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

The precise time of his restitution does not clearly appear, yet several of his proceedings shew, that he was m. the full possession of the metropoiitical power in 1582, in which yet it is also certain hfc lost his eye-sight. Sir John Harrington imagines that his being blind was only a report circulate^ by his friends, in order to conceal his being in confinement by the queen’s order in his own house, but Strype has amply refuted this supposition. He was also much broken down by hard study and infirmities, especially the strangury and colic, with which he had long been afflicted; and losing all hopes of recovering his sight, he resigned his see towards the latter end of 1582, and although by no means a favourite with his royal mistress at this time, she thought proper to grant him a pension for his life. With this provision he retired to Croydon, where be died July 6, 1583, and was interred in that church, where a stone monument was erected to his memory.

Strype has ably vindicated his memory from the misrepresentations of Fuller and Heylin, who consider him as too much inclined to puritanism; and observes, that in the times in which he lived, when he was better known, his episcopal abilities, and admirable endowments for spiritual government, as well as his great learning, were much celebrated. He was a man, says Strype, of great firmness and resolution, though of a mild and affable temper, and friendly disposition; in his deportment courteous and engaging, not easily provoked, well spoken, and easy of access; and in his elation not at all affecting grandeur or state, always obliging in his carriage, as well as kind and grateful to his servants, and of a free and generous spirit. Strype allows, what indeed is obvious, that he used great moderation towards the puritans, to whose interest in the cabinet, joined to his own merits, his preferment was in a great measure owing; and had they repaid this moderation by a corresponding behaviour, he would have less seldom incurred the displeasure of the court , who thought his favours ill-bestowed on men of restless and turbulent dispositions. He had a great respect for the eminent reformers abroad, Calvin, Luther, Melancthon, Bucer, Peter Martyr, Bullinger, Zanchius, and others, with whom he had contracted a friendship during his exile, and always carried on a correspondence; and he was very instrumental in obtaining a settlement for the French protestants in their own way of worship, approaching to the Genevan, who were allowed to assemble in the Walloon church in Threadneedle-street, which has ever since been a French church.

Collier, whose authority is of some consequence in this case, clears Grindal from all imputations of puritanism, and speaking of the articles at one of his metropolitical visitations, observes, that he was no negligent governor, nor a person of latitude or indifference for the ceremonies of the church; but, on the other hand, he was more deeply concerned for her doctrines, and a strenuous assertor of them. He was celebrated as a preacher in king Edward VI.'s time, both at court and in the university; and in the beginning of queen Elizabeth’s reign, when the protestant religion was to be declared and inculcated to the people, he was one of the chief persons employed in the pulpit at St. Paul’s, and before the queen and nobility.

, a. physician, astronomer, and mathematician, and like his countryman, friar Bacon, violently suspected of magic, lived in the fourteenth century, He studied at Merton college, Oxford; and, probably to escape the disagreeable consequences of such suspicions, went into France, where he devoted himself entirely to the study of medicine, first at Montpelier, and then at Marseilles. In this eity he fixed his residence, and lived by the practice of his profession, in which he acquired much skill and eminence. There is no greater proof of his genius, besides the imputations he laboured under in his youth, than his assiduously pursuing the method instituted by the Greek physicians, of investigating the nature and cause of the disease and the constitution of the patient. The time of his death is not known; but we are told that he was an old man in 1350, and that he had a son, who was first an abbot of canons regular at Marseilles, and at length arrived at the pontificate under the name of Urban V. Bale and Pits both give lists of his works, none of which are known to be extant.

, a French topographer and engraver, was born in 1689 at Sedan, and going to Paris, entered the congregation of the priests of St. Lazare, and was sent by them into Poland, to be professor of divinity at Cracow. In a short time, however, he returned, and afterwards quitted his congregation to devote himself entirely to mathematics and topography. He published the “Plan of Paris/' 1723, a very good work in itself, but the engraving was too imperfect at which the abbe de Grive was so vexed, that he broke the plates, and determined, in future, to engrave his works himself, which resolution he executed punctually. Being appointed geographer of Paris, he drew the course of the river Seine, from its source to its mouth. M. de la Grive assisted M. Cassini in determining the meridian of Paris, and undertook a very particular and circumstantial account of that capital, which work was far advanced at the time of his death, which happened April 1757. The first two drawings of this vast plan have been published by M. Hugnin, hi* pupil. The other most esteemed works of the abbe de la Grive are, his” Environs de Paris;“Jardins de Marly” “Terrier du Domaine du Roi aux Environs de Paris” Plan de Versailles,“&c. He also left” Le Manuel de Trigonometric Spherique," published in 1754.

, a man eminently learned in his day> and one of the revivers of literature, was born at Bristol in 1442, and educated at Winchester-school. He was elected thence to New college, Oxford, in 1467; and in 1479, presented by the warden and fellows to the rectory of Newton-Longville, in Buckinghamshire. But his residence being mostly at Oxford, the society of Magdalen college made him their divinity reader, about the beginning of Richard the Illd’s reign; and that king corning soon after to Oxford, he had the honour to hold a disputation before him, with which his majesty was so pleased, that he rewarded him graciously. In 1485 he was made a prebendary of Lincoln, and in 1488 he quitted his reader’s place at Magdalen college, in order to travel into foreign countries; for though he might be reckoned a great master of the Greek and Lati languages in England, where the former especially was then scarcely understood at all, yet he well knew that a more perfect knowledge of it might be attained; and accordingly he went into Italy, and studied there some time under Demetrius Chalcondyles and Politian. He returned to England, and fixed himself in Exeter college, at Oxford, in 1491, where he took the degree of B. D. Here too he publicly taught the Greek language, and was the first who introduced a better pronunciation of it than had been known in this island before. But the introduction of this language alarming many, as a most dangerous innovation, the university divided itself into two factions/distinguished by the appellation of Greeks and Trojans, who bore each other a violent animosity, and proceeded to open hostilities. Anthony Wood says, “I cannot but wonder when I think upon it, to what a strange ignorance were the scholars arrived, when, as they would by no means receive it, but rather scoff and laugh at it; some against the new pronunciation of it, which was endeavoured to be settled; others at the language itself, having not at all read any thing thereof. It is said that there were lately a company of good fellows (Cambridge men as 'tis reported) who, either out of hatred to the Greek tongue, or good letters, or merely to laugh and sport, joined together and called themselves Trojans: one, who was the senior, and wiser than the rest, called himself Priam, another Hector, a third Parys, and the rest by some ancient Trojan names who, after a jocular way, did oppose aa Grecians, the students of the Greek tongue.” In this situation Grocyn was, when Erasmus came ta Oxford; and if he was not this great man’s tutor, yet he certainly assisted him in attaining a more perfect knowledge of the Greek. He was, however, very friendly toErasmus, and did him many kind offices, as introducing him to archbishop Warham, &c. He also boarded him gratis in his house, although he was by no means in affluent circumstances. We cannot be surprized therefore that Erasmus speaks of him often in a strain which shews that he entertained the most sincere regard for him, as well as the highest opinion of his abilities, learning, and integrity. About 1590 he resigned his living, being then made master of Allhallows college, at Maidstone,in Kent, though he continued still to live mostly at Oxford. Grocyn had no esteem for Plato, but applied himself intensely to Aristotle, whose whole works he had formed a design of translating, in conjunction with William Latimer, Linacre, and More, but did not pursue it. While his friend Cotet was dean of St. Paul’s, Grocyn gave a remarkable evidence of the candour and ingenuousness of his temper. He read in St. Paul’s cathedral a public lecture upon the book of Dionysius Areopagita, commonly called “Hierarchia Ecclesiastica;” it being customary at that time for the public lecturers, both in the universities, and in the cathedral thurches, to read upon any book, rather than upon the scriptures, till dean Colet reformed that practice. Grocyn, in the preface to his lecture, declaimed with great warmth against those who either denied or doubted of the authority of the book on which he was reading. But after he had continued to read a few weeks, and had more thoroughly examined the matter, he entirely changed hi sentiments; and openly and candidly declared that he had been in an error; and that the said book, in his judgment, was spurious, and never written by him who, in the Acts of the Apostles, is called Dionysius the Areopagite. But when dean Colet had introduced the custom of reading lectures upon some part of the scriptures at his cathedral, he engaged Grocyn, according to Dr. Knight, as one of the most learned and able men he could meet with, in that useful employment.

Grocyn died at Maidstone in 1519, of a stroke of the palsy, which he had received a year before, and which made him, says Erasmus, “sibi ipsi superstitem;” that is, outlive his faculties. Linacre, the celebrated physiciaa just mentioned, was his executor, to whom he left a con. siderable legacy, as he did a small one fo William Lilly, the grammarian, who was his godson. His will is printed in the appendix to Knight’s “Life of Erasmus.” He had indeed but little to leave, having never enjoyed preferment equal to his worth *; yet he was a man of great generosity, which at one time obliged him to pawn his plate to Dr. Young, who generously returned it by his will without taking principal or interest. A Latin epistle of Grocyn’s to Aldus Manutius is prefixed to Linacre’s translation of“Proclus de Sphaera,” printed at Venice in 1449, fol. Erasmus says, that “there is nothing extant of his but this epistle: indeed a very elaborate and acute one, and written in good Latin.” His publishing nothing more seems to have been owing to too much delicacy; for, Erasmus adds, “he was of so nice a taste, that he h^d rather write nothing than write ill.” Some other things, however, of his writing are mentioned by Bale, Leland, and Tanner, as “Tractatus contra hostiolum Joannis Wiclevi;” “Epistolae ad Erasmum et alios” Grammatica;“” Vulgaria puerorum;“”Epigrammata“” Nota ia Terentium,“and” Isagogicum quoddam."

, a physician, and member of the royal college of London, in the seventeenth century, was born at Deventer, in the province of Overyssel; he studied and graduated at Utrecht, where he began the practice of his profession. He likewise studied under a celebrated lithotomist of Amsterdam, from whom he learnt that art, and whose esteem he acquired by the dexterity with which he performed the operation, insomuch that by his will this master bequeathed all his instruments to Groenvelt, with a request that he should employ them for the good of mankind. After this time he practised this art almost exclusively. He left three treatises; the first entitled “Dissertatio lithologica variis observationibus et figuris illustrata,” Loud. 1684. 2. “Practica qua humani morbi describtmtur,” Francfort, 1688. 3. “Tractatus de tuto Cantharidum in Medicina usu interne,” Lond. 1698, &c. These works were translated into English in 1691, 1706, 1710, and another of his works entitled “The grounds of physic.” In all these the author’s name was changed to Greenfield. None of our authorities specify the time of his death.

, an eminent patron of literature, was born at Lyons in 1479; and very early displayed a propensity towards those elegant and solid pursuits, which afterwards secured him the admiration and esteem of his contemporaries. His address was easy, his manners were frank, yet polished; his demeanour was engaging, and his liberality knew no bounds. As he advanced in years, he advanced in reputation; enjoying a princely fortune, the result, in some measure, of a faithful and honourable discharge of the important diplomatic situations which he filled. He was grand treasurer to Francis I. and ambassador from that monarch to pope Clement VII. During his abode at Rome he employed the Alduses to print for him an edition of Terence in 1521, 8vo, and another of Budaeus’s work “De Asse,” 1522, 4to. Of his liberality while in thiscity Egnatio gives the following instance “I dined along with Aldus, his son Manutius, and other learned men at Grollier’s table. After dinner, and just as the dessert had been placed on the table, our host presented each of his guests with a pair of gloves filled with ducats.” De Thou speaks very highly of his character. During his travels he had secured from Basil, Venice, and Rome, the most precious copies of books that could be purchased, which he bound in a peculiar style, described in our authority. Every library and every scholar has boasted of a book from Grollier’s library since it was dispersed, and during his life-time it was his pride to accommodate his friends with the use of them. He died at Paris in 1565.

, an eminent civilian, historian, and critic, was born at Hamburgh in 1613. He had a strong inclination to learning, which induced him to apply to books with indefatigable diligence from his infancy; and, having made great progress in his studies in his own country, he travelled into Germany, Italy, and France, where he searched all the treasures of literature that could be found in those countries, and was returning fcome by the way of the United Provinces, when he was stopt at Deventer in the province of Over-Issel, and there made professor of polite learning. After acquiring great reputation in this chair, he was promoted to that of Leyden in 1658, vacant by the death of Daniel Heinsius. He died at Leyden in 1672, much regretted. By his wife, whom he married at Deventer, he had two sons that survived him and were both eminent in the republic of letters: James, who is the subject of the ensuing article; and Theodore Laurent, who died young, having published “Emendationes Pandectarum, &c. Leyden, 1605,” 8vo, and “A Vindication of the Marble Base of the Colossus erected in honour of Tiberius Caesar, ibid. 1697,” folio.

Frederic Gronovius was the author of many critical works. Besides his edition of Casaubon’s Epistles, Hague, 1638, in 4to, he published the following 1. “Diatribe in Statii Poetce Sylvas,” Hague, 1637, 8vo. This being attacked by Emeric Crucaeus, who ander the name of Mercurius Frondator published an “Anti-Diatribe” at Paris, 1639j 24mo, Gronovius published, 2. “Elenchus AntiDiatribes Mercurii Frondatoris ad Statii Sylvas,” Paris, 1640, 8vo. This occasioned Crucaeus to publish “Muscarium ad Statii Sylvas,” Paris, 1640, 8vo. 3. “De Sestertiis, sive subsecivorum Pecunise veteris Graecae & Romanae Libri IV. Accesserunt Lucius Volusius Maecianus, J. C. & Balbus Mensor de Asse,” &c. Deventer, 1643, 6vo, Amsterdam, 1656, 8vo, and Leyden, 1691, 4to, in which last edition, published by his son James Gronovius, are added “Paschasii Grosippi, (i. e. Casparis Schioppii) Tabulo3 Numerarije; Johannis Freder. Gronovii Mantissa pecunise veteris, & tres 'AvreZnyweis de Fcenere Unciario & centesimis Usuris; item de Hyperpyro; Salmasii Epistola & ad earn Responsio; & Aoyaoiw Tlateua ua\ Nea, Græcè & Latinè.” 4. “Notæ in Senecam Philosophum & Rhctorein;” first printed separately at Leyden, 1649, 12mo, and afterwards reprinted in the Elzevir edition of “Seneca cum Notis Variorum,” 1673, 3 vols. 8vo. 5. “Monobiblos Ecclesiasticarum Observationum,” 1651, 12mo. 6. Observationum Lib. IV.“Deventer, 1652, i'2mo. 7.” Statins ex recensione J. F. Gronovii, cum ejusdem Notis,“Amsterdam, 1653. Our author’s notes were reprinted in the edition of Statius published by John Veenhusius at Leyden, 1671, in 8vo. And Statius as revised by him was published by Christian Daumius with the Commentaries of Barthius in 2 vols. 4to, at Zwickaw in 1664. 8.” Senecae Tragcedise cum Notis Johannis Frederici Gronovii & variip aliorum,“Leyden, 1661, 8vo. His Notes were reprinted with improvements in the edition of Seneca’s tragedies published by his son James Gronovius at Amsterdam, 1682, 8vo. 9.” Observationum Libri tres,“Leyden, 1662, 8vo. 10.” Plautus ex recensione Joh. Fred. Gronovii, cum Notis Variorum,“Leyden, 1664, and 1684, 8vo. 11.” Titus Livius ex recensione & cum Notis Joh. Frid, Gronovii, additis integris Caroli Sigonii & selectis Variorum Notis,“Amsterdam, 1665, and 1679, 3 vols. 8vo; which last edition of 1679 is preferable to the former, on account of the notes of Henry Valesius and James Gronovius, which were added to it. Our author had published an edition of Livy revised by him at Leyden in 1645 and 1654 in 3 vols. 12mo, and in 1661 and 1678, in one volume, 12mo. His Notes upon Livy were printed separately at Leyden in 1645, 12mo. But several things in this edition of 1645 are omitted in the larger editions of 1675 and 1679. 12.” Plinii Historia Naturalis,“Leyden, 1669, 3 vols. 8vo. 13.” Tacitus,“Amsterdam, 1673, 2 vols. 8vo, reprinted at Amsterdam, 1685, 2 vols. 8vo. 14.” Notae in Hugonis Grotii Libros tres de Jure Belli & Pacis,“Amsterdam, 1680, 8vo. 15.” Observationes ad Bened. Petrocorii de Vita B. Martini carminum libros sex,“published in Daumius’s edition of Petrocorius, Leipsic, 1682, 8vo. 16.” Auli Gellii Noctes Attics,“Leid. 1687, 8vo. His notes are reprinted in his son’s edition, Leid. 1706. 17.” Nota3 in Phsedri Fabulas,“published by his son in the edition of Leyden, 1703, 8vo. 18.” De Musseo Alexandrino Dissertatio,“inserted in his son’s” Thesaurus.“19.” Oratio tie lege regia, &c.“Leyden, 1678. A translation of this in French was published by Barbeyrac with Noodt’s treatise upon liberty of conscience, Amst. 1714, 8vo. A great many of Gronovius’s Letters are published in Burman’s *' Sylloge Epistolarum.”

, son of the preceding, was born October 20, 1645, at Deventer, and learned the elements of the Latin tongue there; but, going with the family in, 1658 to Leyden, he carried on his studies in that university with incredible industry under the eye of his father, who had the greatest desire to make him a complete scholar. In this view he not only read to him the best classic authors, but instructed him in the civil law. About 1670 he made the tour of England, and visited both the universities, consulting their Mss.; and formed an acquaintance with several eminent scholars, particularly Dr. Edward Pocock, Dr. John Pearson, and Dr. Meric Casaubon, which last died in his arms. He was much pleased with the institution of the royal society, and addressed a letter to them in approbation of it. After some months’ stay in England, he returned to Ley den, where he published an edition of Macrobius that year in 8vo, and another of Polybius the same year at Amsterdam, in '2, vols. 8vo. The same year he was also offered the professorship held by Hogersius but, not having finished the plan of his travels, he declined, though the professor, to engage his acceptance, proposed to hold the place till his return.

He had apparently other views at that time, for having experienced many advantages to his literary pursuits by his visit to England, he resolved to see France. In his tour thither, he passed through the cities of Brabant and Flanders; and arriving at Paris, was received with all the respect due to his father’s reputation and his own merit, which presently brought him into the acquaintance of Chaplain, d'Herbelot, Thevenot, and several other persons of distinguished learning. This satisfaction was somewhat damped by the news of his father’s death in 1672 soon after which he left Paris to attend Mr. Paats, ambassador extraordinary from the States-general to the court of Spain. They set out in the spring of 1672; and our author went thence into Italy, where, visiting Tuscany, he was entertained with extraordinary politeness by the great duke, who, among other marks of esteem, gave him a very considerable stipend, and the professor’s place of Pisa, vacant by the death of Chimentel. This nomination was the more honourable, both as he had the famous Henry Norris, afterwards a cardinal, for his colleague; and as he obtained it by the recommendation of Magliabecchi, whom he frequently visited at Florence, where he had an opportunity of consulting the Mss. in the Medicean library.

Having spent two years in Tuscany, he quitted his professorship; and visiting Venice and Padua, he passed through Germany to Leyden, whence he went to take possession of an estate left him by his mother’s brother, at Deventej. Here he sat down closely to his studies, and was employed in preparing an edition of Livy in 1679, when he was nominated to a professor’s place at Ley den, which he accepted; and by his inaugural speech obtained an augmentation to the salary of 400 florins a year, which was continued to his death. He was particularly pleased with the honour shewn to his merit; and Leyden being the city preferred by him, as the place of his education and his father’s residence, he resolved never to leave it for the sake of any other preferment. In this view he refused the chair of the celebrated Octavio Ferrari at Padua, and declined the invitation of Frederic duke of Sleswick to accept u considerable stipend for a lecture at Kell, in Holstein. This post was offered him in 1696, and two years afterwards the Venetian ambassador at the Hague made him larger offers to engage him to settle at Padua; but he withstood all attempts to draw him from Leyden, as his father had done before him and, to engage him firmer to them, in 1702, the curators of that university gave him the lecture of geography, with the same augmentation to the stipend as had been given to his predecessor Philip Cluverius.

