and diligent naturalist, the son of William Baker, a clerk in Chancery, was born in Chancery-lane, London, May 8, 1698. He was placed in 1713 with John Parker, whom he left in 1720, to reside for a few weeks with Mr. John Forster an attorney. Mr. Forster had a daughter of eight years old, who was born deaf and dumb. Mr. Baker, possessed with the idea that he could instruct her in reading, writing, and understanding what was spoken, made the attempt, and was so successful that her father retained him in his house for some years, during which he succeeded equally well with a second daughter who laboured under the same privation. He afterwards made this the employment of his life. In the prosecution of so valuable and difficult an undertaking, he was very successful. Among his pupils were the hon. Lewis Erskine, son of the late earl of Buchaii lady Mary, and lady Anne O'Brien, daughters of the earl of Inchiquin the earl of Sussex and his brother Mr. Yelverton the earl of Haddington, the earl of Londonderry, and many others. At the end of his instructions, he is said to have taken a bond for lOOl. of each scholar not to divulge his method, an instance of narrowness of mind which we wish we could contradict.

In April 1729, he married Sophia, youngest daughter of the famous Daniel Defoe, who brought him two sons, both of whom he survived. On the 29th

In April 1729, he married Sophia, youngest daughter of the famous Daniel Defoe, who brought him two sons, both of whom he survived. On the 29th of January 1740, Mr. Baker was elected a fellow of the society of antiquaries; and, on the 12th of March following, the same honour was conferred upon him by the royal society. In 1744, sir Godfrey Copley’s gold medal was bestowed upon him, for having, by his microscopical experiments on the crystallizations and configurations of saline particles, produced the most extraordinary discovery during that year. This medal was presented to him by sir Hans Sloane, thjen president of the royal society, and only surviving trustee of sir Godfrey Copley’s donation, at the recommendation of sir Hans’s worthy successor, Martin Folkes, esq. and of the council of the said society. Having led a very useful and honourable life, he died, at his apartments in the Strand, on the 25th of Nov. 1774, aged seventy-seven. His wife died in 1762; and he left only one grandson, William Baker, who was born Feb. 17, 1763, and to whom, on his living to the age of twenty-one, he bequeathed the bulk of his fortune, which he had acquired by his profession of teaching deaf and dumb persons to speak. This gentleman is now rector of Lyndon and South Luffenham, in the county of Rutland. He gave also by his will a hundred pounds to the royal society, the interest of which was to be applied in paying for an annual oration on natural history or experimental philosophy, now known by the name of the Bakerian oration. He gave to each of his two executors one hundred pounds and his wife’s gold watch and trinkets in trust to his daughter-in-law Mary Baker for her life, and to be afterwards given to the future wife of his grandson. To Mrs. Baker he gave also an annuity of fifty pounds. His furniture, printed books, curiosities, and collections of every sort, he directed should be sold, which was accordingly done. His manuscripts are in the possession of his grandson. His fine collection of native and foreign fossils, petrifactions, shells, corals, vegetables, ores, &c. with some antiquities and other curiosities, were sold by auction, March 13, 1775, and the nine following days, He was buried, as he desired, in an inexpensive mannef, in the church-yard of St. Mary le-Strand within which church, on the south wall, he ordered a small tablet to be erected to his memory, but owing to some particular regulations annexed to the new churches under the act of queen Anne, leave for this could not be obtained. “An inscription for it,” he said, “would probably be found among his papers if not, he hoped some learned friend would write one agreeably to truth.

in England. The seeds of it were sent in a letter from professor Bruns of Turin to our philosopher, who gave them to several of his friends^ by whose care they furnished