He was revising Tacitus in order to a new edition, when he lost his youngest daughter, September 12, 1716, and he survived her not many weeks. The loss proved insupportable; he fell sick a few days after it, and died of grief, October 21, aged seventy-one. He left two sons, both bred to letters; the eldest being a doctor of physic, and the youngest, Abraham, professor of history at Utrecht. His valuable library, long retained in the possession of the family, and for which 30,000 florins had been offered by the late empress of Russia, was sold by auction at Leyden about 1785, and produced only 5000 florins. It is remarked of James Gronovius, that he fell short of his father, in respect of modesty and moderation, as far as he exceeded him in literature: in his disputes, he treated his antagonists with such a bitterness of style as procured him the name of the second Scioppius, the justness of which censure appears throughout his numerous works, although they must be allowed to form a stupendous monument of literary industry and critical acumen. The following list is probably correct: 1. “Macrobius, cum notis variorum,” Leyd. 1670, 8vo, London, 1694, 8vo. 2. “Polybius cum suis ae ineditis Casauboni, &c. notis,” Gr. & Lat.“Amst. 1670, 2 vols. 8vo. 3.” Tacitus/* ibid. 1672, 2 vols, 8vo, and Utrecht, 1721, 4to, enlarged by his son Abraham. Hanvood says it is an infinitely better and more useful edition than that of Brotier. 4. “Supplementa lacunarum in ^nea Tactico, Dione Cassio, et Arriano,” Leyden, 1675, 8vo. 5. “Dissertationes Epistolicae,” Amst. 1678, 8vo, consisting of critical remarks on various authors. Those he made on Livy involved him in a dispute with Fabretti, who having attacked our critic in his work “De Aquis et Aqureductibus veteris Romoe,” Gronovius answered him in, 6. “Responsio ad cavillationes R. Fabretti,” Leyden, 1685, 8vo. Fabretti, who is treated here with very little ceremony, took his revenge in a work, the title of which is no bad specimen of literary railing, “Jasithei ad Gronovium Apologema, in ej usque Titivilitia seu de Tito Livio somnia animadversiones,” Naples, 1686, 4to. 7. “Fragmentum Stephani Byzantini Grammatici de Dodone, &c.” Leyden, 1681, 4to. 8. “Henrici Valesii Notae, &c. in Harpocrationem,” Leyden, 16&2, 4to, reprinted in Blancard’s edition of Harpocration, in 1683. 9. “Senecae Tragediae,” Amst. 1682, 12mo. This is the edition which his father was preparing when he died. 10. “Exercitationes aca­<Jemicae de pernicie et casu Judoe,” Leyden, 1683, 4to, an endeavour to reconcile the accounts of St. Matthew and St. Luke of the death of Judas. This involved him in a quarrel with Joachim Feller, against whom Gronovius defended himself in a second edition of this tract published at Leyden in 1702, and opened there a controversy with Perizonius. This produced from Gronovius, 11. “Notitia et illustratio dissertationis nuperse de morte Juda?,” Leyden, 1703, 4to; to which Perizonius replied, but the combatants became so warm that the curators of the university of Leyden thought proper to silence them both. 12. “Castigationes ad paraphrasim Graeeam Enchiridii Epicteti ex codice Mediceo,” Delft, 1683, 8vo. This includes the notes published in Berkelius’s edition of 1670. 13. “Dissertatio de origine Romuli,” Leyden, 1684, 8vo, in which he treats the commonly received notion of the origin of Romulus and Remus, and their being nursed by a wolf, as fabulous. 14. “Gemmae et sculpturae antiquse, &c.” a Latin translation of Leonard Augustini’s Italian description of these antiquities, with a learned preface by our author. 15. “Pomponii Melae libri tres de situ orbis,” Leyden, 1685, 8vo, without his name, and containing an on Vossius’s observations on that author. Vossius having defended himself in an appendix to his “Observationes ad Melam,” printed at London in 1685, 4to, Gronovius replied in, 16. “Epistola de argutiolis Isaaci Vossii,” 1687, 8vo, with his usual severity, which he increased in his notice of Vossius in a new edition of P. Mela, in 1696. This edition, besides the extracts of the cosmography of Julius and Honorius, and that ascribed to Æthicus, which were inserted in the former edition, contains the anonymous geographer of Ravenna. 17. “Epistola ad Johannem Georgium Graevium V. Cl. de Pallacopa, ubi Descriptio ejus ab Arriano facta liberatur ab Isaaci Vossii frustrationibus,” Leyden, 1686, 8vo. 18. “Notae ad Lucianum,” printed in Graevius’s edition of Lucian in 2 vols. Amst. 1686, 8vo. 19. “Variae Lectiones &, Notae in Stephanum Byzantinum de Urbibus:” inserted in the edition of that author published by Abraham Berkelius at Leyden in 1683, folio. 20. “Cebetis Thebani Tabula Graece & Latine,” Amst. 1689, 8vo. 21. “Auli Gellii Noctes Atticae, cum Notis & Emendationibus Johannis Frederici Gronovii,” Leyden, 1687, 8vo, 1706, 4to. 22. “M. T. Ciceronis Opera quae extant omnia,” Leyden, 1692, 4 vols. 4to, and 11 in 12mo. 23. “Ammiani Marcellini Rerum gestarum, qui de XXXI supersunt, Libri XVIII.” Leyden, 1693, in folio and 4to. 24. “Johannis Frederici Gronovii de Sestertiis seu subsecivarum Pecuniae veteris Graecae & Romance Libri IV. &c.” Leyden, 1691, 4to, with several additions. 25. “De Icuncula Smetiana qua Harpocratem indigitarunt,” Leyden, 1693, 4to. 26. “Memoria Cossoniana; id est, Danielis Cossonii Vita breviter clescripta, cui annexa nova Editio veteris Monument! Ancyrani,” Leyden, 1695, 4to. 27. “Abraham! Gorlaei Dactylotheca cum Explicationibus,” Leyden, 1695, 4to. 28. “Harpocrationis tie Vocibus Liber; accedit Diatribe Henrici Stephani ad locos Isocrateos,” Leyden, 1696, 4to. 29. “O ratio de primis Incrementis Urbis Lugduni,” Leyden, 1696, 4to. 30. “Thesaurus GriEcarum Antiquitatum,” Leyden, 1697, &c. 13 vols. folio. Gronovius cannot be sufficiently commended for having undertaken this work after the example of Graevius, who published a body of the Roman antiquities. Laurent Beger, having found some things to object to in the three first volumes of this work, published at Berlin in 1702, in folio, “Colloquii quorundam de tribus primis Thesauri Antiquitatum GriEcarum voluminibus, ad eorum Auctorem Relatio.” 31. “Geographia antiqua; hoc est, Scylacis Periplus Maris Mediterranei, &c. &c.” Leyden, 1697, 4to. 32. “Appendix ad Geographiam antiquani,” Leyden, 1609, 4to. 33. “Manethonis Apotelesmaticorum Libri sex, nunc primum ex Bibliotheca Medicea eruti,” Leyden, 1698, 4to. 34. “De duobus LapU dibus in agro Dnyvenvoordiensi repertis,” Leyden, 1696, 4to. 35. “Rycquius de Capitolio Romano, cum Notis Gronovii,” Leyden, 1696, 8vo. 36. “.Q. Cnrtius cum Gronovii & Variorum Notis,” Amsterdam, 1696, 8vo. 37. “Suetonius a Salmasio recensitus cum Emendationibus J. Gronovii,” Leyden, 1698, 12mo. 33. “Phredri Fabulae cum Joan. Fred. Gronovii & Jac. Gronovii Notis & Nicolai Dispontini collectaneis,” Leyden, 1703, 8vo, 39. “Arriani Nicomediensis Expeditionis Alexandri Libri septem, & Historia Indica,”“Leyden, 1704, folio. This edition is a very beautiful one; and Gronovius displays in it the same extent of learning, which he does in all his other writings, and the same rude censure of all men of learning, who are not of his opinion. 40.” Minutii Felicis Octavius: accedunt Csecilius Cyprianus de Idolorum Vanitate, & Julius Firmicus Materuus de Errore profanarum Religionum,“Leyden, 1709, 8vo. 41.” Infamia Emendationum in Menandri Reliquias nuper editarum. Trajecti ad Rhenum, auctore Phiieleuthero Lipsiensi. Accedit Responsio M. Lucilii Profuturi ad Epistolam Caii Veracii Philelienis, qua; extat parte IX Bibliothecae selectte Jo. Clerici,“Leyden, 1710, 12mo. In this he attacks Dr. Bentley, who had assumed the name of Phileleutherus Lipsiensis; and Le Clerc, who had published an edition of the fragments of Menander and Philander, and to whom he ascribes the letter inserted in the” Bibliotheque choisie,“which he animadverts upon. 42.” Decreta Romana & Asiatica pro Judseis ad cultum divinum per Asios Minoris urbes secure obeundum, a Josepho coliecta in Libro XIV. Archseologiae, sed male interversa & expuncta, in ^ublicam lucem restituta. Accedunt Suidae aliquot loca a vitiis purgata,“Leyden, 1711, 8vo. The notes on Suidas are levelled against Ludolfus Knster, who had published an edition of Suidas at Cambridge in 1705 in 3 vols. folio, and who wrote in vindication of himgelf,” Diatriba L. K. in qua Editio Suidse Cantabrigiensis contra Cavillationes Jacobi Gronovii Aristarchi Leydensis defenditur,“inserted in the 24th tome of the Bibiiotheque choisie, p. 49, and printed separately in 12mo. There was likewise a new edition with additions published at Amsterdam in 1712, 8vo, under the title of” Diatriba Anti-Gronoviana.“43.” Ludibria malevola Clerici, vel Prose riptio pravse Mercis ac Mentis pravissimae, quam exponit in Minutio Felice Joannes Clericus torn. 24. Bibliothecse selectae,“Leyden, 1712, 8 vo. 44.” Recensio brevis Mutilationum, quas patitur Suidas in Editione nupera Cantabrigise anni 1705, ubi varia ejus Auctoris loca perperam intellecta illustrantur, emendantur, & supplentur,“Leyden, 1713, 8vo. 45.” Severi Sancti, id est, Endeleichii Rhetoris de Mortibus Bourn Carmen ab Elia Vineto & Petro Pithseo servatum, cum Notis Job. Weitzii & Wolfgangi Seberi,“Leyden, 1715, 8vo, with a preface, though without his name. 46.” Herodoti Halicarnassei Historiarum Libri IX. Greece & Latine, cum Interpretatione Laurentii Vallx ex Codice Mediceo^“Leyden, 1715, folio. This edition had not the general approbation of learned men, who discovered very gross errors in it. The reader may see upon this subject a piece of Kuster, entitled” Examen Criticum Editionis novissimae Herodoti Gronovianae," inserted in the 5th tome of M. le Clerc’s Bibliotheque ancienne & moderne, p. 383, and another of Stephen Bergler in the Acta Eruditorum of Leipsic for 1716, p. 201, 337, and 417. Gronovius in this edition has attacked in the most furious manner several of the greatest men in the republic of letters, particularly Laurentius Valla, ^milius Portus, Henry Stephens, Holstenius, Dr. Thomas Gale, Ezechiel Spanheim, Salmasius, Isaac Vossius, Tanaquii Faber, John le Clerc, Kuster, Bochart, Grsevius, &c. He had a very extensive correspondence with the men of learning in Europe, and the utmost that can be said for his intemperate treatment of so many learned contemporaries, is, as we have been told, that his thoughts of many of them were kinder than his words.

, a physician and botanist of considerable learning, the son, we presume, of the preceding, was born in Holland, in 1690. He took his doctor’s degree at Leyden in 1715, on which occasion he published a dissertation upon camphor, of the natural history and preparation of which he gives much new information. He settled at Leyden, and became one of the chief magistrates. He adopted the prevailing taste of his coun­ trymen for making collections of natural history, and in 1740 published his “Index Suppellectilis Lapideae,” or a scientific catalogue of his own collection of minerals, drawn up under the inspection, and with the assistance of Linnaeus. In a letter to Haller, in 1737, Linnæus mentions Gronovius, with Burmann and Adrian Van Royen, as principally anxious to increase their collections of dried plants, instead of studying genera; which study Linnæus was destined to revive. Grouovius received from Clayton various specimens of Virginian plants, which he, with the assistance of Linnæus, then resident in Holland, arranged according to the sexual system, and with proper specific characters, descriptions, and synonyms, published under the title of “Flora Virginica,” 1739, 8vo. A second part or supplement of the same work appeared in 1743, and a third was preparing when he died. This last being afterwards incorporated with the two former, the whole was published in 1762, 4to, by his son.

In 1755, came out his “Flora Orientalis,” 8vo, the materials of which were afforded by the collection made by llau wolf, in his travels in the East during 1573, 1574, and 1575, and which, by favour of queen Christina of Sweden, came afterwards into the hands of the learned Vossius, who allowed the chief British botanists of his day to study and quote it. Gronovius determined by it above 330 species of oriental plants, which was a valuable addition to the knowledge of that day. The work is arranged after the Linnaean method, but trivial names, though invented and published in the first edition of the “Species Plantaruin,” two y?ars before, are not adopted, nor does the author appear to have used this publication. He was, however, in frequent correspondence with Linnæus, whom he furnished with numerous specimens of American plants sent by Clayton, and with whom he conferred on the subject of fishes amongst others, Haller mentions him as having written learned notes to the 20th and following books of Pliny. He continued to enrich his museum, and to devote it to the use of all who were desirous of consulting it, as long as he lived. In 1750 Gronovius is represented as labouring under the gout, as well as a hernia, but he lived to the age of seventy-two, dying in 1762. His herbarium was, after the death of his son, purchased by sir Joseph Banks.

, son of the preceding, was born at Ley den in 1730. He took the degree of doctor of laws, and, like his father, attained to the chief civil honours of his native place. From him he imbibed a taste for natural history, and, as we have already mentioned, edited the latest and completest edition of the “Flora Virginica.” He particularly excelled in the knowledge of fishes but most departments of systematic zoology engaged his attention. He published in 1754, his “Museum Ichthyologicum,” a handsome folio, with ample descriptions of the species. The second part appeared in 1756, accompanied by descriptions of the serpents in his father’s museum. In 1763 appeared the “Zoophylacii Gronoviani fasciculus primus,” containing descriptions o a few quadrupeds, more amphibia, and a still greater number of fishes, all from the same museum; the latter illustrated by 13 good plates, exhibiting 38 species. The second fasciculus of the same work, published in 1764, describes the insects of his collection, of which numerous species are engraved on four copper plates. A third and last, with three plates, came out in 1781, after the death of the author, which happened in 1777. He published in 1760 a very valuable work in 4to, entitled “Bibliotheca Regni Animalis atque Lapidei,” on the plan of the “Bibliothecae Botanicse” of Linnoeus and Seguier, with an excellent Index Rerum, highly useful in such a publication. He furnished, moreover, an appendix of 65 quarto pages to the said work of Seguier.

, a learned French theologian, was born in December 1675, at Rheims, of obscure and poor parents. The religious of St. Genevieve, who served the parish of St. Denis at Rheims, undertook his education, and he was admitted doctor of divinity in that city in 1702, and became successively chaplain at Notre Dame, canon of the collegiate church of St. Symphorien, and, in 1704, canon of the cathedral at Rheims. He was also made governor of the little seminary of St. James by M Le Tellier, but was deprived of that office on this gentleman’s death in 1710, and forbidden to preach or confess, on account of his zealous opposition to the bull Unigenitus. Being afterwards excommunicated by M. de Maille, who succeeded M. le Tellier as archbishop of Rheims, he went to Paris, and afterwards to Holland, where he remained ubout a year with father Quesnel and Messrs. Petitpied and Fouillou; but when Louis XIV. died, the proceedings at Rheims were declared null, and M. le Gros returned thither in 1716. He was a zealous promoter of the appeal to a future council, and was the soul of the faculty of theoJogy; but M. de Mailli obtained a lettre dt cachet against him in 1721, by which he was banished to St. John de Luz. This sentence, however, he evaded, by living concealed four or five years. In 1725, he went into Italy to observe what passed in the council appointed by Benedict XIIL and at length retired to Holland, and there spent the last twenty-five years of his life, excepting a voyage he made to England. The archbishop of Utrecht chose him professor of divinity in his seminary at Amersfort, and he died at Rhinwick, near Utrecht, December 4, 1751, aged 76. His principal works are, 1. “Le Renversement des Libenes de l'Eglise Gallicane dans r affaire de la Constitution Unigenitus,” 2 vols. 12mo. 2. “La Sainte Bible traduite sur les textes originaux, avec les differences de la Vulgate,” 1739, 8vo. M. Rondet published a new edition of this work 1756, in 6 small vois. 12mo.; but, on account of some alterations, it is not esteemed. 3. “Sept Lettres Theolo^iques contre le Traite des Prets de Commerce, et en ge‘ne’ral contre toute Usure,” 4to. 4. “Dogma Ecclesiae circa Usurum expositum, et vindicatum;” with several other pieces in Latin against usury, 4to. 5. “Observations sur une Lettre attribute a ieu M. de Launoi sur l'Usure,” 4to. 6. “Eclaircissement historique et dogmatique sur la Contrition,” 12mo. 7. “Motifs invincible* d‘Attachement a l’Eglise Romaine pour les Catholiqnes, ou de Re-union pour les pretendus Reformes,” 12mo. 8. “Meditations sur la Concorde des Evangiles,” 3 vols. 12mo. 9. “Sur l'EpStre aux Remains,” 2 vols. 12mo. 10. “SurlesEpitrescanoniques,” 2 vols. 12mo. ll.“Memoire sur les Droits du second Ordre,” 4to. 12. “Me”­moire sur l'Appel au futur Concile,“4to; several tracts on the Constitution, the Miracles, ascribed to M.Paris; the Convulsions, &c. 13.” Manuel du Chretien,“which contains the Psalms, the New Testament, and the Imitation, 24to. A book in twelves, entitled” Eclaircissement sur les Conciles genéraux," is also attributed to M. le Gros.

, an eminent English antiquary, was the son of Mr. Francis Grose, of Richmond, jeweller, who died in 1769. He was born in 1731, and having a taste for heraldry and antiquities, his father procured him a place in the college of arms, which, however, he resigned in 1763. By his father he was left an independent fortune, which he was not of a disposition to add to, or even to -reserve. He early entered into the Surrey militia, of which he became adjutant and paymaster; but so much had dissipation taken possession of him, that in a situation which above all others required attention, he was so careless as to have for some time (as he used pleasantly to tell) only two books of accounts, viz. his right and left hand pockets. In the one he received, and from the other paid; and this too with a want of circumspection which may be readily supposed from such a mode of book keeping. His losses on this occasion roused his latent talents: with a good classical education he united a fine taste for drawing, which he now began again to cultivate; and encouraged by his friends, he undertook the work from which be derived both profit and reputation: his Views of Antiquities in England and Wales, which he first began to publish in numbers in 1773, and finished in 1776. The next year he added two more volumes to his English views, in which he included the islands of Guernsey and Jersey, which were completed in 1787. This work, which was executed with accuracy and elegance, soon became a favourite with the public at large, as well as with professed antiquaries, from the neatness of the embellishments, and the succinct manner in which he conveyed his information, and therefore answered his most sanguine expectations; and, from the time he began it to the end of his life, he continued without intermission to publish various works, generally to the advantage of his literary reputation, and almost always to the benefit of his finances. His wit and good-humour were the abundant source of satisfaction to himself and entertainment to his friends. He visited almost every part of the kingdom, and was a welcome guest wherever he went. In the summer of 1789 he set out on a tour in Scotland the result of which he began to communicate to the public in 1790, in numbers. Before he had concluded this work, he proceeded to Ireland, intending to furnish that kingdom with views and descriptions of her antiquities, in the same manner he had executed those of Great Britain; but soon after his arrival in Dublin, being at the house of Mr. Hone there, he suddenly was seized at table with an apoplecticfit, on the 6th May 1791, and died immediately. He was interred in Dublin.

“His literary history,” says a friend, “respectable as it is, was exceeded by his good-humour, conviviality, and friendship. Living much abroad, and in the best company at home, he had the easiest habits of adapting himself to all tempers; and, being a man of general knowledge, perpetually drew out some conversation that was either useful to himself, or agreeable to the party. He could observe upon most things with precision and judgment; but his natural tendency was to humour, in which he excelled both by the selection of anecdotes and his manner of telling them: it may be said too, that his figure rather assisted him, which was in fact the very title-page to a joke. He had neither the pride nor malignity of authorship: he felt the independency of his own talents, and was satisfied with them, without degrading others. His friendships were of the same cast; constant and sincere, overlooking some faults, and seeking out greater virtues.”

Grose, to a stranger, says Mr. Noble, might have been supposed not a surname, but one selected as significant of his figure: which was more of the form of Sancho Panca than Falstaff; but he partook of the properties of both. He was as low, squat, and rotund as the former, and not less a sloven; equalled him too in his love of sleep, and nearly so in his proverbs. In his wit he was a Falstaff. He was the butt for other men to shoot at, but it always rebounded with a double force. He could eat with Sancho, and drink with the knight. In simplicity, probity, and a compassionate heart, he was wholly of the Panca breed; his jocularity could have pleased a prince. In the “St. James’s Evening Post,” the following was proposed as an epitaph for him:

His works are, 1. “The Antiquities of England and Wales,” 8 vols. 4to and 8vo. 2. “The Antiquities of Scotland,” 2 vols. 4to and 8vo. 3. “The Antiquities of Ireland,” 2 vols. 4to and 8vo, a posthumous work, edited by Mr. Ledwich, 1794. 4. “A Treatise on ancient Armour and Weapons,” 1785, 4to. 5. “A Classical Dictionary of the Vulgar Tongue,” 1785, 8vo. 6. “Military Antiquities being a History of the English Army from the Conquest to the present Time,” 1786, 1788, 2 vols. 4to. 7. “The History of Dover Castle, by the rev. William. Darell,” 1786, 4to. 8. “A Provincial Glossary, with a Collection of local Proverbs and popular Superstitions,” 1788, 8vo. 9. “Rules for drawing Caricatures,” 1788, 8vo. 10. “Supplement to the Treatise on ancient Armour and Weapons,” 1789, 4to. 11. “A guide to Health, Beauty, Honour, and Riches,” being a collection of humorous advertisements, pointing out the means to obtain those blessings with a suitable introductory preface, 8vo. 12. “The Olio, a collection of Essays,” jests, small pieces of poetry, all highly characteristic of Mr. Grose, but the collection was not made by him, and we suspect all the contents are not from his pen; 1793, 8vo.

, a French antiquary and polite writer, was born at Troyes Nov. 18, 1718, and was educated in the profession of the law, but a decided turn for literary pursuits interrupted his legal studies, and induced him, in search of knowledge, to travel twice into Italy, twice into England, and once into Holland, besides passing a considerable part of every year at Paris, where he was received into the best company, but would never settle. His disposition appears to have been amiable and liberal, as when yet a youth he gave up a legacy of 40,000 livres in favour of his sister. At his own expence, too, he undertook to embellish the saloon of the town house of his native city, Troyes, with marble busts of the eminent natives of that city, executed by Vasse, the king’s sculptor; and the first put up were those of Pithou, le Comte, Passerat, Girardon, and Mignard. He died in that city, Nov. 4, 1785, being then an associate of the academy of inscriptions and belles lettres, and a member of our royal society. His principal works are, 1. “Recherches pour Fhistoire du Droit Francois,” Paris, 1752, 12mo, a work highly esteemed. 2. “Vie de Pithou,” ibid. 1756, 2 vols. J2mo. 3. “Observations de deux gentil-hommes Stiedou sur l'Italie,” 1774, 4 vols. 12mo, a very lively work, and full of interesting anecdotes. 4. “Londres,” 1770, 3 vols. 12mo, of which nearly the same may be s;iid, although allowances must be made for the mistakes into which a foreigner is very liable to fall. It was translated in 1772, by Dr. Nugent, 2 vols. 8vo. 5. “Essais historiques sur la Champagne.” 6. “Ephemerides Troyennes,” continued for several years, and containing papers relative to the history of Troyes. He had also a part in the “Memoires de Pacademie de Troyes,” and in the last translation of Davila; and was an useful contributor to the “Journal Encyclopedique,” from 1771 to 17S5, and to the “Dictionnaire Historique.” A Life, written by himself, and some posthumous pieces, have been lately published,

, an English prelate, and the most learned ecclesiastic of his time, was born probably about 1175, of obscure parents at Stradbrook in Suffolk. He studied at Oxford, where he laid the foundation of his skill in the Greek tongue, and was thus enabled to make himself master of Aristotle, whose works had been hitherto read only in translations: at Oxford too he acquired a knowledge of the Hebrew. He afterwards went to Paris, where he prosecuted his studies of Greek and Hebrew, and made himself master of French. Here he also studied the divinity and philosophy of the age, his proficiency in which was so remarkable as to draw upon him the suspicion of being a magician. At Oxford, on his return, he became celebrated as a divine, and was the first lecturer in the Franciscan school in that university. In 1235 he was elected, by the dean and chapter, bishop of Lincoln, which see was then, and continues still, the largest in England, although Ely, Oxford, and Peterborough have been since taken from it. Grosseteste, who was of an ardent and active spirit, immediately undertook to reform abuses, exhorting 'both clergy and people to religious observances, and perhaps would have been in a considerable degree successful, had he not confided too much in the Dominican and Franciscan friars, as his helpers in the good work. But they being appointed by him to preach to the people, hear their confessions, and enjoin penance, abused these op-­portunities by exercising dominion over the superstitious minds of the laity, and enriched themselves at their expence. Although, however, the hypocrisy of the Dominicans and Franciscans in this instance escaped his penetration, he could not be deceived in the dissolute character and ignorance of the more ancient orders, and was very strict in his visitations, and very severe in his censures of their conduct. Partly through this sense of his duty, and his love of justice, and partly from his warmth of temper, he was frequently engaged in quarrels with convents, and other agents of the pope. At one time he was even excommunicated by the convent of Canterbury; but treating this with contempt, he continued to labour in promoting piety, and redressing abuses with his usual zeal, firmness, and perseverance. Although the friars continued to be his favourites, and he rebuked the rectors and vicars of his diocese, because they neglected to hear them preach, and be^ cause they discouraged the people from attending and confessing to them, in time he began to see more clearly into the character of those ecclesiastics. In 1247, two English Francisqans were sent into England with credentials to extort money for the pope; and when they applied, with some degree of insolence, to Grosseteste, for six thousand marks, as the contribution for the diocese of Lincoln, he answered them that (with submission to his holiness), the demand was as dishonourable as impracticable; that the whole body of the clergy and people were concerned in it as well as himself; and that for him to give a definitive answer in an instant to such a demand, before the sense of the kingdom was taken upon it, would be rash and absurd.

He continued afterwards to exert himself in promoting the good of the church as to doctrine and morals, with the most upright intentions, and to the best of his knowledge, although it must afford the present age but a poor opinion of his knowledge in such matters, when we find him translating, and illustrating with commentaries, such works as those of John Damascenus, and of the spurious Dionysius the Areopagite; and even ^ The Testaments of the Twelve Patriarchs," which he thought a valuable monument of sacred antiquity, and equal in importance with the scriptures. But the ignorance of the times, and the difficulties of acquiring divine knowledge, were in that age greatly beyond what can now be conceived. In the case, however, of external morals, Grosseteste showed more discernment. In 1248 he obtained, at a great expence, from pope Innocent IV. letters to empower him to reform the religious orders, fortified by this authority, he first turned his attention to die waste of large revenues by the monastic orders, and determined to take into his own hand the rents of the religious houses, probably with a design to institute and ordain vicarages in his diocese, and to provide for the more general instruction of the peopled But the monks having appealed to the pope, Crosseteste, in his old age^ was obliged to travel to Lyons, where Innocent resided, and where he immediately decided against our bishop, and treated him with much harshness of language, to which Grosseteste replied with great spirit, and went so far as to insinuate the power of money at the court of Rome. All, however, that he could do was to leave a kind of remonstrance, in the shape of a long sermon, one copy of which he delivered to the pope, and others totwo of the cardinals, in which he sharply inveighed against the flagitious practices of the court of Rome, particularly the appropriation of churches to religious houses, the appeals of the religious to the pope, and the scandalous clause in the bulls of nan obstantd, which was the great engine of the pope’s dispensing power, anil enabled him to set aside all statutes and customs. He was for some time so dejected with the disappointment he had met with, that he intended to resign his bishopric, but upon more mature -reflection, thought it his duty to remain in his office, and do all the good which the bigotry and ignorance of the times would permit.

At home he still opposed the lazy Italians, who had procured the pope’s letters for provisions, and were the objects of Grosseteste 1 s greatest detestation, for he said “if he should commit the care of souls to them, he should be the friend of Satan.” Upon such principles he would often, with indignation, cast the bulls out of his hand, and absolutely refused to comply with them. He was suspended at one time for disobeying a papal mandate of this kind. Pope Innocent, persisting in his old courses, notwithstanding all the fair promises and assurances he had given to the contrary, commanded the bishop to admit un Italian, entirely ignorant of the English language, to a rich benefice in his diocese, and be refusing to comply, was suspended for it the Lent following. This sentence, however, seems to have been soon relaxed, as we find the bishop singing mass at Hales the same year. A more remarkable instance of Grosseteste’s spirited opposition to the papal usurpations occurred in 1253, when Innocent ordered his nephew, aa Italian youth, to be promoted to the first canonry that should be vacant in the cathedral of Lincoln, and declared that any other disposal of the canonry should be null and void; and that he would excommunicate every one who should dare to disobey his injunction. The pope also wrote to the archdeacon of Canterbury, and to one Mr. Innocent, both Italians, to see this business completed, with a clause of non obstante and to cite all coiuraveners to appear before him without any manner of plea or excuse and under another clause of non obstante^ in two months time.

Grosseteste wrote immediately to the pope, or to his agents, in the most resolute and spirited terms, almost retorting, as Brown in his “Fasciculus rerum expetendarum,” &c. observes, “excommunication for excommunication.” This epistle, of which we have many copies notv extant, both in manuscript and printed, is a most celebrated performance, and has immortalized the bishop’s memory, and endeared it to all generations. He insists, that the papal mandates cannot be repugnant to the doctrine of Christ and his apostles, and that, therefore, the tenor of his holifiess’s epistles was not consonant to toe sanctity of the holy see, on account of the accumulated clauses of non obstante. Then, that no sin can be more adverse to the doctrine of the apostles, more abominable to Jesus Christ, or more hurtful to mankind, than to defraud and rob those souls, which ought to be the objects of the pastoral care, of that instruction which by the scriptures they have a right to, &c. Hence he infers that the holy see, destined to edify and not to destroy, cannot possibly incur a sin of this kind; and that no one that is not an excommunicate, ought to obey any such absurd mandate, though an angj^l from heaven should command him, but rather to revolt and oppose them, &c.

The pope, on receiving this flat denial, which he little expected, written, as our readers may perceive, in a sarcastic styje implying much more than is expressed, fell into a furious passion, exclaiming, with a stern countenanc, and with all the pride of Lucifer, “Who is this old dotard, deaf, and absurd, that thus rashly presumes to judge of my actions? By Peter and Paul, if the goodness of my own heart did not restrain me, I should so chastise him, as to make him an example and a spectacle to all the world. Is not the king of England my vassal, my slave, and for a word speaking, would throw him into prison, and load him with infamy and disgrace?” And, when the cardinals interposed, they had much ado to mollify him, by telling him, “it was little for his interest to think of animadverting on the bishop; since, as they must all own, what he said was true, and they could not condemn or blame him, &c.” giving the bishop, at the same time, a most noble testimony, in respect of his piety, learning, and general character, as acknowledged by all the world: in all which, they confessed frankly, they were none of them to be compared to him. The pope, however, excommunicated the bishop, and even named a successor to his see; but the bishop, on his part, contented himself with appealing from the sentence to the tribunal of Christ, after which he troubled himself no more about it, and remained quietly in possession of his dignity.

Towards the end of this summer (1253) he fell sick at his palace at Buckden, and sent for friar John de St. Giles, who was a physician and a divine, in both which capacities he wanted his assistance, as he foresaw, to the great uneasiness of his mind, the troubles that would shortly befall the church. He then gave orders to the clergy of his diocese to renew the sentence of excommunication upon all who should infringe the magna charta concerning the liberties of the kingdom, which made the incumbents very obnoxious to many of the courtiers. In all his conversations on this subject in his last illness, he appears to have retained the strength of his understanding, and conscious of the uprightness of his conduct towards the pope, he still fully approved it in his heart; nor was his courage in the least broken, or his spirits dejected, by any fulminations that had Hfcen launched against him from that quarter. His conversations on this occasion, given by his biographer, display his real sentiments on the depraved and corrupt state of the papacy in his time, the particulars or articles on which he grounded his charge, and that abhorrence of its proceedings which does him so much honour.

He died at Buckden, Oct. 9, 1255, and the corpse was carried to Lincoln, where it was met by archbishop Boniface, who attended the funeral. He was interred in the upper south transept. For an account of his tomb, &c. we must refer to our principal authority. The pope, who rejoiced at his death, ordered a Letter to be written to king Henry, enjoining him to take up the bishop’s bones, cast them out of the church, and burn them, but this letter was not sent. As Grosseteste was a person of acknowledged piety and strictness of manners, he easily arrived at the beatitude, or title of Beatus, and even at sanctity 9 in the general estimation; but he could never obtain these jhonours from the church, though they were solicited for him in the strongest terms. Indeed, as l>r. Pegge observes, it would have been improper and absurd for the popes to repute and proclaim a person to be now an holy beatified saint in heaven, who in their opinion had so openly traduced, insulted, and vilified both the see and court of Rome, which were still pursuing the very same measures he condemned, and continued to be invariably the same depraved, venal, and corrupt body. It is, however, for the honour of bishop Grosseteste, that for his piety and integrity, his learning and abilities, he still lives valued and revered in the breasts of all sober and reasonable men. It is plain that he did not suffer the least in the esteem of the world, any more than he did in his own opinion, by the anathema which pope Innocent had denounced against him. Indeed the papal censures, of which our prelates stood so much in dread at Lyons, in 1245, had been of late so infamously prostituted, that they seem to have lost their efficacy. Grosseteste, in particular, paid no regard to that which was denounced against him, for he still continued to exercise his function; his clergy also made no scruple of obeying him when under the sentence; and his exequies were solemnized not only by the secular but even by the regular clergy of his diocese.

Few authors, ancient or modern, ever mention bishop Grosseteste without an eulogium, and from the many evidences brought by his biographer, he appears to have excelled all his contemporaries in learning, piety, judgment, and conscientious integrity in the discharge of his episcopal duties, and to have powerfully aided in producing what we may term the preliminaries of that reformation which was afterwards to take place in a church so corrupt, and so weak, that even at this time it was not able to support itself against the arguments of one English prelate, a point of religion, the papists are very desirous of having bishop Grosseteste for their own; and it must be acknowledged that he was much with them doctrinally, and at first entertained a high opinion of the power of the keys, and the personal authority of the pope; but at last, in a case manifestly unscriptural and injurious to the welfare of religion, he openly contemned it, and did not even regard dying in a state of excommunication. He had also at one time conceived a most elevated idea of the hierarchy in general, thinking it superior to the regal dignity. To this he was led, exceeding in this respect even Becket himself, by the authority of the “Testaments of the Twelve Patriarchs,” and this is the best excuse that can be made for him; the blindness of the times being sucb, that men of the best learning, and the greatest acuteness, had not critical skill sufficient, though this be the first and proper object of criticism, to distinguish a spurious composition from the true word of God. But, however, he afterwards changed his mind in regard to the hierarchy. Had he lived in more enlightened times, when points formerly taken fur granted as principles not to be controverted, were more maturely canvassed and considered, his ideas on many religious topics would have been greatly enlarged, and he would not have been at all averse to a separation from a church so venal and corrupt as that of Home, nor to a reformation both of her doctrines and discipline.

Bishop Grosseteste was a severe student to the very end of life. He was a master of languages, of some that were not jhen generally known, and also of every branch of learning, both human and divine, as they were then usually studied and professed; and he improved many of them by the productions of his own pen. His erudition was truly multifarious, so that he may justly be said, both in respect of himself and his own acquirements, and of that general patronage and encouragement which he afforded the literati of his time, to stand at the head in this country at least, of all the learning of the age. His forte seems to have been logic, philosophy, and theology, and his knowledge of the scriptures was very intimate.

For a list of his works, both published, which are but few, and unpublished, we must necessarily refer to Dr. Pegge-'s elaborate life of our prelate, where it occupies twenty-five closely printed pages in quarto. It is thought Grosseteste was the most voluminous writer of any Englishman, at least wrote more tracts, and on a greater variety of subjects, than any one. Archbishop Williams had once an intention of collecting them for publication; but as Dr. Pegge has very justly remarked, it is not much to be regretted that the design was not executed,when we consider the superior light and knowledge of our times, and how much better every thing is understood. His style is copious and verbose, and bordering frequently upon turgidity, abounding with uncouth words, which, though formed analogically, are yet new, and not very pleasing to a reader of the classics; but he expresses himself in general very intelligibly, particularly in his books “De Sphaera” and “De Cessatione Legalium.” He proceeds also in his compositions very methodically and perspicuously.

, a pious dissenting divine, was born in London Jan. J, 1675, where his father was an upholder. In 1693 he was placed under the tuition of the rev. Mr. Jollie, of Attercliffe, in Yorkshire, with whom he went through a course of studies preparatory to ordination among the dissenters; and afterwards studied Hebrew under Capell, formerly professor of oriental languages at Saumur, but at this time a refugee ii> London. In 1699 Mr. Grosvenor was admitted into the ministry, and officiated first as assistant to Mr. Oldfield, in Southwark, and afterwards was joint preacher of a lecture in the Old Jewry meeting. His biographers seem all unwilling to tell us that he was at first of the baptist persua-; sion, and having been baptised in 1689 by Mr. Benjamin Keach, became a member of his meeting for about seven or eight years; but in the course of his studies he changed his opinions, and was “dismissed in a general manner from his membership with” the baptists. In 1703 or 1704 he was chosen to succeed Mr. Slater in the meeting in Crosby-square, to which he was formally ordained in July 1704. In 1716 he was chosen one of the lecturers at Salter’s-hall, which added much to his reputation, but which he resigned in 1740. In 1730 the university of Edinburgh conferred the degree of D. D. upon him. After this he continued to preach until 1749, when the increasing infirmities of age obliged him to desist from all public services. He continued, however, his private studies, and kept up an amicable intercourse with his friends until his death, Aug.7, 1758. Dr. Grosvenor possessed great mildness of temper, lively and brilliant wit, a candid disposition towards those who differed from him, and an habitual cheerfulness which rendered his visits peculiarly acceptable. He published various single sermons preached on funeral and other occasions an “Essay on Health,” 1748, 8vo; and a treatise on consolation, entitled “The Mourner,” which has been repeatedly printed, and still preserves his memory.

, a French protestant clergyman, born at Paris in 1647, was educated in the reformed religion, and after applying with success to classical studies, was advised by his father to follow the law. In 1664, accordingly, he was admitted to the title and privilege of a doctor of the civil and canon law, and the year following was received as an advocate at Paris, and was distinguishing himself, when by the persuasion of some friends, he quitted his profession, and began to study divinity at Saumur. In 1675 he was appointed minister of the church of Lisy, and was ordained. In -1677 and 1678 he received pressing invitations from the churches of Gien and Amiens, both which he declined, as it was his intention to spend a few more years in close study. At length, however, in 1682, he accepted an invitation from the church at Rouen, but did not remain long connected with it, a decree of council having separated him from his flock, and forbid him to come nearer the place than seven leagues. He was confined by sickness at the time this decree arrived, and on his recovery went to England in 1685, and connected himself in the exercise of his ministerial functions with Messieurs Allix and Lombard. In 1694 he became minister of the Savoy, which office he held until his death, Sept. 30, 1713. His widow is said to have given his library to the Savoy church, on Condition of its being open to the public certain days in every week. He published “Trait< de Pinspiration des livres sacrt-es,” Amst. 1695, and several sermons and pious tracts. He appears to have been a very active member of the society for propagating the gospel.

, or Hugo de Groot, one of the most eminent names in literary history, was descended from a family of the greatest distinction in the Low Countries: his father^ John de Groot, was burgomaster of Delft, and curator of the university of Leyden, and in 1582, married Alida Averschie, a lady of one of the first families in the country, by whom he had three sons and a daughter. His son Hugo, the subject of this article, was born at Delft on Easter-day, April I0j 1583, and came into the world with the most happy dispositions; a profound genius, a solid judgment, and a wonderful memory. These extraordinary natural endowments had all the advantages that education could give them, and he found in his own father a pious and an able tutor, who formed his mind and his morals. He was scarce past his childhood, when he was sent to the Hague, and boarded with Mr. Utengobard, a celebrated clergyman among the Arrninians, who took great care of his trust; and, before he had completed his twelfth year, was removed to Leyden, under the learned Francis Jimiiis. He continued three years at this university, where Joseph Scaliger was so struck with his prodigious capacity, that he condescended to direct his studies; and in 1597, Grotius maintained public theses in the mathematics, philosophy, and law, with the highest applause.

* Their business was, in conjunc- France, against Spain; but this was tion with lord Cecil, on the part of not successful: Grotius fives a historyEngland, to negociate a triple al- of this embassy in the 7th book of his liance between England. Holland, and Annals. M, cle Buzanval, who had been ambassador in Holland, introduced him to the king-, who presented him with his picture and a gold chain, with which Grotius was so highly flattered, as to have a print engraved of himself, adorned with the chain. After almost a year’s stay in France he returned home, much pleased with his journey; one thin“­only was wanting to complete his satisfaction, a sight of the celebrated M. de Thou, or Thuanus, the person among all the French whom he most esteemed. He had eagerly sought an acquaintance with that great man, and as he did not succeed, he now resolved to open a literary correspondence, and present him with the first-fruits of his studies in print, which he had just dedicated to the prince of Conde”. This was his edition of“Maitianus Capella.” He had formed the plan of this work, when only fourteen years old, almost finished it before he left Holland, and published it presently after his return in 1599. M. de Thou was extremely well pleased with this address, and from this time to his death there subsisted an intimate correspondence between them. In 1600, Grotius sent de Thou an epithalamiuin he had written on the marriage of Henry IV. with Mary of Medicis, but this is not in the collection of his poems.

Grotius, having chosen the law for his profession, had taken an opportunity before he left France, to obtain a doctor’s degree in that faculty; and upon his return he attended the law-courts, and pleaded his first cause at Delft with universal applause, though he was scarcely seventeen; and he maintained the same reputation as lung as he continued at the bar. This employment, however, not filling up his whole time, he found leisure to publish the same year, 1599, another work, which discovered as much knowledge of the abstract sciences in particular as the former did of his learning in general. Stevin, mathematician to prince Maurice of Nassau, composed a small treatise for the instruction of pilots in finding a ship’s place at sea; in which he drew up a table of the variations of the needle, according to the observations of Plancius, a celebrated geographer, and added directions how to use it. Grotius translated into Latin this work, which prince Maurice had recommended to the college of admiralty, to be studied by all officers of the navy; and, because it might be equally useful to Venice, he dedicated his translation to that republic. In 1600, he published his “of Aratus,” which discovers a great knowledge in physics, and especially astronomy. The corrections he made in the Greek are esteemed very judicious: the notes shew that he had reviewed several of the rabhies, and had some knowledge of the Arabic tongue; and the verses he made to supply those of Cicero that were lost have been thought very happy ‘imitations of that writer’s style. In the midst of these profound studies, this extraordinary young man found time to cultivate the muses, and with such success, that he was esteemed one of the best Latin poets in Europe. The prosopopoeia, in which he makes the city of Ostend speak, after having been three years besieged by the Spaniards, was reckoned a masterpiece, and was translated intoJFrench by Du Vae’r, Rapin, Pasquier, and Malherbe; and Casanbon turned it into Greek. Neither did Grotius content himself with writing small pieces of verse; he rose to tragedy, of which he produced three specimens; the first, called “Adamus Exul,” was printed in Leyden, in 1601, with which, however, he became afterwards dissatisfied, and would not let it appear in the collection of hi* poems published by his brother. “Christus patiens,” his second tragedy, was printed at Leyden in 1608, and much approved: Casaubon greatly admires its poetical fire. Sandys translated it into English verse, and dedicated it to Charles I. It was favourably received in England, and in Germany proposed as the model of perfect tragedy. His third was the story of Joseph, and its title “Sophornphanceus,” which, in the language of Egypt, signifies the Saviour of the World; he finished this in 1633, and the following year, at Hamburgh.

In 1603, the glory which the United Provinces had obtained by their illustrious defence against the whole power of Spain, after the peace of Vervins, determined them to transmit to posterity the signal exploits of that memorable war; and for this purpose they sought out a proper historian. Several made great interest for the place, and among others Baudius, the professor of eloquence at Leyden. But the States thought young Grotius, who had taken ao steps to obtain it, deserved the preference; and, what is singular, Baudius himself did not blame their choice, because he looked upon Grotius to be already a very great man. In the execution of this office, he undertook his “Annals,” which were begun in 1614, though not finished long before his death, and not published until twelve years after. All this while his principal employment was that of an advocate, in which he acquired great honour; but, upon the whole, the profession did not please him, though the brilliant figure he made at the bar procured him the place of advocate-general of the fisc for Holland and Zealand, which, becoming vacant, was immediately conferred on him by those provinces. He took possession of this important office in 1607, and filled it with so much reputation, that the States augmented his salary, and promised him a seat in the court of Holland. Upon this promotion, his father began to think of a wife for him, and fixed upon Mary Reigesberg, a lady of great family in Zealand, whose father had been burgomaster of Veer. The marriage was solemnized in July 1608, and celebrated by him in some Latin and French verses, the former of which he translated into Dutch. On this occasion his father likewise wrote an epithalamium, and another was composed by Heinsius. At the time of his marriage he was employed in writing his “Mare liberum,” i. e. “the Freedom of the Ocean, or the Right of the Dutch to trade to the Indies.” The work was printed in 1609, without his knowledge or consent. Indeed he appears not to have been quite satisfied with it: and though there came out seveial answers, particularly that of Selden, entitled “Mare clausum, seti de dominio maris,” yet, being soon after disgusted with his country, he took no farther concern in the controversy. The ensuing year, he published his piece “De antiquitate ReipublieiE Batavae,” designed to shew the original independence of Holland and Friesland against the Spanish claim; and he accordingly dedicated it to those States^ March 16, 1610, who were es-tremely pleased with it, returned thanks to the author, and made him a present. While it was in the press, Grotius and his father, who usually assisted him in his writings, translated it into Dutch.

Elias Oldenbarnevelt, pensionary of Rotterdam, and brother to the grand pensionary of Holland, dying in 1613, the city of Rotterdam offered that important place to Grotius; but it was some time before he yielded to the offer. By the ferment of men’s minds he foresaw that great commotions would speedily shake the republic, which made him insist, that he should never be turned out; and, upon a promise of this, he accepted of the post, which gave him a seat in the assembly of the States of Holland, and afterwards in that of the States-General. Hitherto he had tut very little connexion with the grand pensionary Barnevelt; but i'rom this time he contracted an intimate friendship with him, and it was even reported that Barnevelt designed to have his friend succeed him as grand pensionary of Holland*.

At this time a dispute arose between the English and the Dutch, concerning the right of fishing in the Northern seas. Two Amsterdam vessels, having caught some whales in the Greenland ocean, were met by some English ships bound to Russia; who, finding that the Dutch had no passports from the king of England, demanded the whales, which the Dutchmen, unable to resist, were obliged to deliver. On their arrival in Holland, they made their complaint; and the affair being laid before the States, it was resolved that Grotius, who had written on the subject, and was more master of it than any one, should be sent to England, where his demands were refused. On this the Dutch determined not to send to Greenland for the future without a force sufficient to revenge themselves on the English, or at least to have nothing to fear from them. The dispute growing serious, to prevent any acts of hostility, a conference was held, in 1615, between the commissioners of England and Holland, in which the debate turned chiefly on the whale-fishery; but, the English still insisting on the right to Greenland, which the Dutch refused, the conference broke up without any success. Grotius, who was one of the commissioners from Holland, gives the history of this conference, in a letter to Du Maurier, dated at Rotterdam, June 5, 1615. On this occasion, however, he had reason to be well satisfied with the politeness of king James, who gave him a gracious reception, and was charmed with his conversation. But the greatest pleasure he received at this visit, was the intimate friendship he contracted with Casaubon. Their esteem for each other was increased by a similarity of studies and sentiments, and they both entertained hopes of a scheme, which human agency at least will never render practicable, that of uniting all Christians in one faith. In the midst of these occupations, Du Maurier, the French ambassador in Holland, and his particular

patches, and answer them, so that he and is the lowest in rank, yet his iffi* in a manner both attorney-general fluence is the greatest. friend, resolving to begin a course of study, applied to him for directions, and Grotius laid down that excellent plan printed by Elzevir in 1637, in the work “De omni o-enere studiorum recte instituendo,” but the author informs us that it was printed without his consent.

Hitherto Grotius had passed his life with uninterrupted honour and fame; but a reverse was now approaching The United Provinces had been kindled into a warm dis*­pute about grace and predestination, from 1603, when Arminius first broached his opinions. His doctrines, being directly opposite to those of Calvin, gave great offence to that party, at the head of which appeared Gomar, who accused his antagonist before the synod of Rotterdam. Gomar’s party prevailing there, Arminius applied to the States of Holland, who promised the disputants to have the affair speedily discussed in a synod. The dispute still continuing with much bitterness, in 1611 the States ordered a conference to be held between twelve ministers on each side: but the consequence of this was, that men’s minds were the more inflamed. Arminius died October 19, 1609, some time before this conference; and Grotius made his eulogium in verse. He had hitherto applied little to these matters, and ingenuously owns he did not understand a great part of them, being foreign to his profession; and certainly every admirer of his unrivalled talents must wish that he never had involved himself; but having once studied the controversy, he embraced the Arminian doc* trine. In 1610, the partisans of Arminius drew up a remonstrance, setting forth their belief; first negatively against their adversaries, and then positively their own sentiments, each comprehended in six articles. This remonstrance was drawn up by Utengobard, minister at the Hague, and was probably made in concert with Grotius, the intimate friend and quondam pupil of that minister. To this the Gomarists opposed a contra-remonstrance: the former proposed to end the matter by a toleration, the latter to decide it by a national synod; and, the disputes increasing, the StateSj at the motion of the grand pensionary, with the view of putting an end to them, revived an obsolete law made in 1591, placing the appointment of ministers in the civil magistrates. But this was so far from answering the purpose, that the Contra-remoustrants resolved not to obey it. Hence grew a schism, which occasioned a sedition, and many riots. It was at this time that Grotius was nominated pensionary at Rotterdam, as mentioned above; and ordered to go to England, with secret instructions, as is thought, to persuade the king and principal divines of that kingdom to favour the Arminians, and approve the conduct of the States. He had several conferences with king James on that subject, and while here he wrote his tract in favour of the Arminians, entitled “A reconciliation of the different opinions on Predestination and Grace,” which is printed among his theological works. On his return to Holland he found the divisions increased: Barnevelt and he had the direction of the States’ proceedings in this matter; and he was appointed to draw up an edict which might restore tranquillity, the draught of which was approved by the States; but it was so favourable to the Arminians that it gave great offence to the Contra-remonstrants, who determined to pay no regard to it. Hence this edict serving to increase the troubles, by driving the Gomarists to despair, the grand pensionary Barnevelt, in hourly expectation of fresh riots, proposed to the States of Holland, that their magistrates should be empowered to raise troops for the suppression of the rioters, and the security of their towns. Dort, Amsterdam, and three others of the most favourable to the Gomarists, protested against this step, which they regarded, and in fact it was, as a declaration of war against the Contra-remonstrants. Barnevelt’s motion however was agreed to, and, August 4, 1617, the States issued a placart accordingly. This fatal decree occasioned the death of the grand pensionary, and the ruin of Grotius, by incensing prince Maurice of Nassau against them, who looked upon the resolution of the States, taken without his consent, to be derogatory to his dignity, as governor and captain-general.