Mr. Baker was a constant and useful attendant at the meetings of the royal and antiquary societies, and in both was frequently chosen one of the council. He was peculiarly attentive to all the new improvements which were made in natural science, and very solicitous for the prosecution of them. Several of his communications are printed in the Philosophical Transactions and, besides the papers written by himself, he was the means, by his extensive correspondence, of conveying to the society the intelligence and observations of other inquisitive and philosophical men. His correspondence was not confined to his own country. To him we are obliged for a true history of the coccus polonicus, transmitted by Dr. Wolfe. It is to Mr. Baker’s communications that we owe the larger alpine strawberry, of late so much cultivated and approved of in England. The seeds of it were sent in a letter from professor Bruns of Turin to our philosopher, who gave them to several of his friends^ by whose care they furnished an abundant increase. The seeds likewise of the true rhubarb, or rheum palmatum, now to be met with in almost every garden in this country, were first transmitted to Mr. Baker by Dr. Mounsey, physician to the empress of Russia. These, like the former, were distributed to his various acquaintance, and some of the seeds vegetated very kindly. It is apprehended that all the plants of the rhubarb now in Great Britain were propagated from this source. Two or three of Mr. Baker’s papers, which relate to antiquities, may be found in the Philosophical Transactions. The society for the encouragement of arts, manufactures, and commerce, is under singular obligations to our worthy naturalist. As he was one of the earliest members of it, so he contributed in no small degree to its rise and establishment. At its first institution, he officiated for some time gratis, as secretary. He was many years chairman ^of the committee of accounts and he took an active part in the general deliberations of the society. In his attendance he was almost unfailing, and there were few questions of any moment upon which he did not deliver his opinion. Though, fronl the lowness of his voice, his manner of speaking was not powerful, it was clear, sensible, and convincing; what he said, being usually much to the purpose, and always proceeding from the best intentions, had often the good effect of contributing to bring the society to rational determinations, when many of the members seemed to have lost themselves in the intricacies of debate. He drew up a short account of the original of this society, and of the concern he himself had in forming it; which was read before the society of antiquaries, and would be a pleasing present to the public. Mr*. Baker was a poetical writer in the early part of his life. His “Invocation of Health” got abroad without his knowledge; but was reprinted by himself in his “Original Poems, serious and humourous,” Part the first, 8vo, 1725. The second part came out iri 1726. He was the author, likewise, of “The Universe^ a poem, intended to restrain the pride of man,” which has been several times reprinted. His account of the water polype, which was originally published in the Philosophical Transactions, was afterwards enlarged into a separate treatise, and hath gone through several editions. In 1728 he began, and for five years conducted the “Universal Spectator,” a periodical paper, under the assumed name of Henry Stonecastle a selection of these papers was afterwards printed in 4 vols. 12mo. In 1737 he published “Medulla Poetarum Romanorum,” 2 vols. 8vo, a selection from the Roman poets, with translations. But his principal publications are, “The Microscope made easy,” and “Employment for the Microscope.” The first of these, which was originally published in 1742, or 1743, has gone through six editions. The second edition of the other, which, to say the least of it, is equally pleasing and instructive, appearedin 1764. These treatises, and especially the latter, contain the most curious and important of the observations and experiments which Mr. Baker either laid before the royal society, or published separately. It has been said of Mr. Baker, “that he was a philosopher in little things.” If it was intended by this language to lessen his reputation, there is no propriety in the stricture. He was an intelligent, upright and benevolent man, much respected by those who knew him best. His friends were the friends of science and virtue and it will always be remembered by his contemporaries, that no one was more ready than himself to assist those with whom he was conversant in their various researches and endeavours for the advancement of knowledge and the benefit of society. His eldest son, David Erskine Baker, was a young man of genius and learning, and, like his father, a philosopher, an antiquary, and a poet. Being very partial to mathematical and geometrical studies, the duke of Montague, then master of the ordnance, placed him in the drawing-room in the Tower, to qualify him for the royal engineers. In a letter to Dr. Doddridge, dated 1747, his father speaks of him in these terms: “He has been somewhat forwarder than boys usually are, from a constant conversation with men. At twelve years old he had translated the whole twenty-four books of Telemachus from the French before he was fifteen, he translated from the Italian, and published, a treatise on physic, of Dr. Cocchi, of Florence, concerning the diet and doctrines of Pythagoras and last year, before he was seventeen, he likewise published a treatise of sir Isaac Newton’s Metaphysics, compared with those of Dr. Leibnitz, from the French of M. Voltaire. He is a pretty good master of the Latin, understands some Greek, is reckoned no bad mathematician for his years, and knows a great deal of natural history, both from reading and observation, so that, by the grace of God, I hope he will become a virtuous and useful man.” In another letter he mentions a singular commission given to his son, that of making drawings of all the machines, designs, and operations employed in the grand fire- works to be exhibited on occasion of the peace of 1748. It is to be regretted, however, that his father’s expectations were disappointed by a reverse of conduct in this son, occasioned by his turn for dramatic performances, and his marrying the daughter of a Mr. Clendon, a clerical empiric, who had, like himself, a similar turn. In consequence of this unhappy taste, he repeatedly engaged with the lowest strolling companies, in spite of every effort of his father to reclaim him. The public was, however, indebted to him for “The Companion to the Playhouse,1764, 2 vols. 12mo; a work which, though imperfect, had considerable merit, and shewed that he possessed a very extensive knowledge of our dramatic authors and which has since (under the title of “Biographia Dramatica”) been considerably improved, first in 1782, by the late Mr. Isaac Reed, 2 vols. 8vo, and more recently, in 1812, enlarged and improved by Mr. Stephen Jones, so as to form 4 vols. 8vo. He died Feb. 16, 1767. Mr. Baker’s other son, Henry, followed the profession of a lawyer, and occasionally appeared as a poet and miscellaneous writer. In 1756 he published te Essays Pastoral and Elegiac,“2 vols. 8vo, and left ready for the press an arranged collection of all the statutes relating to bankruptcy, with cases, precedents, &c. entitled” The Clerk to the Commission," a work which is supposed to have been published under another title in 1768.

Previous Page

Next Page