Amsterdam, almost as powerful singly as all Holland, favoured the Gomarists, and disapproved the toleration which the States wanted to introduce. These resolved therefore to send a deputation to that city, in order to reconcile them to their sentiments. Grotius was one of. these deputies: they received their instructions April 21, 1616; and, arriving at Amsterdam next day, met the town-council on the 23d, when Grotius was their spokesman. But neither his speech nor all his other endeavours could avail any thing. The burgomasters declared their pinion for a synod, and that they could not receive the cachet of 1614 without endangering the church, and risquing the ruin of their trade. The deputies wished to answer, but were not allowed. Grotius presented to the States on his return an account in writing of all that had passed at this deputation, and he flattered himself for some time with the hopes of good effects from it; hut his disappointment chagrined him so much, that he was seized with a violent fever, which had almost proved fatal. He was removed to Delft, where he recovered, but, being forbid to do any thing which required application, he wrote to Vossius, desiring his company, as the best restorative of his health. The time of his recovery he employed in examining the part he had acted in the present" disputes; and, the more he reflected on it, the less reason he had for altering his sentiments; and although he foresaw the danger he incurred, his resolution was, not to change his conduct, but to refer the event to Providence. The States of Holland, wholly employed in endeavouring to compound matters, came to a resolution, February 21, 1617, to make a rule or formula, to which both parties should be obliged to conform; and such an instrument was accordingly drawn up at their request by Grotius, who presented it to prince Maurice. But the project did not please him; he wanted a national synod, which was at length determined by the States General, and to be convoked in Holland at Dort. In the mean time the prince, who saw with the utmost displeasure several cities, agreeably to the permission given them by the particular States, levy a new militia, under the title of attendant soldiers, without his consent, engaged the States General to write to the provinces and magistrates of those cities, enjoining them to disband the new levies. This injunction not being complied with, he considered the refusal as a rebellion; concerted with the States General, that he should march in. person with the troops under his command, to get the attendant soldiers disbanded, depose the Arminian magistrates, and turn out the ministers of their party. He accordingly set out, accompanied by the deputies of the States^General, in 1618; and, having reduced the province of Gueldres, he was proceeding to Utrecht, when the States of Holland sent thither Grotius, with Hoogerbetz, pensionary of Leyden, to put that city into a posture of defence against him. But, their endeavours proving ineffectual, the prince reduced the place; and soon aftervyards sent Grotius and Hoogerbetz to prison in the castle at the Hague, where Barnevelt also was confined, August 29th this year. After this the States of Holland consented to the national synod, which was opened at Dort, Nov. 15, 1618, which, as is well known, ended in a sentence, condemning the five articles of the Arminians, and in imprisoning and banishing their ministers. This sentence was approved by the States General, July 2, 1619.

After the rising of that synod, our three prisoners were brought in order to their trial, the issue of which was the execution of Barnevelt, May 13, 1619. Five days after came on the trial of Grotius. He had been treated, as well as his fellow-prisoner, with inconceivable rigour during their imprisonment, and also while their cause was depending. He tells us himself, that, when they were known to be ill, it was concerted to examine them that they had not liberty to defend themselves that they were threatened and teazed to give immediate answers and not suffered to have their examinations read over to them. Grotius, having asked leave to write his defence, was allowed only five hours, and one sheet of paper; he was also told, that if he would own he had transgressed, and ask pardon, he might obtain his liberty; but, as he had nothing to reproach himself with, he would never take any step that might imply consciousness of guilt. His wife, his father, brother, and friends, all approved this resolution. His, sentence, after reciting the several reasons thereof, concludes thus: " For these causes, the judges, appointed to try this affair, administering justice in the name of the States General, condemn the said Hugo Groiius to perpetual imprisonment, and to be carried to the place appointed by the States General, there to be guarded with all precaution, and confined the rest of his days; and de-s clare his estate confiscated. Hague, May 18, 1619. In pursuance of this sentence he was carried from the Hague to the fortress of Louvestein near Gorcuni in South Holland, June 6, 1619, and 24 sols per day assigned for his maintenance, and as much for Hoogerbetz; but their respective wives declared they had enough to support their husbands, and that they chose to be without an allowance, which was considered as an affront. Grotius’s father asked leave to see his son, but was denied; they consented to admit his wife into Louvestein, but, if she came out, not to be suffered to return. However, in the sequel, it was granted that she might go abroad twice a week.

Grotius now became more sensible than ever of the advantage of study; which became his business and conso^. lation. We have several of his letters written from Louvestein, in which he gives Vossius an account of his studies, informing him that he had resumed the study of the law, which had been interrupted by the multiplicity of business; that the rest of his time he devoted to the study of morality, which had led him to translate Stobaeus’s Maxims of the poets, and the fragments of Menander and Philemon. He likewise proposed to extract from the tragic and comic authors of Greece what related to morality, and was omitted by StobiEiis, and translate it into free verse, like that of the Latin comic writers. In translating the fragments of the Greek tragic poet, he intended that his verses should resemble those of the originals, excepting in the chorusses, whici) he would put into such verse as best suited him. Sundays he employed in reading treatises of the Christian religion, and used to spend some of his spare hours in this study on other days when his ordinary labour was over. He meditated some work in Flemish on the subject of religion; and the subject which he preferred! at that time was Christ’s love to mankind. He proposed likewise to write a commentary on Christ’s Sermon on the Mount.

Time seemed to pass away very fast amidst these several projects. In a letter dated Dec. 5, 1619, he writes to Vossius, that the muses, which were always his delight, even when immersed in business, were now his consolation, and appeared more amiable than ever. He wrote some short notes on the New Testament, which he intended to send Erpenius, who was projecting a new edition of it; but a fit of illness did not suffer him to finish them. When he was able to resume his studies he composed, in Dutch verse, his “Treatise of the truth of the Christian Religion,” and sent it to Vossius, who thought some places obscure. In 1620 he promises his brother to send him his observations on Seneca’s tragedies, which he had written of Vossius’s desire, In 1621 his friend Du Maurier losing. his lady, Grotius wrote to him, February 27, a very consolatory letter, in which he deduced with great eloquence, every topic of support that philosophy and religion can suggest on that melancholy occasion. It would appear that the only method he took to unbend himself, was to go from one work to another. He translated the “Phenissce of Euripides,” wrote his “Institutions of the Laws of Holland in Dutch,” and composed some short “Instructions for his Daughter” Cornelia, in the form of a catechism, in Flemish verse, containing 185 questions and answers. This was printed at the Hague in 1619, and he afterwards translated it into Latin verse, for the use of his son. This seems to be the catechism mentioned in our account of Nicholas Grey, master of Merchant Taylors’ school. He wrote also, while under confinement, a dialogue in Dutch verse, between a father and a son, on the necessity of silence.

He had been above 18 months shut up at Louvesteih, when, January 11, 1620, Muys van-Halli, his declared enemy, who had been one of his judges, informed the States general, that he had advice from good authority, that their prisoner was seeking to make his escape. Some persons were sent to examine into this matter; but, notivithstanding all the inquiry that could be made, they found no reason to believe that he had contrived any means to escape. H s wife, however, was very industriously and ingeniously employed in contriving it, which she effected in the following manner. He had been permitted to borrow books of his friends, and when he had done with them they were carried back in a chest with his foul linen, which was sent to Gorcum to be washed. The first year his guards were very exact in examining the chest; but, being used to find nothing in it besides books and linen, they grew tired of searching, and even did not take the trouble to open it. His wife, observing their negligence, proposed to take advantage of it. She represented to her husband, that it was in his power to get out of prison when he pleased, if he would put himself into this chest; and not to endanger his health, she caused holes to be bored opposite where his face was to be, to breathe at, persuading him to try if he could continue shut up in that confined posture, as long as it would require to go from Louvestein to Gorcum. Finding it might be done, she resolved to seize the first favourable opportunity; which very soon offered. The commandant of Louvestein going to Heusden to raise recruits, she paid a visit to his lady, and told her in the course of conversation, that she was desirous of sending away a chest of books; for, her husband was so weak, that it gave her great uneasiness to see him study with such application. Having thus prepared the commandant’s wife, she returned to her husband’s apartment, and in concert with a valet and a maid who were in the secret, shut him up in the chest; and at the same time, that the people might not be surprised at not seeing him, she spread a report of his being ill. Two soldiers carried the chest; one of them, finding it was heavier than usual, said there must be “an Arminian in it.” Grotius’s wife, who was present, said with great coolness, “There are indeed Arminian books in it.” The chest was brought down on a ladder with great difficulty; the soldier insisted on its being opened, to see wiiat was in it; he even went and informed the commandant’s wife, that the weight of the chest gave him reason to suspect the contents, and that it would be proper to have it opened. She told him that Grotius’ s wife had said there was nothing but books in and that they might carry it to the boat. It is even said that a soldier’s wife, who was present, reminded them there was more than one example of prisoners making their escape in boxes. In this way, however, eiither by negligence, or connivance, which there seems no reason to suspect, the chest was brought down, and put into the boat; and Grotius’s maid, who was in the secret, had orders to go to Gorcum with it, and put it into a house there. When it came to Gorcum, they wanted to put it on a sledge; but the maid telling the boatman that there were some brittle things in it, and begging of him to take care how it was carried, it was put on a horse, and carried by two chairmen to David Dazelaor’s, a friend of Grotius, and brother-in-law to Erpenius; and, when every body was gone, the maid opened the chest. Grotius had felt no inconvenience in it, though its length was not above three feet and a half. He got out, dressed himself like a mason with a rule and a trowel; and was secretly conveyed in this disguise to Valvic in Brabant. Here he made himself known to some Arminians, and hired a carriage to Antwerp; and, at Antwerp, he alighted at the house of Nicolas Grevincovius, who had been formerly a minister at Amsterdam., but did not make himself known to any other person. It was on March 22, 1621, that he thus recovered his liberty.

In the mean time, his wife’s account, that he was ill, gained credit at Louvestein and, to give him time to get out, she gave out that his illness was dangerous but as soon as she learnt by the maid’s return that he was at Brabant, and consequently in safety, she told the guards what had happened. They informed the commandant, by this time returned from Heusden, who, finding it true, confined Grotius’s wife more closely; but upon her petition to the States-General, April 5, 1621, she was discharged two days after, and suffered to carry away every thing that belonged to her in Louvestein. From Antwerp, Grotius wrote to the States-General, March 30, that, in procuring his liberty, he had employed neither violence nor corruption with his keepers; that he had nothing to reproach himself with in what he had done; that he gave those counsels which he thought best for appeasing the troubles that had arisen in public business; that he only obeyed the magistrates of Rotterdam his masters, and the States of Holland his sovereigns; and that the persecution he had suffered would never diminish his love for his country, for whose prosperity he heartily prayed. He continued some time at Antwerp, deliberating what course to take; and at length, principally by the advice of Du Maurier, determined to go to France, where he had many friends. He arrived at Paris, April 13, 1621, and his wife in October following; but their expences had so much exceeded the small revenue she had still left, that in the beginning of December, he wrote to Du Maurier, that if something was not soon done, he must seek a settlement in Germany, or hide himself in some corner of France. At length the king coming to Paris in January 1621, Grotius was presented to him by the chancellor and the keeper of the seals, in the beginning of March, and on a day when the court was very numerous. His majesty received him graciously, and granted him a pension of 3000 livres, and upon his account granted a protection to all the Dutch refugees, a very singular exchange of the principles of toleration between the two countries. But, notwithstanding the king’s grant, he could not touch the money; they had forgot to put it on the civil list, and the commissioners of the treasury found daily some new excuse for delaying the payment; and at length, when by the solicitation of some powerful friends, he received it, it continued to be paid as grants were paid at that time, that is to say, very slowly. These difficulties did not diminish his passion for literature, “I persist,” he says in a letter to Vossius, dated Sept. 29, 162], “in my respect for sacred antiquity; there are many people here of the same taste. My six books in Dutch will appear soon (i. e. his book on the truth of the Chr.stiau religion.) Perhaps 1 shall also publish my disquisition on Pelagianism, with the precautions hinted to me by you and some other persons of learning. In the mean time, I am preparing an edition of Stobrcus; and to render it more perfect, 1 collate the Greek Mss. with the printed copies.” Thus he spent the greatest part of his time; and as the ministers of Charenton, who had accorded with the decisions of the synod of Dort, would not admit him into their communion, he resolved to have divine service performed at home in his family.

Having collected some materials in prison for his Apology, he printed it in the beginning of 1622; and it was translated into Latin, and published the same year at Paris. It was sent to Holland immediately, where it caused so much disgust, that the States-General proscribed it as slanderous, tending to asperse by falsehoods the sovereign authority of the government of the United Provinces; the person of the prince of Orange, the States of the particular provinces, and the towjis themselves; and forbad all persons to have it in their custody on pain of death. Grotius presenteJ a petition to the king of France, to be protected against this edict, because it imported, that he should be apprehended wherever found; on which his majesty tqok him into his special protection, the letters for that purpose being issued at Paris, February 25, 1623. The malevolence of those who were then in place made no change in Grotius. In the height of this new persecution, he wrote to his brother, that he would still labour to promote the interest of Holland; and that, if the United Provinces were desirous of entering into a closer union with France, he would assist them with all his credit. This candour enabled him still to preserve many friends, who ardently wished for his return; though they were not able to facilitate it. In 1623, he published at Paris his edition of Stobsp,us.

He had now lived a year in the noise of Paris, and began to think of retiring into the country, when the presiDe Meme offered him one of his seats at Bologne, near Senlis. Grotius accepted the offer, and passed there the spring and summer of 1623. In this castle he began his great work, which alone is sufficient to render his name immortal, his “Treatise of the Rights of Peace and War.” He had visited the most distinguished men of learning; among others Salmasius and Rigault, and had the free use of de Thou’s library: he sometimes also made excursions to St. Germain’s, where the court was; but, having learned that De Meme wanted to reside at Bologne, he returned to Paris in October. Btirigny informs us, which somewhat diminishes our respect for Grotius’s firmness of mine!, that he took particular care not to offend De Meme, who was a zealous catholic, and was even so submissive as to eat meagre on Fridays, to receive none of his Dutch refugee ministers, and to abstain from every public or private exercise of the protestant religious worship. In April 1625, prince Frederic Henry succeeding to the post of stadtholder on the death of his brother Maurice, Grotius’s friends conceived great hopes of obtaining leave for his return to Holland and, at their request, he wrote to the new stadtholder for this purpose, but without effect as he had before conjectured. However, he was now in the height of his glory by the prodigious success of his book “De Jure Belli Si Pacis,” which was published this year. In the mean time he began to grow tired of that city. His pension was ill-paid, and his revenue insufficient to keep him decently with a wife and a family. He had an offer of being professor of law in a college at Denmark; but, though he was satisfied with the salary, he thought the place beneath his acceptance. While he remained in suspense, cardinal Richelieu was nominated prime minister in 1626, and being very desirous of becoming acquainted with Grotius, invited him to his house at Limours. Here it is supposed that he wished to engage Grotius to devote himself entirely to him, and that Grotius’s reservations gave offence. It is certain that from this time his pension was unpaid, which greatly distressed him, but his love for Paris induced him to bear with such a privation as long as it was possible.

In the mean time his heart was strongly bent upon returning to his native country; and in these wishes he sent his wife into Holland in the spring of 1627, that she might inquire how matters stood: but, as he continued in the resolution to make no solicitations for leave, all the endeavours of his friends were fruitless. However, they obtained a cause of some consequence to him; for, having reclaimed his effects which were confiscated, his demand was granted. At last, notwithstanding the inefficacy of his friends’ solicitations, he resolved, by his wife’s advice, to go thither; and accordingly set out for Holland in October 1631. The sentence passed against him being still in force, his friends advised him to conceal himself, which step appeared to him shameful and ill-timed. He went, however, first to Rotterdam, as thinking it the safest, because, having filled the place of pensionary with much honour, he was greatly beloved in the town; but the magistrates giving him to understand, that they did not approve his appearing in public, he left Rotterdam, and, passing to Amsterdam, he was extremely well received there; and Delft also, where he was born, shewed him sincere respect.

But no city ventured publicly to protect him; and the States-General, thinking themselves affronted by this boldness in continuing in the country without their leave, and by the repugnance he shewed to ask them pardon, issued an ordinance, December 10, 1631, enjoining all bailiffs of the country to seize his person, and give them notice: yet such was the general sympathy of his countrymen, that no person would execute it; and, to employ himself till his fate should be determined, he resolved to follow the business of a chamber-counsel. With this view he desired his brother, in a letter dated February 16, 1632, to send him what law books he might want for that office but of these he could make no long use; for, the States-General on March 10 renewed their ordinance, upon pain to those who would not obey, of lo.sing their places, and with a promise of 2000 florins to any one who should deliver him into the hands of justice. Upon this he thought proper to seek for an asylum elsewhere; and, on March 17, he set out from Amsterdam on his way to Hamburgh, and passed the fine season at an agreeable seat called Okenhuse, near the Elbe, belonging to William Morth, a Dutchman. On the approach of winter, he went to Hamburgh, and lodged with one Van Sorgen. a merchant: but the town did not prove agreeable to him, and he passed his time but heavily till the return of his wife from Zealand in autumn 1633. She had always been his consolation in adversity, and rendered all his sufferings more tolerable, not more by her affection, than by her good sense, and resources of mind. Her business at Zealand was to collect the remains of their fortune, which she probably brought with her to HambufgnY While he continued here, some advantageous proposal? were made him from Spain, Poland, Denmark, the duke 1 of Holstein, and several other princes; but still entertaining the thought of a reconciliation with his native country, it was long before he could be prevailed upon to abandon it, to which measure the following circumstances at last contributed.

He had always entertained a very high opinion of Gustavus king of Sweden; and that prince having sent to Paris Benedict Oxenstiern, a relation of the chancellor, to bring to a final conclusion the treaty between France and Sweden, this minister became acquainted with Grotius, and resolved, if possible, to draw him to his master’s court: and Grotius writes, that if that monarch would nominate him ambassador, with a proper salary for the decent sup* port of the dignity, the proposal might be accepted. In this situation Salvius, vice-chancellor of Sweden, a great statesman, and a man of learning, being then at this city, Grotius was introduced to him, and saw him frequently. Polite literature was the subject of their conversation. Salvius conceived a great esteem for Grotius, and the favourable report he made of him to the high-chancellor Oxenstiern determined the latter to write to Grotius to come to him, that he might employ him in affairs of the greatest importance. Grotius accepted of this invitation; and setting out for Francfort on the Maine, where that minister Avas, arrived there in May 1634. He was received with the; greatest politeness by Oxenstiern, who did not yet, how-> ever, explain his intentions. In confidence of the highchancellor’s character, and apparent sincerity, he sent for his wife, who arrived at Francfort with his daughters and son, in the beginning of August The chancellor after for some time continuing to heap civilities upon him, without mentioning a word of business, ordered that he should follow him to Mentz, and at length declared him counsellor to the queen of Sweden, and her ambassador to the court of France.

As soon as he could thtis depend upon an establishment, he resolved to renounce his country, and to make it known by some public act, that he considered himself as no longer a Dutchman. In this spirit he sent his brother letters for the prince of Orange and the Dutch to that purport, July 13 of this year: he likewise wrote to Rotterdam, whick had deferred nominating a pensionary after the sentence passed against him, that they might proceed to an election, since they must no longer look upon him as a Dutchman. He set out from Mentz on his embassy to France in the beginning of 1636, and made his public entry into Paris, March 2, and was introduced to Louis XIII. on the sixth. The great business of this embassy was to obtain the French king’s assistance to Sweden against the imperialists, in transacting which, he always supported with great firmness the rights and honours belonging to the rank of an ambassador. He continued in that character in -France till 1644, when he was recalled at his own request. In order to his return, having obtained a passport through Holland, he embarked at Dieppe, and arrived at Amsterdam in 1645, where he was extremely well received, and entertained at the public expence. That city fitted out a vessel to carry him to Hamburgh, where he was, May 16, this year. He went next day to Lubeck, and thence to Wismar, where count Wrangle, admiral of the Swedish fleet, gave him a splendid entertainment, and afterwards sent a man of war with him to Calmar, whither the chancellor sent a gentleman with his coach to bring him to Suderacher. He continued there about a fortnight with the chancellor and other ambassadors, who treated him with great honours. Returning to Calmar, he went by land to Stockholm, whither queen Christina came from Upsal to see him.

Her majesty had, before his departure from France, asured him that she was extremely satisfied with his services; and she now gave him several audiences, and made him dine with her, and he appeared to be abundantly pleased with the honours he received but as he saw they were in no haste to do any thing for him, and only rewarded him with compliments, he grew uneasy, and asked leave to retire. He was confirmed in this resolution, by finding the court filled up with persons that had conceived a jealousy against him; besides, the air of Sweden did not agree with him. The queen several times refused to gr;i:;t him his dismission, and signified that if he would continue in her service in quality of counsellor of state, and bring his family into Sweden, he should have no reason to repent it: but he excused himself on account of his heahh, which could not bear the cold air of that kingdom. He asked a passport, which they Delaying to grant, he became so uneasy that he resolved to go without it. Leaving

Stockholm, therefore, he went to a. sea-port two leaguus distant, in order to embark for Lubeck. The queen, being informed of his departure, sent a gentleman to tell him she wanted to see him once more, otherwise she should think he was displeased with her. He returned therefore to Stockholm, and explained himself to the queen, who seemed satisfied with his reasons, and made him a large present in money, amounting to 12 or 13,000 imperials; adding to it some silver plate which was not finished sooner, and which he was assured had delayed the granting of his passport. That was afterwards issued; and the queen gave him a vessel, on-board which he embarked, August 12, for Lubeck.

But the vessel was scarce sailed when a violent storm arose, which obliged her after three days tossing to put in, August 17, on the coast of Pomerania, fourteen miles from Dantzic. Grotius set out in an open waggon for Lubeck, and arrived at Rostock, August 26, very ill, having travelled about sixty miles through wind and rain. He lodged with Balleman, and sent for Stochman the physician, who, from the symptoms, judged he could not live long. Ou the 28th he sent for Quistorpius, minister of that town, who gives the following account of his last moments: “You are desirous of hearing how that phoenix of literature, Hugo Grotius, behaved in his last moments; I am going to tell you.” He then proceeds to give an account of his voyage, and his sending for Stochman, a Scotch physician, after which he goes on as follows: “he sent for me about nine at night; I went, and found him almost at the point of death. I said, * There was nothing I desired more than to have seen him in health, that I might have had the pleasure of his conversation;‘ he said, ’ God hath ordered it otherwise. 7 I desired him t to prepare himself for a happier life, to acknowledge he was a sinner, arrd repent of his faults;‘ and happening to mention the publican, who acknowledged he was a sinner, and asked God’s mercy, he answered, * I am that publican.’ I went on, and told him that ‘ he must have recourse to Jesus Christ, without whom there is no salvation.’ He replied, * I place my hope in Jesus Christ.‘ I began to repeat aloud in German the prayer that begins ’ Holy Jesus;‘ he followed me in a very low voice with his hands clasped. When I had done, I asked him if he understood me he answered, < I understand you very well.’ I continued to repeat to him those passages of the word of God, which are commonly offered to the remembrance of dying persons; and, asking if he Understood me, he answered me, * I heard your voice, but did not understand what you said.'. These were his last Words; soon after he expired, just at midnight. His body was delivered to the physicians, who took out his bowels, and easily obtained leave to bury them in our principal church, dedicated to the Virgin Mary.”

Thus died this extraordinary person, August 28, at night, 1645. His corpse was carried to Delft, and deposited in the tomb of his ancestors. He wrote this modest epitaph for himself:

Grotius had a very agreeable person, a good complexion an aquiline nose, sparkling eyes, and a serene and smiling countenance. He was not tall, but well-formed and strong. Two medals were struck in honour of him. Among his works, besides those we have mentioned, are, 1. “Anthologia,” of which, however, a few specimens only remain. 2. “Via ad Pacem Ecclesiastic-am.” 3. “Historia Gothorum,” &c. 4. “Remarks on Justinian’s Laws.” 5. “Commentary on the Old and New Testament, with several pieces annexed.” 6. “Dissertatio Hist. & Politic, cle Dogmatis, Ritibus, & Gubernatione Ecclesiae,” &c. 7. “De Origine Gentium Americanarum,” c. with two answers to Dr. Laets in its defence. 8. “An Introduction to the Laws of Holland.” 9. “Notes to Tacitus,” published in Lipsius’s edition) 1640. 10. “Notes upon Lucian,” published in 1614. In 1652, there came out a small collection, in 12mo, with this title, “Hugonis Grotii quredam inedita> aliaque ex Belgice editis Latine versa argumenti theolog, jurid. politic.” and in 1686, an edition of his “Epistles,” folio, containing 2500 letters in chronological order, from 1599 to 1645.

His theological works, printed in 3 vols. fol. but usually bound in four, include his Commentaries on the Bible, concerning which there have been various opinions. Some esteem him one of the best general commentators, and plead for him that he must not be thought to oppose a doctrine because he rejects some of the texts which have been quoted in support of it. This is plausible; but others conceive that doubts as to his orthodoxy are well founded, and it is evident that none of his biographers have been able to set up a good defence of him in this respect. Calmet has justly remarked the ambiguity of his notions respecting the divinity of Christ, and the doctrine of original sin the indecency of his prefaces and explanation of the Canticles and objects to him that he weakens or reduces almost to nothing the prophecies relating to Jesus Christ. Nor was he less offensive to protestants for his notions conr cerning the pope’s not being antichrist, and concerning St. Paul’s expectation of living until the general judgment. With regard to the prophecies, he is said to have been the first interpreter of Scripture (though some are inclined to doubt this priority) who endeavoured to prove that the greater part of the prophecies of the Old Testament had a double sense, and have received a double accomplishment. He maintains that the predictions even of the evangelical prophet Isaiah, related in their primary and literal sense to the times and circumstances of the Jewish people, but that they respected the Messiah in a secondary and allegorical sense. It is unnecessary to inform such of our readers as are acquainted with the history of theological controversy, that these notions have met with able opponents both in the churches of Rome and England, and it is perhaps as unnecessary to add that they sufficiently account for the general suspicion entertained of Grotius’s religious principles, as well as for the various systems to which his friends or enemies wished, or suspected him to be at one time or other attached.

The late bishop Kurd’s mode of accounting for the apparent inconsistencies in the religious principles of Grotius, is the most favourable we have yet seen, and not improbable. “Grotius,” says that learned prelate, " is justly esteemed among the ablest and most learned men of an age that abounded in ability and learning. Besides his other shining talents, his acquaintance with history was extensive; and his knowledge of Scripture profound. And yet with two such requisites for unlocking the true sense of the prophetic writings, this excellent man undertook to prove in form, that the pope was not antichrist. The account of this mischance is as extraordinary as the mischance itself. The moral qualities of Grotius were still more admirable than his intellectual; and its these qualities we shall find the true spring of his unhappy and misapplied pains on the subject before us. He was in his own nature just, candid, benevolent, to a supreme degree; and the experience of an active turbulent life had but fortified him the more in a love of those pacific virtues. He was, on principle, a sincere and zealous Christian; and consequently impressed With a clue sense of that exalted charity which is the characteristic of that religion but he had seen and felt much of the mischiefs which proceed from theological quarrels and thus every thing concurred to make him a friend to peace, and above all, to peace among Christians. An union of the catholic and protestant churches seemed necessary to this end; and the apparent candour, whether real or affected, of some learned persons, whom he had long known and valued in the church of Rome, drew him into the belief that such a project was not impracticable. Henceforth it became the ruling object of his life; and permitting himself too easily to conclude that the protestant doctrine of antichrist was the sole or principal obstruction to the union desired, he bent all the efforts of his wit and learning to discredit and overthrow that doctrine. Thus was this virtuous man betrayed by the wisdom and equity of his own character; and I know not if the observation of the moral poet can be so justly applied to any other:

“The issue of his general scheme was what might easily be foreseen; and of his arguments I shall only say thus much, that the Romish writers themselves, for whose use they might seem to be invented, though they continue to object his name to us, are too wise to venture the stress of their cause upon them.”

“But another sort of answer is due to some of those who have criticised Grotius, and that answer might be given in the words of Grotius himself. He was not of such a stupid and servile cast of mind, as to quote the opinions of poets or orators, of historians and philosophers, as those of judges, from whose decision there was no appeal. He quotes them, as he tells us himself, as witnesses whose conspiring testimony, mightily strengthened and confirmed by their discordance on almost every other subject, is a conclusive proof of the unanimity of the whole human race on the great rules of duty and the fundamental principles of morals. On such matters poets and orators are the most unexceptionable of all witnesses for they address themselves to the general feelings and sympathies of mankind they are neither warped by system, nor perverted by sophistry; they can attain none of their objects; they can neither please nor persuade if they dwell on moral sentiments not in unison with those of their readers. No system of moral philosophy can surely disregard the general feelings of human nature and the according judgment of all ages and nations. But where are these feelings and that judgment recorded and preserved In those very writings which Grotius is gravely blamed for having quoted. The usages and laws of nations, the events of history, the opinions of philosophers, the sentiments of orators and poets, as well as the observation of common life, are, in truth, the materials out of which the science of morality is formed; and those who neglect them are justly chargeable with a vain attempt to philosophise without regard to fact and experience, the sole foundation of all true philosophy. “If this were merely an objection of taste, I should be willing to allow that Grotius has indeed poured forth his learning with a profusion that sometimes rather encumbers than adorns his work, and which is not always necessary to the illustration of his subject. Yet, even in making that concession, I should rather yield to the taste of others than speak from my own feelings. I own that such richness and splendour of literature have a powerful charm for me. They fill my mind with an endless variety of delightful recollections and associations. They relieve the understanding in its progress through a vast science, by calling up the memory of great men and of interesting events. By this means we see the truths of morality clothed with all the eloquence (not that could be produced by the powers of one man, but) that could be bestowed on them by the collective genius of the world. Even virtue and wisdom themselves acquire new majesty in my eyes, when I thus see all the great masters of thinking and writing called together, as it were, from all times and countries, to do them homage, and to appear in their train.

“But this is no place for discussions of taste, and I am very ready to own that mine may be corrupted. The work of Grotius is liable to a more serious objection, though I do not recollect that it has ever been made. His method is inconvenient and unscientific. He has inverted the natural order. That natural order undoubtedly dictates that we should first search for the original principles of the science in human nature then apply them to the regulation of the conduct of individuals and lastly, employ them for the decision of those difficult and complicated questions that arise with respect to the intercourse of nations. But Grolius has chosen the reverse of this method, tie begins with the consideration of the states of peace and war, and he examines original principles only occasionally and incidentally as they grow out of the questions which he is called upon to decide. It is a uecessary consequence of this disorderly method, which exhibits the elements of the science in the form of scattered digressions, that he seldom employs sufficient discussion on these fundamental truths, and never in the place where such a discussion would be most instructive to the reader. This defect in the plan of Grotius was perceived, and supplied by Puffendorff, who restored natural law to that superiority which belonged to it, and with great propriety treated the law of nations as only one main branch of the parent stock,” &c.

Of the surviving sons of Grotius, Cornelius and Dier cleric followed the profession of arms, and Peter was bred to the law, and became pensionary of Amsterdam and de* puty of the states-general. His brother William was a lawyer and a man of learning, and was the correspondent and confident of Grotius during his whole life, and it was to him he addressed the last letter in his collection, dated a few months before his death.

, an Italian poet, commonly called, from his misfortune, Cieco D‘Adria, was born Sept. 7, 1541, in the ancient town of Adria, which gives name to the gulph called the Adriatic. His parents were of a noble but decayed family. He lost his sight a few days after his birth, and never recovered it. Yet this did not check his proficiency in learning; able masters were provided, under whom he made astonishing progress, although we may conceive with considerable difficulty to his instructors. He lays, indeed, in one of his orations, that when a new master visited him, he used to say, *’ you must teach me how I am to teach you." His talents and acquirements, however, procured him very early fame, and such was his natural eloquence, that at the age of fourteen he was chosen on two very solemn occasions, the one when the queen of Poland visited Venice, and the other on the election of the Doge Lorenzo Priuli, to give a public harangue in that city, where Casa and other orators had been so much celebrated, and acquitted himself with the greatest credit. His youth and his blindness might probably procure him favour, but according to his biographer, he was received with equal applause at other times and places, and under other circumstances. Having an early turn for poetry as well as oratory, he attempted to write for the stage, and although inferior to the other dramatic poets who then flourished at Ferrara, Rome, and Florence, he became a favourite with the people of Adria. In other cities to which he was invited as a public speaker, at Ferrara, Bologna, and Rovigo, he was received with every mark of distinction. Several princesses, as Laura of Este, and Laura Gonzaga, who patronized genius, frequently visited him, and made him rich presents. Yet he remained poor, fortune being in general more liberal of honours than of riches. Although blind, he appears to have felt the tender passion, which he has often introduced in his lyric poetry and in his dramas; in the latter, indeed, he treats of love matters in a style which gives but an unfavourable idea of his delicacy. In 1585 he acquired much reputation at Vincenza by playing the part of CEdipus when represented by the academicians in the famous Olympic theatre of Palladio. He did not, however, appear on this occasion, until the last act, when CEdipus appears blind. He was at this time in full health, but was suddenly attacked with a disorder at Venice, which proved fatal Dec. 13 of that year. His remains were carried to his own country, and interred with great funeral honours. His works consist of orations, published at Venice 1598, 4to, and tragedies, two pastorals, and other pieces of poetry, printed separately. They are distinguished rather by genius than judgment, and abound in that play of words, and those extravagant metaphors which were so much the taste of the subsequent age, and which appear most out of place in his pastorals.

, a learned divine among the disseners, was descended from the Groves of Wiltshire, and the Jlowes of Devonshire. His grandfather Grove was ejected from a living in Devonshire for nonconformity in 1662; his father suffered much in the same cause for lay-nonconformity under Charles and James II. The eminent piety of Mr. Rowe, his grandfather by the mother’s side, may be known by the account of his life by Mr. Theophilus Gale. His father, in particular, filled a life of eighty years honourably and usefully, and died universally esteemed and lamented. From such parents our author was born at Taunton, in Somersetshire, January 4, 1683, and at fourteen years of age, being possessed with a sufficient stock of classical literature, he went through a course of jacademical learning under the rev. Mr. Warren, of Taunton, who was for many years at the head of a flourishing academy. Having finished here his course of philosophy and divinity, he removed to London, and studied some time under the rev. Mr. Rowe, to whom he was nearly related. At this time he contracted a friendship with several person^ of merit, and particularly with Dr. Watts, which continued till his death, though they differed in their judgment upon several points.

After two years spent in London, he returned into the country; and being now twenty-two years of age, began to preach with great reputation. The spirit of devotion which prevailed in his sermons early procured the friendship of Mrs. Singer, afterwards Mrs. Howe, which she expressed in an “Ode on Death, 7 ' addressed to Mr. Grove, Soon after his beginning to preach, he married; and at the age of twenty -three, upon the death of his tutor, Mr, Warren, was chosen to succeed him in the academy at Taunton. The province first assigned him, was ethics and pneumatology; and he composed systems in each. His concern in the academy obliging him to a residence in Taunton, he preached for eighteen years to two small congregations in the neighbourhood. In 1708 he commenced author, by a piece entitled” The Regulation of Diversions,“drawn up for the use of his pupils; and about the same time Dr. Samuel Clarke published his” Discourse on the Being and Attributes of God;“and the proof in, that work from the necessary ideas of space and duration not convincing our author, he wrote to the doctor for farther information. This occasioned their exchanging several letters; when, not being able to convince each other, the debate was dropped with expressions of great mutual esteem. The pext offering he made to the public was several papers in the eighth volume of the” Spectator,“viz. JNo. 588, 601, 626, 635, In 171S he published” An Essay towards a Demonstration of the Soul’s Immortality.“About 1719, when disputes upon the Trinity divided the presbyterians, and when the animosities were carried so high as to produce excommunications, &c. Mr. Grove’s moderation on this occasion drew on him the censures and displeasure of some of his own persuasion: what influenced his mind, however, he has explained in his” Essay on the Terms of Christian Communion."

In 1725 he lost his partner in the academy, the rev. Mr. James; and was now obliged to take the students in, divinity under his direction. In the execution of this, task he confined himself to no system in divinity, but directed his pupils to the best writers on natural and revealed religion, and an impartial consideration of the chief controversies. He likewise succeeded Mr. James in his pastoral charge at Fullwood^ near Taunton, in which he continued till his death. In 1730 he published “The Evidence of our Saviour’s Resurrection considered,” and the same year, “Some Thoughts concerning the Proof of a future State from Reason,” in answer to the rev. Mr. Hallet, junior, which drew him into a dispute on the point with that divine. In this controversy he was thought to disparage the necessity of revelation in regard to that proof. In 1732 he printed “A Discourse concerning the Nature and Design of the Lord’s Supper,” where he set that institution in the same light with bishop Hoadly. In 173-1he published, without his name, “Wisdom the first Spring of Action in the Deity,” which was animadverted on, as to some particulars, by Mr. Balguy, who, however, allowed the discourse in general to abound in solid remarks and sound reasonings. In 1736 he published “A Discourse on saving Faith.” The same year he met with a heavy affliction, in the death of his wife; and a little more than a year after this, he died himself; for, having preached on February 19, 1737-8, and with such an uncommon flow of spirits as he said he could hardly govern, he was violentlyseized at night with a fever, which carried him off upon the 27th. His friends erected a handsome monument over his grave, on which is a Latin inscription composed by the late Dr. Ward, rhetoric-professor at Gresham-college, who has also obliged the world with an English version of it. Besides the works already mentioned, he published many sermons upon several occasions, and also a volume of (i Miscellanies in prose and verse.“After his death came out by subscription his” Posthumous Works,“1740, in 4 vols. 8vo. Gruchius, or Grouciii (Nicholas), an eminent antiquary in the sixteenth century, descended from a noble family of Rouen, was the first who explained Aristotle in Greek. He taught with reputation at Paris, Bourdeaux, and Coimbra, and, on his return to France, went to Rochelle, where a college was intended to be established, and where he died in January 1572, leaving many works. The most known are, a translation of F. L. de Castagneda’s” History of the Indies,“Paris, 1554, 4to; a treatise” De Comitiis Romanorum," 1555, fol.; and some pieces against Sigonius, fol. which Sigonius did not answer till he heard of the author’s death.

, an eminent divine and critical scholar, was born at Cobourg in 1723, where his father was aulic counsellor to the duke of Saxe-Cobourg. He was educated in his infancy at home under private tutors. In his thirteenth year he was sent to Weisenborn, and placed under the care of John Faccius, an eminent classical scholar, and after a year’s residence here went to the university of Casimir, where he enjoyed the instructions and lectures of Berger, Albrecht, and other eminent professors. In 1742 he removed to Jena, where he pursued his studies with great diligence and success, and took his degrees in philosophy, In 1764 he was invited to be professor of theology at Halle, and died there in 1778. His talents are represented to have been very various, and his diligence indefatigable. He published a new edition of “Cselius Sedulius,” with various commentaries, “An Introduction to Roman Antiquities,” “Miscellanea Sacra,” “Various critical Remarks on the Classics,” new editions of Eutropius, printed at Cobourg in 1752, and reprinted with additions, 1768, and of Velleius Paterculus, Cobourg, 1762, &c.

, a celebrated philologer, was born December 3, 1560, at Antwerp. He was the son of John Walter Gruter, burgomaster of Antwerp; who, having, among others, signed the famous petition tq the duchess of Parma, the governess of the Netherlands, which gave rise to the word Gueux (Beggars), was banished his country. He crossed the sea to Norwich in England, taking his wife (who was an English woman) and family along with him. Young Gruter was then but an infant; he had the peculiar felicity, like Cicero, of imbibing the elements of learning from his mother, Catharine Tishem; who, besides French, Italian, and English, was complete mistress of Latin, and so well skilled in Greek that she could read Galen in the original. The family found an hospitable asylum in England, where they resided several years, and at a proper age sent their son to complete his education at Cambridge. His parents, after some time, repassing the sea to Middleburg, the son followed them to Holland and, going to Leyden, studied the civil law, and took his doctor’s degree there in that faculty but, applying himself at the same time to polite literature, he became an early author, as appears by some Latin verses which he published, under the title of “Ocelli,” at twenty years of age.

After taking his degree, he went to Antwerp, to his fa ther, who had returned thither as soon as the States had possessed themselves of it; but, when the city was threatened with a siege by the duke of Parma in 15S4-, was sent to France, where he resided some years, and then visited other countries. The particular route and circumstances of his travels afterwards are not known; but it appears that he read public lectures upon the Classics at Rostock, particularly on Suetonius. He was in Prussia, when Christian, duke of Saxony, offered him the chair of hi story -professor in the university of Wittemburg; which place he enjoyed but a few months: for, upon the death of that prince, his successors desiring the professors to subscribe the act of concord on pain of forfeiting their places, Gruterus chose rather to resign than subscribe a confession of faith which he could not reconcile to his conscience. He was treated with particular seventy on this occasion for, while two others who were deprived on the same account, had half a year’s salary allowed them by way of gratification, according to the custom of those countries, with regard to persons honourably discharged; yet in the case of Gruterus, they did not defray even the expences of his journey. Where he went immediately after this does not appear; but we are told, that, being at Padua at the time of Riccoboni’s death, that professor’s place was offered to him, together with liberty of conscience: the salary too was very considerable, yet he refused all these advantages. He was apprehensive that so profitable and honourable an employment would expose him to the attacks of envy, and he would not submit to the bare exercise of his religion in private. He was therefore much better pleased with an invitation to Heidelberg, where he filled the professor’s chair with great reputation for many years; and, in 1602, had the direction of that famous library, which was afterwards carried to Rome.

This employ suited his genius, and soon after he published the most useful of his works, his large collection of inscriptions, whjch is dedicated to the emperor Rodolphus II. who bestowed great encomiums upon it, and gave Gruterus the choice of his own reward. He answered that he would leave it to the emperor’s pleasure, only begged it might not be pecuniary. In the same temper, upon hearing there was a design to give him a coat of arms, in order to raise the dignity of his extraction, he declared, that, so far from deserving a new coat of arms, he was too much burthened with those which had devolved to him from his ancestors. The emperor was then desired to grant him a general licence for all the books of his own publishing, which he not only consented to, but also granted him a privilege of licensing others. His majesty also intended to create him a count of the sacred palace; and the patent was actually drawn, and brought to be ratified by his sign manual; but this monarch happening to die in the interim, it was left without the signature, which it never afterwards received. Yet Gruterus bestowed the same encomiums on the good emperor as if it had been completed; and his privilege of licensing books continued to be of great advantage to him, being one of the most voluminous writers of his age. This task he was the better enabled to execute by the help of his library, which was large and curious, having cost him no less than twelve thousand crowns in gold; but the whole was destroyed or plundered, together with the city of Heidelberg, in 1622. Oswald Smendius, his son-in-law, endeavoured in vain to save it, by writing to one of the great officers of the duke of Bavaria’s troops; but the licentiousness of the soldiers could not be restrained. Afterwards he went to Heidelberg, and having witnessed the havock that had been made at his father’s house, he tried to save at least what Gruterus’s amanuensis had lodged in the elector’s libra^, and brought the Pope’s commission to give him leave to remove them. He received for answer, that as to the Mss. the pope had ordered them all to be sought for carefully, and carried to Home; but as to the printed books, leave would be given to restore them to Gruterus, provided it was approved by Tilly under his hand: but this pretended favour prove4 of no effect, as no access could be had to Tilly,

Gruterus had left Heidelberg before it was taken, and retired to his son-in-law’s at Bretten, whence he went to Tubingen, where he remained some time. He made several removes afterwards, and received invitations to read lectures at various places, and particularly one from Denmark, to enter into the service of the constable D'Esdiguieres. The curators also of the university of Frauecker offered him the professorship of history in 1624; but, when the affairs of the palatinate were a little settled, he returned to Bretten; where, however, he found himself very mucli teazed by some young Jesuits who were fond of disputing. Gruterus, who never loved controversy, especially upon religious subjects, could think of no other way of getting rid of their importunities than by living at a distance from them. He retired therefore to a country-house, which he purchased near Heidelberg, where he used to make visits occasionally. He came from one of these, September 1627, and going to Bernhelden, a country seat belonging to his son-in-law Smendius, about a league’s distance from Heidelberg, he fell sick Sept. 20, and expired. His corpse was carried to Heidelberg, and interred in St. Peter’s church.

He wrote notes upon the Roman historians and several of the poets; and published all the works of Cicero, with notes, in '2 vols. folio. That printed in 1618 is a good edition but the London edition of 1681 is incorrect. His “Florilegium magnum, seu Polyanthea,” is a voluminous common-place book, formerly valued as a treasure. His 4< Chronicon Chronicorum“is a proof of his industry in history; but the chief of all his performances is his” Collection of Ancient Inscriptions,“a work not only estimable for the historical knowledge contained in it, but because it throws the clearest light upon a multitude of obscure passages in classic authors. This was published in 1601, and afterwards in a more perfect and splendid form by Grsevius at Amsterdam in 1707, 4 vols. folio. He published also a collection of scarce critical treatises, under the title of” Thesaurus Criticus,“6 vols. 8vo. To this Daniel Pareus added a seventh.” Delicise Poetarum Gallorum, Italorum, Belgarum, 1608 14, 9 vols. 8vo. In this last publication he assumed the name of Ranutius Gerus, the anagram of his name. An ample list of his works may be seen in Niceron. His private character appears to have been excellent. He was very liberal both in giving and lending money, on which he set no other value than as affording him the means of doing good. As a student, few men have been more indefatigable, employing not only the whole of the day, but a considerable part of the night on his literary researches, in which he always preferred a standing posture.

, a very learned German, was thg son of a peasant of Suabia, and born at Veringen in the county of Hohenzollern in 1493. He pursued his studies in Pfortsheim at the same time with Melancthon, which gave rise to a lasting friendship between them. He then went for farther instruction to Vienna, and there taking the degree of master in philosophy* was appointed Greek professor. Having embraced the protestant religion, he was exposed to many dangers; and particularly in Baden, of which he was some years rector of the school. He was thrown into prison at the instigation of the friars; but at the solicitation of the nobles of Hungary, was set at liberty, and retired to Wittemberg, where he had a conference with Luther and Melancthon. Being returned to his native country, he was invited to Heidelberg, to be Greek professor in that city, in 1523. He exercised this employment till 1529, when he was invited to Basil to teach publicly in that city. In 1531, he took a journey into England, and carried with him a recommendatory letter from Erasmus to William Montjoy, dated Friburg, March 18, 1531. After desiring Montjoy to assist Grynaeus as much as he could, in shewing him libraries, and introducing him to learned men, Erasmus recommends him as a man perfectly skilled in Latin and Greek, a good philosopher and mathematician, and a man of humble manners, whose object was to visit the libraries, &c. Erasmus recommended him also to sir Thomas More, from whom he received the highest civilities, In 1534, he was employed, in conjunction with other persons, in reforming the church and school of Tubingen. He returned to Basil in 1536, and in 1540 was appointed to go to the conferences of Worms, with Melancthon, Capito, Bucer, Calvin, &c. He died, of the plague at Basil in 1541.

He did great service to the commonwealth of learning, by publishing valuable editions of several ancient authors. Among these was the “Almagest” of Ptolemy in Greek, which he published at Basil in 1538, and added a preface concerning the use of that author’s doctrine. He also published a Greek “Euclid,” with a preface, in 1533, and Plato’s works with some commentaries of Proclus, in 1534. His edition of Plato was addressed to John More, the chancellor’s son, as a testimony of gratitude for favours received from the father; and the following passage in the dedication shews sir Thomas, as well as Grynseus, in a very amiable light. “It is, you know, three years, since arriving in England, and being recommended most auspiciously hy my friend Erasmus to your house, the sacred seat of the muses, I was there received with great kindness, was entertained with greater, was dismissed with the greatest of all. For that great and excellent man your father, so eminent for his high rank and noble talents, not only allowed me, a private and obscure person (such was his love of literature), the honour of conversing with him in the midst of many public and private affairs, gave me a place at his table, though he was the greatest man in England, took me with him when he went to court or returned from it, and had me ever by his side, but also with the utmost gentleness and candour inquired, in what particulars my religious principles were different from his; and though he found them to vary greatly, yet he was so kind as to assist me in every respect, and even to defray all my expences. He likewise sent me to Oxford with one Mr. Harris, a learned young gentleman, and recommended me so powerfully to the university, that at the sight of his letters all the libraries were open to me, and I was admitted to the most intimate familiarity with the students.”

He had a son, Samuel Grynaeus, born at Basil in 1539, who was made professor of eloquence there at the age of twenty-five. He had also a nephew, Thomas, who was born in 1512. He pursued his studies under the auspices of his uncle, and taught the Latin and Greek languages at Berne. He also read public lectures at Basil, and was a great supporter of the reformed religion. He left four sons, all of whom were eminent for their learning. One of them is the subject of our next article.

, was born at Bern in 1540, was educated at Basil, and m 1551 was admitted into the university. In 1559 he was ordained deacon, and began to preach the doctrines of the reformers. In 1563 he went to Tubingen, and the year following was created doctor in divinity, and soon after succeeded his father, as pastor of Rotelen, where, besides his more public services, he lectured twice a week to the deacons. About this time the “Form of Concord' 7 between the Lutheran and Zuingtiaft parties, respecting the corporal presence of Christ’s body in the Lord’s Supper^ was a matter of deep controversy. Grynasus, who had hitherto been a Lutheran, now studied the controversy more closely, the result of which was his declaring his opinion in favour of Zuinglius, and this lost him many friends of. the contrary party. In 1575 he was invited to Basil, to lecture upon the Old Testament, in the course of which employment he was happily instrumental in healing the differences between the Lutheran and Zuinglian churches; and his instructions were so much approved, that many noblemen and gentlemen came from other countries, and boarded with him for the sake of tuition and conversation. After the death of Lewis, the elector palatine, prince Casimir invited him to Heidelberg, where he read divinity and history almost two years^ but was then recalled to Basil to succeed Sulcer in his pastoral office and professorship; both which offices he discharged with faithfulness and success for the remainder of his life, In the latter part of it he became very infirm and blind, and outlived all his children, except one daughter. These calamities he bore with pious resignation, and expired Aug. 30, 1617. He was a man of extensive learning, and highly respected by his conteai<­poraries. Among his writings are, 1.” A Summary of the Old Testament.“2. An Outline of Divinity.” 3* “The Character of Christians.” 4. Expositions on the Psalms, and other parts of Scripture; and various theological theses, and disputations. 5. “A Commentary upon Irenaeus.” 6. “An Ecclesiastical History.” 7. “Chronology of the Gospel History.” His “Letters” to his friends are highly praised by Melchior Adam.

, was born at Glogaw in 1616, and died in 1664. He was called the Corneille of Germany, and acquired considerable reputation by his. compositions for the theatre, and is among the very first writers of tragedy in the catalogue of German writers. He also wrote, in a fine vein of irony, a “Critique on the ancient Comedies of the Germans.”

, son of the preceding, and one of the greatest geniuses that Germany has produced, was born September 29, 1649, at Fraustadt. Having acquired great skill in the languages and belles lettres, he was appointed professor of rhetoric at Breslau, afterwards principal of Magdalen college in that city, and, at length, librarian. Gryphins was a good orator and historian, a man of extensive learning, and an excellent German poet, which language he considerably improved. He was also a contributor to the Leipsic Journal. He died March 6, 1706, having just before his death heard a beautiful poem of his own writing, which had been set to music, performed in his chamber. The piece is said to have been admirably expressive of the consolations derived from our Saviour’s death to a dying man. His works arc, “A History of. the Orders of Knighthood,” in German, 1709, 8vo; “Poems,” in German among them, “Pastorals,” 8vo; “The German Language formed by degrees, or, a treatise on the origin and progress of it,” 8vo, in German, and a valuable posthumous work, entitled “Apparatus, s?ive Dissertatio Isagogica de Scriptoribus Historiam Seculi XVII illustrantibus,” Leipsic, 1710, 8vo.

, a celebrated printer of Lyons, in France, was a German, and born at Suabia, near Augsburg, in 1493. He performed the duties of his profession with so much honour as to receive the approbation of the most learned men. Conrad Gesner has even “dedicated one of his books, namely, the twelfth of his pandects, to him and takes occasion to bestow the following praises on him” You, most humane Gryphius, who are far from meriting the last place among the excellent printers of this age, came first into my mind: and especially on this account, because you have not only gained greater fame than any foreigner in France, by a vast number of most excellent works, printed with the greatest beauty and accuracy, but because, though a German, you seem to be a countryman, by youV coming to reside amon<r us.“Baillet says, that Julius Scaliger dedicated also to him his work” De Causis Linguae Latinae:“but this seems a mistake. Scaliger wrote a kind letter to Gryphius, which is printed at the head of the work: but the dedication is to Silvius Scaliger, his eldest son, to whom he also addressed his” Ars Poetica." Gryphius is allowed to have restored the art of printing at Lyons, which was before exceedingly corrupted; and the great number of books printed by him are valued by the connoisseurs. He printed many books in HebreV, Greek, and Latin, with new and very beautiful types; and his editions are no less accurate than beautiful. He was himself a very learned man, and perfectly versed in the languages of such books as he undertook to print. Vulteius, of Reims, an epigrammatist, has observed, that Robert Stephens was a very good corrector, Colinaeus a very good printer, but that Gryphius was both an able printer and corrector.

He died in 1556, in his sixty-third year, and his trade was carried on honourably in the same city by his son, Anthony Gryphius. One of the most beautiful books of Sebastian Gryphius is a “Latin Bible,” printed 1550, with the largest types that had then been seen, in 2 vols. fol.

, a learned French abbé, prior of St. George de Vigou, a member of the royal society of London (1742) and of the French academy of sciences, was born in Languedoc, in 1712, and was the son of John de Gua, baron of Halves, whose property was swallowed up in the unfortunate Missisippi Scheme. He was educated for the church, but appears to have had less ambition for promotion in that, than to render himself distinguished for scientific knowledge. When admitted into the academy of sciences in 1741, he gave a specimen of his skill in mathematics by publishing “Usages de l'analyse de Descartes,” and was the author of other papers on mathematical subjects in the Memoirs of the Academy, in one of which he endeavours to vindicate Descartes against our Wallis, who, in the abbe’s opinion, wrote his history of algebra for no other purpose than to bestow upon his coun ­tryman Hariot, the discoveries that belong to Viete and Descartes. (See Hariot.) The abbe* was, however, chiefly distinguished in France for having first given the plan of the Encyclopedic, although he wrote very little in it. In 1764 he presented a plan for exploring the mines of Languedoc, and was the author of some other projects whick bad little success. His necessities sometimes drove him to the business of translating for the booksellers. Amonothese publications we find bishop Berkeley’s “Hylas and Philonous,” “Locke’s Essay,” Anson’s Voyage, and Decker on trade. He died at Paris, June 2, 1735, leaving the character of a man of considerable learning and industry, but not very happy in his temper, and often pursuing trifling difficulties, which he made a great merit in surmounting, such as complicated anagrams; and on one occasion, in consequence of a sort of challenge, he perplexed himself in writing a very long poem, in which words only of one syllable were admitted.

, an eminent Orientalist of Italy, was born about 1596, at Magliano. After going through his studies, he entered among the regular minor clerks, and made his profession at Rome in 1612. His genius prompted him to the study of languages, to which he devoted himself entirely; so that he acquired the Greek, Hebrew, Chaldean, Syriac, Persian, and Arabic languages, but excelled chiefly in the Arabic. He spent the greatest part of his life in translating books from that language, and in writing books in it, to facilitate the learning of it to others. He taught it many years in the college della Sapienza at Rome; and was indeed so perfect a master of it, that he spoke an oration in it before Christina, queen of Sweden, in 1656. The eastern prelates presented a petition to Urban VIII. to have the Bible translated into Arabic; and, the congregation “de propaganda fide” complying with their desires, Guadagnolo was immediately selected as the person best qualified to undertake this great work. He began it in 1622, and finished it in 1649; having, however, assistants under him, and sometimes only acting the part of a corrector. During the time that he was employed in it, he gave an account twice a week of ?vhat progress he had made to a congregation assembled for that purpose. It was published ai Home, 1671, in 3 vols. folio, with this title, “Biblia Sacra Arabica Sacra? Congregationis de propaganda fide jussu edita ad usuia ecclesiarum orientalium. Additis c regione Bibliis Vulgatis Latinis.” In 1631 he published a Latin work entitled “Apologia pro Christiana Religione, qua responde* tur ad objectiones Ahmed filii Zin Alabedin Persoe Asphaensis contetitas in Ifbro inscripto, Politor Speculi,” 4to. The history of this work was as follows: A Spaniard had published a religious book entitled “The true Lookingglass;” which falling into the hands of a learned Persian, he wrote an answer to it in his native tongue, entitled ‘.’ The Polisher of the Looking-glass“and added these words at the end of it” Let the pope answer it.“This book being brought to Rome in 1625, Urban VIII. ordered Guadagnolo to refute it; which he did so effectually, that the Persian, to whom it was sent, renounced the Mahometan faith, and became as zealous a defender of Christianity as he had before been an opposer of it. Guadagnolo published his apology in Arabic, in 1637, 4to. He wrote another work in Arabic and Latin, entitled” Considerations against the Mahometan Religion;“in which he shews, that the Koran is a mere rhapsody of falsehood and imposture. He published also at Rome, in 1642,” Breves Institutiones Linguae Arabicae," folio; a very methodical grammar. He had also compiled a dictionary in that language, but the publication of it was prevented by his death, which happened in 1656. The ms. is preserved in the convent of San Lorenzo in Lucina.

, a native of Verona, where he was born in 1538, was naturalized in Poland, and made himself famous both by his sword and pen. He had considerable employments in the Polish armies; and having displayed his valour in the wars of Livonia and Moldavia, as well as those of Muscovy, was not only honoured with the indiginate, by which he ranked as a nobleman, in the reign of Sigismund Augustus, but also made governor of the fortress of Witehsk, where he commanded fourteen years. He at last devoted himself to literature, and drew up a history of Poland, under the title “Rerum Polonicarum Tomi Tres,” Francfort, 1584, 8vo. He died at Cracow in 1614. He wrote also “Sarmatiae European Descriptio,” Spires, 1581.

, an Italian historian, was born 1606, of a noble family at Vincenza. He was historiographer to the emperor, and distinguished himself in the seventeenth century by his historical works, written, in a very pleasing style, in Italian; the principal are, “History of the Wars of Ferdinand II. and Ferdinand III.” from 1630 to 1640, fol. “History of Leopold,” from 1656 to 1670, 3 vols. fol.; History of Troubles in France,“from 1648 to 1654. The authors of the” Journal des Savans,“March 16, 1665, said they had found as many errors as words in this work. But Gualdo, not discouraged by that censure, continued his History to the peace of the Pyrenees, and reprinted it with that addition at Cologn, 1670. His” History of cardinal Mazarine’s Administration“is much esteemed, and has been translated into French, 1671, 3 vols. 12mo;” The Life and Qualities“of the same cardinal, a valuable work, which appeared in French, 1662, 4to” An account of the Peace of the Pyrenees" the most ample edition is, Cologn, 1667, 12mo. This work is likewise much esteemed, and has been translated into Latin, and inserted in the fourth volume of the Public Law of the Empire, published at Francfort, 1710. It has been also translated into French. Gualdo died at Vincenza in 1678.

, an eminent Swiss divine, and one of the first reformers, was born at Zurich in 1529. In his youth he attained an accurate knowledge of Greek and Latin, and acquired much fame as an orator and Latin poet. He married the daughter of Zuinglius, and being admitted into orders, preached at Zurich from 1542 to 1575, when he was chosen to succeed Bullinger, as first minister of the protestant church there. His writings also, which consisted of homilies, or sermons on the prophets, evangelists, and apostles, procured him great fame both at home and abroad, and were long regarded as standard books among the protestant churches. He died Nov. 25, 1586. In the early part of queen Elizabeth’s reign we find him corresponding with the English divines who had been exiles in the preceding reign, and brought over an attachment to the simple forms of the Genevan church, which Elizabeth wished to discourage. His works, as enumerated by Verheiden, consist of Latin poems, commentaries on various books of the Scripture, works on grammar and history, and some translations. His son, of the same names, spent some years in Merton college, Oxford, where he took his degree of M. A. in 1573, and returning to Zurich, became minister of St. Peter’s church there. Wood attributes several Latin poems to him, some of which we suspect were the production of his father: but this young man died in 1577, when oniy twenty five years of age.

, a learned Benedictine, of the congregation of St. Maur, born 1678, in the diocese of Rouen, near the forest of Lyons, taught Greek and Hebrew with great credit in his congregation, and died librarian of St. Germain-de-Pres, at Paris, December 29, 1729. He left a “Hebrew Grammar,” in Latin, 1724 and 1726, 2 vols. 4to, and a “Hebrew Lexicon,” in Latin, also printed after his death, in 1746, 2 vols. 4to. Guarin continued this work only to the letter Mm, inclusively; but it was finished by M. le Toiirnois. He had objected to M. Masclef’s method in his grammar, and was answered by M. de la Bletterie, in the edition of Masclef’s grammar, 1730, 2 vols. 12mo.

, surnamed Veronese, the first branch of a family celebrated in the republic of letters, and one of the revivers of literature, was born at Verona in 1370. After being taught Latin by John of Ravenna, he went to Constantinople, with the sole view of learning Greek in the school of Emanuel Chrysoloras, who had not then come to Italy. Pontico Virunio, in his life of Chrysoloras, says that Guarino was of an advanced age when he set out for Constantinople, and that he returned to Italy with a large collection of Greek manuscripts, the loss of which by shipwreck so affected him, that his hair turned white in one night; but Maffei and Apostolo Zeno have justly considered this as a fable. It appears, on the other hand, on comparing various circumstances, that Guarino was very young when he went into Greece, and was only twenty years of age when he returned. After this return he first kept school at Florence, and afterwards successively at Verona, Padua, Bologna, Venice, and Ferrara, in which last city he resided longest. Nicolas III. of Este had invited him thither in 1429 to superintend the education of his son Lionel. Six or seven years after, he was appointed professor of Greek and Latin in the university of Ferrara. This office he filled until the assembling of the grand council, to which the emperor John Paleologus came, accompanied with several Greeks, who found Guarino. sufficient employment, as he mentions in his letters, and on the council being removed to Florence, he accompanied them thither as interpreter between the Latins and Greeks. He returned again to Ferrara, where he held his professorship until his death in 1460. His principal works consist of Latin translations from Greek authors; particularly of many of Plutarch’s lives, part of Plutarch’s morals, and Strabo’s geography. Of this author he at first translated only ten books, by order of pope Nicholas V.; the other seven were translated by Gregory of Typhernuin, and in this state the work was first printed at Rome in 1470, folio. But, at the request of the Venetian senator Marcello, Guarino made a translation of these seven books, of which there are manuscript copies at Venice, Modena, &c. Maffei, in his “Verona Illustrata,” mentions also a translation of the whole seventeen in the hand-writing of Guarino, which was at one time in the library of the senator Soranzo at Venice. To his translation of Plutarch’s lives, he added those of Aristotle and Plato. He also compiled a Greek grammar, “Em. Chrysolorae erotemata lingusc Graecse, in compendium redacta, a Guarino Veronesi,” Ferrar. 1509, 8vo and a Latin grammar, “Grammatical institutiones,” without date or place, but printed at Verona, 1487, and reprinted in 1540, the model, says Maffei, from which all others have been taken. Annexed are some lesser treatises, “Carmina ditiferentialia,” “Liber de Diphtongis,” &c. Guarino also wrote commentaries or notes on various authors, both Greek and Latin, among the latter on Cicero’s orations and Persius’s satires, and was the author of various Latin orations delivered at Verona, Ferrara, and other places, and of some Latin poems, and a great number of letters which have not been printed. He was the first who recovered the poems of Catullus, a manuscript which was mouldering in a garret, and almost destroyed, and rendered the whole legible, with the exception of a very few verses. If it be thought that even all this is insufficient to justify the high reputation which Guarino enjoyed in his lifetime, and for ages afterwards, we must add that, independently of rendering these services to the cause of learning, which were of great importance at its revival, Guarino derived no small share of fame from the vast number of scholars whom he formed, with a like taste for classical literature, which they dispersed throughout all Europe. Guarino, likewise, was one of the most indefatigable student* of his time. Even in old age his memory was extraordinary, and his application incessant. He took little nourishment and little sleep, and rarely went abroad, yet he preserved his strength and faculties to the last. By his wife he had at least twelve children, two of whom followed his steps Jerome became secretary to Alphonso, king of Naples and Baptist, or Battista, rather better known, was professor of Greek and Latin at Ferrara, like his fathev, and like him educated some eminent scholars, among whom were Giraldi and Aldus Manutius. He left a collection of Latin poetry, “Baptists Guarini Veronensis poemata Latina,” Modena, 1496; a treatise on study, “De ordine docendi ac studendi,” without place or date; but there is a subsequent edition of Heidelberg, 1489. He wrote also other treatises, translations from the Greek, discourses, and letters, which latter remain in manuscript. It is to him we owe the first edition of the Commentaries of Servius on Virgil; and he assisted his father in recovering and making legible the manuscript of Catullus above mentioned.

, or more commonly Guarini (Battista), an eminent pastoral poet, descended in the fourth degree from Guarino Veronese, was born at Ferrara in 1537. We know but little of his early years and studies; but it is said that in the course of his education he spent some time at Pisa, and at Padua, where he was much esteemed by the rector of the university; but at an early age he went to Rome, and was still young when, on his return to Ferrara, he lectured for about a year with great reputation, on Aristotle’s Morals, in the same university in which the memory of his ancestors continued to be highly venerated. He was professor of belles lettres there in 1563, when he sent one of his sonnets to Annibal Caro, who in his answer complimented him as a young man of the greatest hopes. In his twenty-eighth year he was admitted into the academy of the Eterei of Padua, founded by the young prince Scipio of Gonzaga, afterwards cardinal. Tasso was at the same time admitted, and between him and Guarino a friendship commenced, which was afterwards disturbed by rivalship.

Guarino had the misfortune to be early involved in family law-suits, and had to apply for the heritage of his grandfather and grand- uncle in opposition to francis Guahuo, his father, who has left no other character than that of a keen sportsman, and who was the only one of the family that had no taste for literature. Having lost his first wife, he married again to injure his son’s interest; hut the duke Hercules II. interposed, and assigned to our poet a proportion of the family property, which was very considerable. Battista married himself about this time Taddea Bendedei, a lady of a noble family of Ferrara.

In his thirtieth year he entered into the service of the duke Alphonso II.; but there seems some difficulty in understanding the order and nature of the business on which he was employed, and the origin of the title of knight which is usually joined to his name, and which he had engraven on the seal with which he sealed his letters. It is probable, however, that the duke bestowed this title on him as a necessary appendage to the rank of ambassador. The first office of this kind which he filled, was in 1567, when he was sent to Venice, with the congratulations of the duke Alphonso to the new doge Pier Loredano, and the address which he spoke on this occasion being printed, gave the Italian literati a very favourable idea of his talents. The duke then sent him as resident ambassador to Emmanuel Philebert, duke of Savoy, and after continuing there some years, he was sent to Rome in 1571, to compliment pope Gregory XIII. as successor to Pius V. He arrived by post in the evening, passed the night in writing his address, and delivered it next morning in a full consistory. Two years afterwards, the duke sent him to Germany to the emperor Maximilian, whence he went to Poland, to congratulate Henry of Valois on his accession to the throne, in 1571.

On his return, he was appointed counsellor and secretary of state, but had scarcely been invested with these honours before he was obliged again to go to Poland, which Henry of France had left in order to succeed his brother Charles IX. on the throne of France. Guarino’s business in Poland now was to manage the affairs of his master, who aspired to the crown of Poland; but this employment was very difficult and even dangerous. In one of his letters to his wife, he says that he was obliged to travel all day more like a courier than an ambassador, and spend the night in writing his memorials, which proved too much for his health. Anxiety of mind and fatigue of body threw him into a fever, which made him despair of his life, and in that fear, he wrote a very affectionate letter to his wife, taking leave of her, and recommending his children to her care. It appears by his correspondence that it was not entirely on account of his ^aierits that he was employed in these distant and intricate missions, and that he had enemies at Ferrara, who made use of his reputation and the confidence the prince had in him, to get him removed. This, however, did not abate his zeal for the interests of his master, although the negociation was not successful, nor was he ever rewarded suitably to his exertions.

After his return to Ferrara, he spent his time in the service of his prince, in study, and in managing some lawsuits, from which it was his misfortune to be seldom free; but finding still more fatigue and uneasiness in attending the court, he made these law-suits a pretext for asking leave to resign, which was granted. Become now his own master, at the age of forty-five years, fifteen of which he had spent in a service by no means of any advantage to himself, he retired in 1582, with his family to la Guarina, a pleasant country-seat at Polesina de Itovigo, which duke Borso had presented to his grand-father, as a reward for his services as envoy in France. Here he determined to pass the five finest months of the year, and the rest at Padua. He had now eight children, three sons and five daughters; he was also involved in lawsuits and in debts; all his time and every effort appeared necessary to recover from such a situation, and he seems at one time to have despaired of finding any leisure to cultivate polite literature. After he had been, however, quietly settled at this country seat, he found that he could relax a little from his more serious and pressing occupations. The fame which accompanied the publication of Tasso’s “Aminta” recalled Guarino’s attention to a work which he had sketched many years before, and had occasionally touched and re-touched, but without completing it. Tasso and he, we have already observed, were friends in their youth, but when they met at the court of Ferrara, rivulship in, court gallantries and poetry had separated them. Some satirical sonnets passed between them, but here their animosity ended, and they henceforth had the liberality to do justice to each other’s talents. Tasso’s misfortunes were now begun, and Guarino, shocked at the incorrect manner in which the first editions of the “Jerusalem delivered” were printed without the knowledge of the author, took every pains to prepare it for a correct edition, and bestowed the same care on the other published works of that poqt. The only thing be would not yield toTasso was superiority, and though unable to rival him in his larger poems, he thought he could surpass him in pastoral, and his “Pastor Fido” was to be the criterion. Besides submitting the manuscript to some men of taste, he read it before the duke Ferdinand II. of Gonzaga, at Guastalla, and a large company, composed of poets, admirers of poetry, and ladies of the first rank and taste, who were unbounded in their applauses. It is said to have been first performed at Turin in 1585, where were celebrated the nuptials of Charles Emmanuel to the infanta Catherine, daughter of Philip II. of Spain. This, however, appears doubtful, although it is more clear that it was much read on this occasion, and that the fame which it required reached the ears of Guarino’s old master, duke Alphonso, who invited him most pressingly, to return to Ferrara, with the title of secretary of state.

Having accepted this offer, he was employed, as formerly, on missions to Umbria, Milan, and other places, but now his tranquillity was disturbed by a domestic affair, in which he fancied he had been improperly treated;Alexander, his eldest son, who, in 1587, had married a rich heiress, niece to cardinal Canani, being weary of living under the subjection of his father, and disgusted, whether justly or not, with the treatment he met with from him, resolved to leave his house, and live apart with his wife. Guarino was so highly offended at their departure, that he immediately seized their income, on pretence of debts due to him for money expended at their marriage. His son, deprived of his income for nine months, at last applied to the duke of Ferrara to interpose his authority, which he did, commanding the chief judge to take cognizance of the affair, who immediately decided it in favour of Alexander. This sentence exasperated the father still more; so that, looking on it as a proof that the duke had no regard for him, he addressed a letter to him in the most respectful but strongest terms, to be dismissed the service; which the duke granted, though not without intimating some displeasure at Guarino, for shewing so little regard to the favours he had conferred on him. The treatment, however, which Tasso had suffered was a recent lesson for the poets who iiad the misfortune to be patronized by Alphonso, and Guarino immediately went into the service of the duke of Savoy, where he had some reason to expect a better lot; but here he did not remain many months; and during a year of repose in the country, he resumed his labours on his favourite pastoral, which at length was published in 1590, at Venice, 4to, and the same year at Ferrara, in 12mo. The great applause which he received from this poem, was followed by a most severe loss in the death of his wile, Dec. 25, 1590, at Padua. This misfortune appears to have greatly affected him. His two eldest sons had left him two of his daughters were married three others he had placed in convents and from being surrounded by a numerous family, he was now left with one boy only often years old. In this desolate state he appears to have entertained thoughts of going to Home and becoming an ecclesiastic. He was, however, diverted from this step by an invitation received in 1592 from the duke of Mantua, who sent him to Inspruck to negociate some affairs at the archduke’s court. But he afterwards was dismissed this service, as he had been that of Ferrara, by the solicitations of duke Alphonso; who, it is said, could not bear that a subject of his, of Guarino’s merit, should serve other princes. Thus persecuted, he went to Rome apparently with the design just mentioned, but was again prevented from executing it by a reconciliation with Alphonso, which brought him back to Ferrara in 1595. This reconciliation was obtained by his son Alexander, who was very much beloved at court. However, fresh quarrels between father and son soon broke out again, which were afterwards carried to a great height; and, great changes happening upon the death of Alphonso in 1597, Guarino thought himself ill used, and left Ferrara to go to Ferdinand de Medicis, grand duke of Tuscany, who expressed a great esteem for him.

But here again an unlucky accident cut short his hopes; he carried with him to Florence Guarino Guarini, his third son, but fifteen years of age, and sent him to Pisa to complete his studies in that city. There the youth fell in love with a noble but poor widow, named Cassandra Pontaderi, and married her. Guarino no sooner heard the news, but suspecting the grand duke was privy to the marriage, and even promoted it, he left his service abruptly; and, returning to Ferrara, went thence to the prince of Urbino, but in a year’s time came back to Ferrara, in 1604. He was sent the same year by the magistrates of the city of Rome, to congratulate Paul V. on his elevation to the papal chair. This was probably his last public employ. He resided at Ferrara till 1609, going occasionally to Venice to attend his law-suits, which carried him in 1610 to Rome, where they were determined in his favour. Passing through Venice on his return home, he was seized, in his inn there, with the distemper which put a period to his life, October 7, 1612, when he was seventy-four years of age.

He was a member of several academies, besides other societies; as that of the Ricouvrati of Padua, the Intrepidi of Ferrara, and the Umoristi of Rome. Notwithstanding the reputation he had gained by his “Pastor Fido,” he could not endure the title of poet, which he thought was so far from bringing any honour to the bearers, that it rather exposed them to contempt. He wrote other things, a complete catalogue of which may be seen in Niceron; but his “Pastor Fido” was his principal work, has gone through a vast number of editions, and is regarded as one of the standard productions of Italian poetry, although it has all the defects peculiar to the poetry of his age. Hjs personal character, from the preceding account, appears to have been somewhat equivocal. It would not be fair to accuse him of a capricious and irritable temper, unless we were better acquainted with the circumstances of his life. He appears, however, to have owed little of his happiness to his patrons, and less to his family, and was highly unfortunate in public as well as domestic life, whatever share of blame might attach to him.

, a French naval officer, born at St. Malo in 1673, was the son of a merchant who had been French consul at Malaga, and who commanded armed vessels, either for war or trade, as circumstances required. Young Du Guay, led by his example, went on board a privateer, and performed a number of heroic actions. In 1691, when he was only in his eighteenth year, he had the command of an armed sloop, carrying fourteen guns, with which he obtained much success on the coast of Ireland. Three years after he entered the river of Limerick, and carried off several vessels but falling in with four English ships, he was obliged to yield, and was taken a prisoner into Plymouth. In confinement he won the aifootions of a female, who enabled him to make his escape, and in a short time he appeared again on the coast of England, where he captured some prizes. In 1695 he took three rich vessels on the Irish coast, and two Dutch ships on th coast of Spain: these successes were followed by others still more important. In 1696 he fell in with baron de Wassenaer, who with three ships was escorting a fleet of merchant-men, and took the baron with a part of his convoy. He presented, in person, his prisoner to the king, and thereupon was removed to the royal navy, and appointed to the command of a frigate. In a few years afterwards he was made captain of a fifty-four gun ship, with which, it is said, he took an English man-of-war of seventytwo gnus. So brilliant was his career of success, that in 1709 he was rewarded with letters of noblesse, the preamble to which records his having captured more than 300 merchant ships, and 20 ships of war. The most important f all his exploits was the taking of Rio Janeiro in 1711, which occasioned a loss to the Portuguese of at least a million sterling. A pension was now forced on him, he having in 1707 refused one that was then offered, requesting that it might be granted to his second captain, whose thigh had been shot off. “I,” said the gallant officer, “am sufficiently rewarded, if I obtain the advancement of my friends. 7 ' In 1728 he was made commander of the order of St. Louis, and lieutenant-general, and in 1731 went at the head of a squadron to curb the insolence of Algiers and Tunis, and promote a good understanding between France and Tripoli. After many other important services, he died at Paris Sept. 27, 1736, leaving” Memoirs," partly written by his own hand, and partly by a nephew, which were printed in one vol. 4to. 1740.

, a French writer who attained some share of reputation among the encyclopedists, was born at Paris June 6, 1738, in which city he died Feb. 26, 1812. His countrymen have as yels given us very little of his history, except that he was, either by talents or interest, advanced to be a member of the academies of Marseilles and Lyons, an associate of the Frencij institute, and a member of that of Auxerre. He was intimately connected with Beaumarehais, whom he often assisted with his pen, and passed for his secretary. In political sentiments he was a disciple of Rousseau, and eagerly promoted those opinions which led to the revolution. Besides three tragedies of no great merit, he published, i. “Graves observations stir les bonnes moeurs,” in poetical tales, published under the name of Frere Prul, Paris> 1777. 2. “Discours,” likewise in verse, o h abolition of slavery, Paris, 1781, in which he compli acnti Henry IV. as

“Seul roi de qui le pauvre ait garde la incmoirc.” 3. “Essai sur le progres des arts et de l'esprit sous le regne de Louis XV.” Deux Fonts, 1776, Lausanne, 1777. 4. “Supplement a, la maniere d‘ecrire l’histoire,” Kiel, 1781, against the abbe Mably’s method of writing history. 5. “Essai sur l‘histoire de Cornices de Rome, des etats generaux de France, et du parlement d’Angleterre,” Paris, 1789, 3 vols. 8vo. This was held in such esteem as to gain the prize of the French academy in 1790. 6. “Supplement au Contrat Social,” Paris, 1790, in which he endeavours to recommend Rousseau’s principles. 7. “La Conquete de Naples,” Paris, 1801, 3 vols. 8vo, but written in the reign of Louis XV. 8. “L' Astronomic,” a poem, Paris, 1801, and reprinted with additions and corrections in 1811. There are some beautiful lines in this poem, which shews, likewise, an intimate knowledge of the subject. 9. “Contes,” 1804, 2 vols. vhich have been highly praised by some of the French critics and as severely censured by others. Among the manuscripts he Jeft is said to be a “History of France,” which, if written on his principles, is not now likely to be thought worthy of the press.

, a learned critic, was of Hoistein, in Germany, but we know nothing of his parents, nor in what year he was born. He laid the foundation of his studies at Rensburg, under Jonsius, and went afterwards to Jena, where he was in 1654. He continued some years in this city, manifesting a strong inclination for letters, and making diligent search after ancient inscriptions. He was at Francfort in July 1658, when the emperor Leopold was crowned; and went thence to Holland, where John Frederic Gronovius recommended him to Nicolas Heinsius, as a young man of uncommon parts and learning, who had already distinguished himself by some publications, and from whom greater things were to be expected. His parents in the mean time wanted to have him at home, and offered at any price to procure him a place at court, if he WQuld but abandon letters, which they considered as a frivolous and unprofitable employment. But he remained inexorable preferring a competency with books to any fortune without them and above all, was particularly averse from a court, where “he should,” he said, “be constantly obliged to keep the very worst of company.”

His learned friends all this while were labouring to serve him. Grttviiis tried to get him a place at Duisbnrg, but could not succeed. The magistrates of Amsterdam soon after offered him a considerable sum to digest and revise Blondel’s “Remarks upon Baron ius’s Annals,” and gave him hopes of a professorship; but receiving a letter from Gronovius, which proposed to him a better offer, he declined the undertaking. Gronovius proposed to him the making the tour of France, Italy, and other countries of Europe, in quality of tutor to a rich young gentleman, whose name was Samuel Schas; and this proposal he readily embraced, though he had another letter from Alexander Moms, with the offer of a pension of Saumur, and a lodging in the house of the celebrated professor Amyrault, if he would read lectures upon ancient history to some French noblemen.

1661, where they both were attacked with a dangerous illness; but recovering, they went to Italy, where they remained all 1662, and part of 1663. At Rome, at Florence, and at Capua, they were introduced to Leo Ailatius, Carolus Dati, and other men of talents. In 1663, they returned to France, and continued there the remaining part of the year. Gudius. who seems to have been a provident man, had desired his friends at parting, to watch for some place of settlement for him at his return: and accordingly Heinsius, Gronovius, and Graevius, were very attentive to his interest. But his pupil Schas wished to make another tour, and Gudius preferred accompanying him, as Schas was a lover of letters, and, though immensely rich, resolved to spend his life in studious pursuits. He was also very partial to Gudius, whom he dissuaded from accepting any place; and pressed to accompany him through &e libraries of Germany, as he had already done through those of France and Italy.

Before they set out for Germany, Isaac Vossius, jealous at seeing in the hands of Gudius so many valuable monuments of literature, whidrthey had collected in their first tour, is said to have acted a part, neither becoming a scholar nor an honest man. On the one hand, he affected to hold them light when he talked with Gudius; whom also he did not scruple to treat with an air of contempt, even in the presence of his friend Gronovius, saying, that Gudius had never collated any ms. but always used a copyist for that purpose, and that he did not know the value of them, but was ready to sell them for a trifle to the first purchaser. On the other hand, when he talked to Schas, he represented to him what an estimable treasure he was in possession of, exhorted him not to be the dupe of Gudius, but invited him to join his Mss. with his own; alleging, that they would enjoy them in common during their lives, and after their deaths bequeath them to the public; which unusual act of generosity would gain them great honour. But Vossius did not know that Schas loved books, and understood Mss. perhaps as well as Gudius: and Grsevius, in the preface to his edition of “Florus,” makes his acknowledgments to Schas, whom he calls rir exiniius, for having collated three Mss. of that author in the king of France’s library. Vossius used other ungenerous and dishonest means to set Gudius and Schas at variance; and besides causing a quarrel between Schas and his brother, by insinuating, that Gudius had too great a share in the possessions as well as the affections of Schas, he did what he could to ruin Gudius’s character with the States of Holland, although here too he failed.

Gudius and Schas set out for Germany, July 1664; but their excursion was short, for they returned to the Hague in December. They went over to England, some time before they went to Germany: but no particulars of this journey are recorded. Gudius continued at the Hague till 1671, refusing to accept any thing, though two professorships were offered him; and then went to settle in his own country, yet without disuniting himself from his pupil, with whom he had lived long as an intimite friend. Heinsius tells Ezekiei Spanheim in a letter, August 1671, that Gudius was made librarian and counsellor to the duke of Holstein; and in another to Fulconieri, June 1672, that he was married. In 1674 he was sent by tbat prince to the court of Denmark and, December 1675, was informed at the Hague, that Schas was dead at Holstein, and had left his estate to Gudius, with legacies to Graevius, Gronovius, Heinsius, and other learned men: which legacies, however, were revoked in a codicil. The will was contested by the relations of Schas; but Gudius carried the estate, and, as Heinsius relates in a letter, 1676, from that time is said to have discontinued his correspondence with his learned friends in Holland, which we cannot be surprized at, if it be true, as suspected, that he had some hand in the will by which Schas left him his estate. Graevius remarks that he was not only expert at explaining old manuscripts, but also in making new ones.

In 1678, he was irretrievably disgraced with his prince, which created him much affliction, as his learning had not freed his mind from avarice and ambition. However, he was a little comforted afterwards, by being made counsellor to the king of Denmark. He died, somewhat immaturely, in 1689 Burman calls his death immature; and it is certain he could not be old. Though it was constantly expected from him, yet he never published any thing of consequence. At Jena, in 1657, came out a thesis of his, “De Clinicis, sive Grabatariis veteris Ecclesise:” and in 1661, when he was at Paris, he published “Hippolyti Martyris de Antichristo librum, Grace,” a piece never printed before. His Mss. however, with his own collations, he communicated to Gronovius, Graevius, Heinsius, and others, who all considered him as excellent in philology and criticism. “Ingenio & doctrina recondita in primis hujus saeculi conspicuus Marquardus Gudius,” are the words of Graevius, in his preface to “Florus:” and Burman, who was far from being lavish of praise, speaks of him in the highest terms, in the preface to “Phaedrus,” which he published at Amsterdam in 1698, merely for the sake of Gudius’s notes. To this edition are added four new fables, which Gudius extracted from a ms. at Dijon, Burman had published in 4to, the year before, at Utrecht, “A Collection of Epistles of Gudius and his Friends/* whence these memoirs of him are taken: and, in 1731, came out” Antiquae Inscriptiones, cum Graecae torn Latinae, olim a Marquardo Gudio collectae, nuper a Joanne Koolio digestae, hortatu consilioque Joamiis Georgii Graevii; nunc a Francisco Hesselio edit*, cum annotationibus eofum," Leuwardiae, folio. About the beginning of the last century, the duke of Wolfenbutel purchased Gudius’s manuscripts, and employed Leibnitz in making the bargain, as well as in transporting them to his library. They consisted of a vast number of early Mss. of Greek and Latin authors, many of which had never been used.

, a learned Benedictine, was born in 1641, at Rouen. While he was assisting Delfau in the revisal of St. Augustine’s works, he was accused of being concerned in a book entitled “L'abbé Commandataire,” and confined at Ambournay in Bugey. He took advantage of this exile to make a diligent search for ancient Mss. and discovered a great number; among others, St. Augustine’s book against Julian, entitled “Opus imperfectum,” of which only two copies were at that time known, and sent an exact copy of it to his brethren at Paris. Guerard was afterwards sent to Fescamp, and then to Rouen, where he died, Jan. 2, 1715. He left “Abrege* de la Bible, en forme de Questions et de Re*ponses familieres,” 2 vols. If mo. This work is esteemed, and has gone through several editions.

, whose proper name was John Francis Barbieri, an eminent artist, was born at Cento, a village subject to Ferrara, in 1590, and learnt the principles of the art from his countrymen Cremonirii and Benedetto Gennari. Tradition classes him with the disciples of the Carracci but neither his age, his habits, nor his style, make it probable that he ever belonged to that school for of three manners which he successively adopted, it is difficult to say which differs most from its precepts. The first, and least known, is an imitation of Caravagio, abrupt with vivid lights, and deep shades, without much study in faces or extremities; flesh of a yellow cast, and little amenity of colour. From this he passed to the second, his best and most valued manner, gradually improving it by observation, and the help of the Venetian, Bolognese, and Roman schools, by connexion with the best scholars of the Carracci, and the friendship of Caravagio, whose style still forms its basis in bold contrasts of light and shade, but sweetly united, and magically relieved; like Caravagio, he obliterates the outline, but leaves him far behind in elegance and dignity of feature. His females, insidiously charming, dart a sting from their veiled eyes, though his men generally exhibit little more than what the model could afford; youthful vulgarity, emaciated age.

The few specimens left of Guercino’s first manner, are at Bologna and Cento; of the second, are, in general, all he painted at Rome in fresco or in oil, the Aurora in the Villa Ludovisi, the St. Petronilla now in the Louvre, and the Dido in the Spada collection, and of that style is the cupola of the dome in Piacenza; of the third manner, though it bears many traces of the second, the picture of the Circumcision, once at Bologna, now in the Louvre, is the most celebrated. Guercino was invited to Rome by Gregory XV. and after two years spent there with much success, returned home whence he could not be drawn by the most powerful allurements from either the kings of England or France. Nor could Christina, queen of Sweden, prevail with him to leave Bologna, though in her p-ssage through it she made him a visit, and would not be satisfied till she had taken him by the hand; “that hand,” said she, “which had painted 106 altar-pieces, 144 pictures for people of the first quality in Europe, and had, besides, composed ten books of designs.” He received the honour of knighthood from the duke of Mantua. He died a bachelor in 1666, very rich, notwithstanding vast sums of money, which he had expended in building chapels, founding hospitals, and other acts of charity: for, it is reported, that he was every where as much venerated for his exemplary piety and charity, as for his knowledge and skill in his profession.

, an elegant French writer, was born in 1641, at Paris, and admitted advocate to the parliament in that city, and although he seldom pleaded, was much consulted as a chamber counsel, in which rank he met with great success. He died April 22, 1688, at Paris. His principal works are, 1. “Les sept Sages de la Grcce.” 2. “Entretiens sur l'Eloquence de la Chaire et du Barreau.” 3. “Le Parnassus reforme.” 4. “La Guerre des Auteurs.” 5. “Le Journal du Palais,” a well-digested collection of the decrees of parliament, in the compilation of which he was assisted by Claude Blondeau, 1755, 2 vols. folio. 6. La Carte de'la Cour.“7.” La Promenade de St. Cloud, ou Dialogues sur les Auteurs,“a small work, but elegantly written, and full of wit; which the abbe” Joly, chanter of the chapel aux Riches at Dijon, having copied at the abbe L'Avocat’s house from the original ms. published without the abbe’s knowledge in the “Mcnioires historiques de Bruys.” M. Gueret published an edition of “Le Prester,” “Arrets notable du parlement,” with learned notes and additions, 1679, folio, &c. All his works discover an excellent taste, great penetration, and judicious criticism. Messrs. Gueret, doctors of the house and society of the Sorbonne, one curate of St. Paul, who died 1773, the other late grand vicar of lihodez, were sons of this celebrated author, and have supported their father’s reputation with distinction. The latter, named Lewis Gabriel, was author of a “Memoire sur l'Immunite du Clerge*,” 1751, 12mo; “Sur les Refus des Sacremens,” 1752, 12mo; “Sur le Droit qu'ont les Cures de commettre leur Vicaires, et les Confesseurs, dans leur Paroisses,” 1759, 12mo. He died 1759, aged eighty.

, counsellor to the elector of Brandenbourg, and burgomaster of Magdebourg, was born in 1602, and died in 1686 at Hambourg. He was oae of the greatest philosophers of his time. It was Guericke that invented the air-pump; the two brass hemispheres, which being applied to each other, and the air exhausted, sixteen horses were not able to draw them asunder; the marrnouset of glass which descended in a tube in rainy weather, and rose again on the return of serene weather. This last machine fell into disuse on the invention of the barometer, especially after Huygens and Amontous gave theirs to the world. Guericke made use of his marmouset to foretell storms from whence he was looked upon as a sorcerer by the people and the thunder having one day fallen upon his house, and shivered to pieces several machines which he had employed in his exporixnents, they asserted that it was a punishment from heaven. Guericke was author of several works in natural philosophy, the principal of which was his “Experimenta Magdeburgica,” 1672, folio, which contains his experiments on a vacuum.

, a French physician and botanist, was born at Estampes, September 22, 1715, and was admitted a doctor of the faculty of medicine of Paris in 1742. He distinguished himself in the study of botany and mineralogy, and his reputation procured for him admission into the academies of science of Paris, Stockholm, Florence, and Rochelle, as well as the situations of censor royal, and of keeper of the cabinet of natural history belonging to the duke of Orleans. He travelled much in quest of knowledge, and he published in the collection of the academy of sciences, and printed in two quarto volumes, nearly two hundred memoirs, on different parts of natural history. He likewise published some “Observations on Plants,” Paris, 1747, 2 vols. 12mo. He died Jan. 7, 1786. The Guetfarda, in botany, was so named by Linnæus in honour of him. Guettard assisted La Borde in that splendid work entitled " Voyage pitto^ resque, ou Description generale et particuliere de la France,' 1 1781 1796, 12 vols. fol.

, a Spanish writer, was born in the province of Alaba, towards the end of the fifteenth century, and was brought up at court. After the death of Isabella, queen of Castile, he turned Franciscan monk, but afterwards having made himself known at court, became preacher and historiographer to Charles V. He was much admired for his politeness, eloquence, and great parts, but his preaching and conversation proved very superior to his writing. His style was found to be extravagantly figurative, and full of antitheses, but this was trifling, compared with his notions of writing history, and the liberty he took to, falsify whatever he pleased, and to advance as matter of fact the inventions of his own brain, and when censured for it, alleged by way of excuse, that no history, excepting the Holy Scripture, is certain enough to be credited. Being in the emperor’s retinue he had an opportunity of visiting a great part of Europe, an4 was made bishop of Guadix, in the kingdom of Granada, and then bishop of Mondonedo, in Galicia. He died in 1544, or 1548. He was the author of several works in Spanish, the most famous of which is his “Dial of Princes, or Life of Marcus Aurelius Antoninus,” which has been translated into all the languages of Europe. Vossius says it “has nothing in it of Antoninus, but is all a fiction, and the genuine offspring of Guevara himself, who scandalously imposes upon the reader, plainly against the duty of an honest man, but especially of a bishop. In the mean time he has many things not unuseful nor unpleasant, especially to a prince, whence it is entitled The Dial of Princes’.” Those who may be supposed to have spoken of Guevara in the most indulgent manner, have yet been forced to set him in a most scandalous light. “It deserves our pity rather than our censure,” says Nicolas Antonio, “that a writer of such fame should think himself at liberty to forge ancient facts, and to play with the history of the world, as with Æsop’s Fables or Lucian’s Monstrous Stories.” Among Guevara’s works must be ranked his “Epistles,” with which some have been so charmed, that they have not scrupled to call them Golden Epistles; but Montaigne says, “Whoever gave them this title, had a very different opinion of them from what I have, and perhaps saw more in them than I do.” Bayle had such a contempt for Guevara as an author, as to speak with surprize of “the eagerness of foreigners in translating some of his works into several languages.” Mr. Hay ley, however, remarks, that if we may judge of his personal character from his “Letters,” he appears to have been an amiable man. In one he reproves a female relation, with good nature, for intemperate sorrow on the death of a little dog and in another he draws the character of a true friend, with great energy of sentiment and expression. One of Guevara’s sayings, that heaven is filled with those that have done good works, and hell with those that have resolved to do them," has been, under a different form of expression, ascribed to other writers.

, an eminent Italian mathematician, was born at Bologna, September 27, 1655. The great progress which he had made in mathematics, was evinced by his publications at the age of twenty-one years, immediately after which he was admitted doctor of medicine, and was permitted to teach the mathematics, although he did not obtain the title of professor until 1694. In 1696 he was elected a member of the principal learned societies of Europe; and in 1702 the university of Padua offered him the professorship of the theory of medicine, an office which he filled with great reputation. He died July 12, 1710. His numerous publications were collected and edited by Morgagni, under the title of “Opera omnia Mathematica, Hydraulica, Medica, et Physica. Accessit vita auctoris a J. B. Morgagni,” Geneva, 1719, 2 vols. 4to. They principally consist of a Treatise on Hydrostatics, in Latin a large work entitled “Delia Natura de Fiumi,” which is esteemed his master-piece a dissertation “de Sanguinis Natura et Constitutione” a treatise on comets, written on the appearance of the comet in 1681, and two Letters on Hydrostatics, occasioned by a dispute which he had with M. Papin, respecting his work on that subject.

, abbot, a French historian, was born of a rich and powerful family in a village of the diocese of Beauvais, in 1053. He took the religious habit at the abbey of St. Germer, and was elected abbot of Nogent-sousCoucy, in 1104. Dom. Luke d'Achery published his works, 1651, fol. which consist of an excellent “Traite de la Predication;” a history of the first Crusades, entitled “Gesta Dei per Francos;” a singular treatise " on the Relics of the Saints, 1 * occasioned by the monks of St. Medard, at Soissons, pretending they had a tooth of our Lord’s in their possession, which Guibert, though very credulous, rejected as contrary to the faith of Christ’s resurrection, which teaches us that he re-assumed his body entire. He died in the abbey of Nogent-sous-Coucy, in J 124. In his history of the Crusades, he is to be considered as a collector of facts from others, as he does not pretend to have been an eye-witness of any part which he relates.

, a French writer on military affairs, was born at Montauban, Nov. 12, 1743. His father, who was a very intelligent officer, ook great pains in forming his son for the army, in which, Design he so perfectly succeeded, that at the school at which young Guibert was placed, his name was honourably quoted as an example to others, long after he left it. At the age of thirteen he followed his father to the field, and served six campaigns in the German war; three as a captain in the regiment d'Auvergne, and the three other upon the staff, where he gave frequent proofs of his judgment and spirit. After the peace in 1763, he assiduously devoted himself to the study of the theory of his profession till the expedition to Corsica took place, where he obtained the rank of colonel for his services in the action of Ponte Nuovo, and at the end of the campaign was rewarded with the cross of St. Louis. In 1770, two years after his return to France, he published his celebrated “Essai general de Tactique,” a work which though known and admired over all Europe, drew upon its author the envy too often attendant on merit, which embittered a great part of his days. But his pride disdaining to answer his enemies, as much as his mild spirit disliked controversy, he therefore determined to travel, and leave his work to answer for itself. So says his panegyrist, without informing us that his unsparing censures and conceited style had proyoked the hostilities of those enemies.

On his return to France, he pursued his literary turn, and produced “Le Connetable de Bourbon,” a tragedy, and afterwards two other tragedies, the “Gracchi,” and “Anna Bullen,” of which his biographer speaks very highly; but they were not published, the author being called to assist the celebrated M. de Saint Germain, in his reform of the French army. He is said to have been the soul of this minister; and much to his honour, he continued his friendship in his patron’s disgrace. After the new organization was completed, Guibert returned to his studies, and among others, wrote the famous panegyrics on marshal Catinat, and the chancellor de PHopital. He afterward assisted at the camp in Normandy; and during the disputes concerning the number of ranks in which troops should be drawn up, he published the “Refutation complete du systeme de M. Menil-Durand.”

The French government having determined to send troops to assist the Americans, the author was ordered on that service; but on the eve of embarking, he received counter orders; a disappointment which he attributed to the malice of his enemies, and which preyed on him very deeply. As soon as he had recovered from this mortification, he began a work entitled “Histoire de la Milice Francaise,” which, from the profound manner in which he treats his subject, might be called the history of the art of war, and of the military system of the nations of Europe, from the time of the Romans. He had brought it to the eleventh century, when he was drawn from his retirement by having obtained for his venerable father the appointment of governor of the invalids. While he was assisting in reforming the abuses of that noble institution, he wa admitted a member of the French academy; where his introductory address is said to have been much admired for its truly classical spirit. Two years afterward, his health obliged him to retire to the country: but he was soon recalled by the death of his father, to comfort his aged mother. It appears that one of the most estimable traits in Guibert’s character, was his filial piety.

Guibert was afterwards appointed a member of the council of war, formed to establish a regular system in the French army. Here envy and malice again most vehemently pursued him, and being at last persuaded to write in his own justification, he was first attacked by the people for his arbitrary sentiments, then by the court for his popular principles, and was again driven into retirement. At the commencement of the late revolution, he wrote several interesting papers; but, aware of the prejudices existing against him, he assumed the name of G. T. Raynal; under which he obtained all the fame that was refused to Guibert. The chief of these works, was “De la force publique considered sous tous ses rapports.” In his last illness, the injustice done to him still preyed on his mind, and he frequently exclaimed “They will one time know me, and do me justice!” He died May 6, 1790, of an almost broken heart, at the early age of forty-seven. A most flattering mark of esteem and respect was paid to his memory, by the regiment of Neustrie, which he had commanded ten years; the officers and men unanimously voting a letter of condolence to his widow, who published his “German Tour,” in 1803.

, the celebrated historian of Italy, was descended of an ancient and noble family at Florence, where he was born March 6, 1482. His father, Peter Guicciardini, an eminent lawyer, bred up his son in his own profession; in which design he sent him, in 1498, to attend the lectures of M. Jacobo Modesti, of Carmignano, who read upon Justinian’s Institutes at Florence, but his son submitted to this resolution with some reluctance. He had an uncle who was archdeacon of the metropolitan church of Florence, and bishop of Cortona; and the prospect of succeeding to these benefices, which yielded near 1500 ducats a year, had Bred the ambition of the nephew. He had hopes of rising from such a foundation through richer preferments by degrees to the highest, that of a cardinal; and the reversion of the uncle’s places might have been easily obtained. But, though his father had five sons, he could not think of placing any of them in the church, where he thought there was great neglect in the discipline. Francis proceeded therefore with vigour in the study of the law, and took his degrees at Pisa, in 1505; but, looking upon the canon law as of little importance, he chose to be doctor of the civil law only. The same year he was appointed a professor of the institutes at Florence, with a competent salary for those times. He was now no more than twenty-three years of age, yet soon established a reputation superior to all the lawyers his contemporaries, and had more business than any of them. In 1506 he married Maria, daughter of Everardo Salviati, by far the greatest man in Florence; and, in 1507, was chosen standing counsellor to several cities of the republic. Two years after he was appointed advocate of the Florentine chapter, a post of great honour and dignity, which had been always filled with the most learned counsellors in the city; and, in 1509, he was elected advocate of the order of Calmaldoli.

He continued thus employed in the proper business of his profession till 1511; but that year the cKsis of the public affairs gave occasion to call forth his abilities for more important matters. The Florentines were thrown into great difficulties by the league, which the French and Spaniards had entered into against the pope. Perplexed about their choice to remain neuter or engage in the league* they had recourse to our advocate, whom they sent ambassador to Ferdinand, king of Spain, to treat of this matter; and at the same time charged him with other affairs of the highest importance to the state. With this character he left Florence in 1512, and arriving safely afc Bruges, where his Spanish majesty then resided, remained two years at that court. Here he had an opportunity of exerting and improving his talents as a statesman. Many events happened in that time, the consequences whereof came within his province to negociate; such as the taking and plundering Ravenna and Prato by the Spaniards, the deposing of Piero Soderini, and the restoration of the family of Medici. In these and several other occurrences, which happened at that time, he adopted such measures, and with such address, that the republic found no occasion to employ any other minister; and the king testified his satisfaction by a great quantity of fine-wrought plate, which he presented to him at his departure. On his arrival at Florence in 1514, he was received with, uncommon marks of honour; and, in 15 15, constituted advocate of the consistory by Leo X. at Cortona. The pope’s favours did not stop here. Guicciardini’s extraordinary abilities, with a hearty devotion to the interest of the church, were qualifications of necessary use in the ecclesiastical state. Leo, therefore, that he might reap the full advantage of them, sent for him not long after to Rome, resolving to employ him where his talents might be of most service. In 1518, when Modena and Reggio were in great danger of being lost, he was appointed to the government of those cities, and proved himself equal to the charge.

His merit in this government recommended him, in 1521, to that of Parma, whence he drove away the French, and confirmed the Parmesans in their obedience; and this at a time when the holy see was vacant by the death of Leo, and the people he commanded full of fears, disheartened, and unarmed. He retained the same post under Adrian VI, to whom he discovered the dangerous designs of Alberto Pio da Carpi, and got him removed from the government of Reggio and Rubiera. Clement VII. on his exaltation to the pontificate, confirmed him in that government. This pope was of the house of Medici, to which Guicciardini was particularly attached; and, in return, we find him presently raised to the highest dignities in the ecclesiastical state. Having in 1523 prevented the duke of Ferrara from seizing Modena, the pope, in acknowledgement thereof, not only made him governor of that city, but constituted him president of Romagna, with unlimited authority. This was a post of great dignity and power, yet as factions then ran very high, the situation was both laborious and dangerous. However, he not only by his prudence overcame all these difficulties, but found means, in the midst of them, to improve the conveniences and delight of the inhabitants. Their towns which lay almost in rubbish, he embellished with good houses and stately buildings; a happiness, of which they were so sensible, that it rendered the name of Guicciardini dear to them, and they were overjoyed, when, after a farther promotion of Francis, they understood he was to be succeeded in his government by his brother. This happened June 6,

1526, when the pope, by a brief, declared him lieutenantgeneral of all his troops in the ecclesiastical state, with authority over his forces in other parts also, that were under the command of any captain-general. It has been observed, that he was the chief favourite of pope Clement, and his present situation is a most illustrious proof of that remark. This post of lieutenant-general of the forces, added to what he held in the civil government, were the highest dignities which his holiness could bestow: but this honour was yet more increased by the command of the confederate army, which was given him soon after; for, in

1527, he led these joint forces to Ravenna, and relieved that country, then threatened with entire destruction. The same year he also quelled a dangerous insurrection in Florence, when the army of the league was there under the command of the constable of Bourbon.

In 1531 the pope made him governor of Bologna, contrary to all former precedents, that city having never before been committed to the hands of a layman. He was in this post when his holiness met Charles V. there, in December 1532; and he assisted at the pompous coronation of the said emperor, on St. Matthias’s day following. This solemnity was graced with the presence of several princes, who all shewed our governor particular marks of respect, every one courting his company, for the sake of his instructive conversation. He had at this time laid the plan of his history, and made some progress in it; which coining to the ears of the emperor before he left Bologna, his imperial majesty gave orders, when Guicciardini should attend his levee, to admit him into his dressing-room, where he conversed with him on the subject of his history. So particular a distinction gave umbrage to some persons of quality and officers of the army, who had waited many days for an audience. The emperor, being informed of the pique, took Guicciardini by the hand, and, entering into the drawing-room, addressed the company in these terms: “Gentlemen, I am told you think it strange that Guicciardini should have admission to me before yourselves; but I desire you would consider, that in one hour I can create a hundred nobles, and a like number of officers in the army; but I shall not be able to produce such an historian in twenty years. To what purpose serve the pains you take to discharge your respective functions honourably, either in the camp or cabinet, if an account of your conduct is not to be transmitted to posterity for the instruction of your descendants Who are they that have informed mankind of the heroic actions of your great ancestors, but historians? It is necessary then to honour them, that they may be encouraged to convey the knowledge of your illustrious deeds to futurity. Thus, gentlemen, you ought neither to be offended nor surprised at my regard for Guicciardini, since you have as much interest in his province as myself.”

Guicciardini did not remain continually at Bologna, but divided his time between that city and Florence. In February this year, he sent a letter of instructions to Florence; and in April received orders from the Pope to reform the state there, and to put Alessandro in the possession of the government. Wise and prudent, however, as he was, discontents and faction at length arose. As long as Clement sat in the papal chair, the discontented murmured only in private; but upon that Pope’s death, in 1534, the disgust shewed itself openly: two noblemen in particular, Castelli and Pepoli, who till then had been fugitives, entered the city at noon-day, with a retinue of several of their friends, and some outlawed persons, well armed. The governor, looking upon this as done in contempt of his person, meditated how to revenge the affront. One evening two proscribed felons, under Pepoli’s protection, were taken up by the officers as they were walking the streets, and carried to prison: and Guicciardini, without any farther process, ordered them to be immediately executed. Pepoli, highly incensed, assembled a number of hrs friends, and was going in quest of the governor to seek his revenge, when the senate sent some their members to desire him to return home, and not to occasion a tumult, which> for fear of disobliging that body, he complied with. It was this good disposition of the senate towards him, which prevailed with Guicciardini to remain in the government after the death of Clement. He foresaw that the people would no longer submit to his commands, and therefore had resolved to quit the government; but the senate, considering that many disorders might happen, if they were left without a governor in the time of the vacant see, begged him to continue, promising that he should have all the assistance requisite. To this he at last consented; and, with true magnanimity and firmness of mind, despising the danger that threatened him, remained in the city, till he understood that a new governor was appointed, when he resolved to quit the place. Some time after his arrival in Florence, upon the death of the duke, he had influence enough in the senate to procure the election of Cosmo, son of John de Medici, to succeed in the sovereignty. But, though he had interested himself so much in the election, yet he soon quitted the court, and meddled in public affairs no farther than by giving his advice occasionally, when required. He was now past fifty, an age when business becomes disgusting to persons of a reflecting turn. His chief wish was, that he might live long enough, in a quiet recess, to finish his history. In this resolution he retired to his delightful country-seat at Emma, where he gave himself up entirely to the work; nor could he be drawn from it by all the intreaties and advantageous offers that were made him by pope Paul III. who, in the midst of his retirement, passing from Nice to Florence, earnestly solicited our historian, first in person, then by letters, and at last by the mediation of cardinal Ducci, to come to Rome. But he was proof against all solicitations, and, excusing himself in a handsome manner to his holiness, adhered closely to his great design; so that, though he enjoyed this happy tranquillity a few years only, yet in that time he brought his history to a conclusion; and had revised the whole, except the four last books , when he was seized with a fever, May 27, 1540, of which he died.

As to the productions of his pen, his history claims the first place. It would be tedious to produce all the encomiums bestowed upon it by persons of the first character Bolingbroke calls him “The admirable historian” and says, he “should not scruple to prefer him to Thucydides in every respect.” In him are found all the transaction^ of that aera, in which the study of history ought to begin; as he wrote in that point of time when those events and re volutions began, that have produced so vast a change in, the manners, customs, and interests, of particular nations; and in the policy, ecclesiastical and civil, of those parts of the world. And, as Guicciardini lived in those days, and was employed both in the field and cabinet, he had all opportunities of furnishing himself with materials for his history: in particular, he relates at length the various causes, which brought about the great change in religion by the reformation; shews by what accidents the French kings were enabled to become masters at home, and to extend themselves abroad; discovers the origin of the splendor of Spain in the fifteenth century, by the marriage of Ferdinand and Isabella; the total expulsion of the Moors, and the discovery of the West-Indies. Lastly, in respect to the empire, he gives an account of that change which produced the rivalship between the two great powers of France and Austria; whence arose the notion of a balance of power, the preservation whereof has been the principal care of all the wise councils of Europe, and is so to this day. Of this history sir William Jones says, “It is the most authentic I believe (may I add, I fear) that ever was composed. I believe it, because the historian was an actor in his terrible drama, and personally knew the principal performers in it; and I fear it, because it exhibits the woeful picture of society in the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries.”

Of this history there have been various editions, and it has been translated into various languages, particularly into English, by the chevalier Austin Parke Goddard, 1O vols. 8vo, 1754, &c. The original xvas first published by Guicciardini’s nephew Agnolo, at Florence in 15^1, folio. But this edition comprehends only the first sixteen books, as we have remarked, and is besides defective by the omission of several passages of importance. The four additional books were published by Seth Vioiti at Parma in 1564, and the passages omitted have been published separately in the work entitled “Thuanus resthufcus, sive sylloge, e. cum Francisci Guicciardini paralipomenis,” Amst. 1663. It was afterwards often re-printed complete, but in 1775, appeared an edition at Friburg, in 4 vols. 4to, professedly printed from the manuscript, reviewed and corrected by the author, which is, or was, in the library of Magliabecchi at Florence. This, of course, seems entitled to the preference.

Guicciardini wrote several other pieces, as “The Sacking of Rome;” “Considerations on State-Affairs;” “Councilu and Admonitions,” and there are extant several of his “Law-Cases,” with his opinion, preserved in the famous library of Signior Carlo Tomaso Strozzi and an epistle in verse, which has given him a place among the Tuscan poets, in the account of them by Crescimbeni. It were to be wished, that we could look into his correspondence but all his letters, by fatal negligence, have perished our curiosity in that point can only be satisfied by some written to him: part of these are from cardinal Pietro Bern bo, secretary to pope Leo X. and are to be seen in his printed letters; and oners from Barnardo Tasso. Berabo’s letters shew, that his correspondent possessed the agreeable art of winning the affections both of private persons and princes. Guicciardini was survived by his wife (who lived till 1559) and three daughters. Two married into the family of Capponi, and the third into that of Ducci.

, nephew of the preceding, was born at Florence in 1521, and was educated with a view to general science, in the pursuit of which he gave the preference to mathematics, geography, and history. About 1550 he took up his residence in the Low Countries, where he continued till his death, March 22, 1589. He was author of many works, of which the principal is “A Description of the Low Countries,” which is in great esteem for the accuracy of its relations. His other works are “Commentaries on the Affairs of Europe, particularly in the Low Countries, from 1529 to 1560.” “Remarkable words and actions of Princes,” &c. “Hours of Amusement;” and a collection of the precepts and maxims of his illustrious relation. He was buried in the cathedral of Antwerp, where an honourable inscription is placed to hi* memory.

, an ingenious and judicious French historian in the seventeenth century, was a native of Macon, and advocate at Bourg-en-Brasse. He distinguished himself by his works, and was loaded with favours from the duke of Savoy for his excellent “Hist. Genealogique de la Maison Royale de Savoie,” 1660, 2 vols. fol. He died September 8, 1664, aged 57, after having embraced the Catholic religion; and left, besides the work above-mentioned, “Une Suite Chronologique des Eveques de Belley,” 4to. “Hist.de Brasse et de Bugey,” 1650, fol. much esteemed, and “Hist, de la Principaute* de Dombes,” never printed; also a collection of the most remarkable acts and titles of the Province of Brasse and Bugey, entitled “Bibliotheca Sebnsiana,” 1666, 4to.

, an Italian poet, was born at Pavia^ in Milan, 1650, and sent to Parma at sixteen years of age. His uncommon talents for poetry recommended him so powerfully at court, that he received great encouragement from the duke. He composed some pieces at that time, which, though they savoured of the bad taste thei> prevailing, yet shewed genius, and a capacity for better things. He had afterwards a desire to see Rome, and, in 1683, going thither by the permission of the duke of Parma, and being already known by his poems y found no difficulty in being introduced to persons of the first distinctiort. Among others, Christina queen of Sweden wished to see him; and was so pleased with a poem, which he composed at her request, that she had a great desire to retain him at her court. The term allowed him by the duke being expired, he returned to Parma; but the queen having signified her desire to that prince’s resident at Rome, and the duke being acquainted with it, Guidi was sent back to Rome in May 1685.

His abode in this city was highly advantageous to him; for, being received into the academy which was held at the queen of Sweden’s, he became acquainted with several of the learned who were members of it. He began then to read the poems of Dante, Petrarch, and Chiabrara; which reformed the bad taste he had contracted. The reading of these and other good authors entirely changed his manner of writing; and the pieces he wrote afterwards were of quite a different style and taste. Though the queen of Sweden was very kind to him, and obtained a good benefice for him from Innocent XI. yet he did not cease to feel the esteem of his master the duke of Parma, but received from him a pension, which was paid very punctually. The death of his royal patroness happened in 1689, but he did not leave Rome; lor the duke of Parma gave him an apartment in his palace there, and his loss was abundantly recompensed by the liberality of many persons of quality. In July 1691, he was made a member of the academy of Arcadi at Rome, under the name of Erilo Cleoneo, nine months after its foundation, and was one of its chief ornaments. Clement XI. who knew him well, and did him kind offices while he was a cardinal, continued his favours to him after he was raised to the pontificate.

In 1709, he took a journey to his own country, to settle some private affairs. He was there when the emperor made a new regulation for the state of Milan, which was very grievous to it; and having political talents, was employed to represent to prince Eugene of Savoy the inconveniences and burden of this regulation, prince Eugene being then governor of the country, and deputed by the emperor to manage the affair. For this purpose Guidi drew up a memorial, which was thought so just and argumentative, that the new regulation was immediately revoked. The service he did his country, in this respect, procured him a mark of distinction from the council Pavia; who, in 1710, enrolled him in the list of and decurions of the town. He was now solely intent upon returning to Rome; but made his will first, as if he had foreseen what was shortly to happen to him. Upon his arrival there, he applied himself to a versification of six homilies of the Pope, which he caused to be magnificently printed, and would have presented it to the pontiff, who was then at Castel-Gandolfe. With this view he set out from Rome in June 17 12, and arrived at Frescati, where he was seized with an apoplectic fit, of which he died in a few hours, aged almost sixty-two. His body was carried back to Rome, and interred in the church of St. Onuphrius, near Tasso.

Though nature had been very kind to his inner-man, yet she had not been so to his outer; for he was deformed both before and behind; his head, which was unreasonably large, did not bear a just proportion to his body, which was small; and he was blind of his right eye. In recompense, however, for these bodily defects, he possessed very largely the faculties of the mind. He was not learned, but he had a great deal of wit and judgment. His taste lay for heroic poetry, and he had an aversion to any thing free or satirical. His taste is original, though we may sometimes perceive that Dante, Petrarch, and Chiabrara, were his models.

Though the writers of his life tell us of some prose piece before it, yet the first production we know of is “Poesie Liriche,” Parma, 1681; which, with “L'Amalasunta,” an opera, printed there the same year, he afterwards made no account of, they being written during the depravity of his taste. In 1687 he published at Rome, “Accademia per musica;” written by order of Christina of Sweden, for an entertainment, which that princess gave to the earl of Castlemain, whom James II. of England sent ambassador to Innocent XI. to notify his accession to the throne, and to implore his holiness’ s assistance in reconciling his three kingdoms to Popery. “L'Endimione di Erilo Cleoneo, pastor Arcade, con un discorso di Bione Crateo al card male Albano. In Roma, 1692.” The queen of Sweden formed the plan of this species of pastoral, and furnished the author with some sentiments, as well as with some lines, which are marked with commas to distinguish them from the rest. The discourse annexed, to point out the beauties of the piece, was written by John Vincent Gravina. “LeRime,” Roma, 1704. In this he declares, that he rejects all his works, which had appeared before these poems, except his “L'Endimione.” “Sei Omelie di M. S. Clemente XI. Spiegate in versi,” Roma, 1712, folio, a very magnificent work, and adorned with cuts, but not properly either a version or a paraphrase, the author having only taken occasion, from some passages in these homilies, to compose verses according to his own genius and taste.

In 1726 was published at Verona, in 12mo, “Poesie d'Alessandro Guidi non piu raccolte. Con la sua vita novamente scntta dal signor Canonico Crescimbeni. E con due Ragionamenti di Vincenzo Gravina, non piu divulgati.” This is a collection of his printed poems and Mss. including the pieces which he had recited before the academy of the Arcadi upon various subjects.

, an Italian poet, was born at Lucca in 1550. Having received an excellent education, he was introduced to the service of cardinal Alexander Farnese, afterwards pope Paul III. He became very intimate with Annibal Caro, and with many other men of letters at Rome. When his patron was elevated to the popedom, he was made governor of the city, and bishop of Fossombrone. In 1535 he was sent nuncio to the emperor Charles V. whom he accompanied in his expedition to Tunis, and on other journeys. He was, about 1539, made president of Romagna, and afterwards commissary-general of the pontifical army, and governor of the Marche. So well did he act his part in all these employments, that he would have been raised to the dignity of cardinal had he not been carried off by a disease in 1541. He was author of an oration to the republic of Lucca, of many letters, and of a number of poems which gave him a high reputation. His works ka*e been several times printed. The best edition is that of 1749—50, 2 vols. 4to.

, a very celebrated artist, was born at Bologna in 1574, and early in life became the pupil of Denis Calvert, a Fleming; but he afterwards entered the school of the Carracci at Bologna, and is by many considered as their principal pupil, and none but Domenichino would have been entitled to dispute that praise with him, if his astonishing work of the communion of St. Jerome had been equally supported by his other labours, The Carracci, however, were too jealous to rejoice in the extraordinary progress of Guido, who threatened to rival at least, if not surpass, their own claims to public applause, and Ludovico disgracefully attempted to depreciate his pupil by opposing Guercino to him, while Annihal himself js said to have censured Albani for having conducted Guido. thither, alarmed at his aspiring talents, his graceful man-, ner, and ambitious desire to excel.

It is not, however, in their style that he wrought, hut he chose for himself his objects and manner of imitation and his various styles exhibit how anxiously he sought for fame at one time imitating Passerotti, at another Carravaggio, and then, stimulated by a remark of A. Cafracci, framing one for himself; the reverse of Carravaggio’s, all gentleness and softness. Skilful in execution, he had no difficulty in imitating whatever he desired his pencil was light, and his touch free and delicate and he took great pains to finish his pictures not with, minute detail, but with great roundness in the figures, correct arrangement of the folds of his draperies, which he perfectly understood, and made great use of in filling up his canvas, and the most careful management of all the inferior parts. The beauty he gave to his females, he sought for in the antique, and the group of Niobe particularly. He has frequently expressed the pathetic and the tender. One of his heads, formerly the property of earl Moira, and now in possession of the venerable president of the royal academy, exhibits our Saviour with the crown of thorns upon his head, and has been admirably engraved by Sharp. It is not possible for painting to go beyond it in the perfect attainment ef its object, the expression of pious resignation under acute suffering of mind and body, with beauty and truth of character. Mr. Fuseli, in his late edition of Pilkington, has. given justly the character of the generality of Guide’s works he says, “his attitudes seldom elevate themselves to the fine expression and graceful simplicity of the face the grace of Guido is the grace of theatre; the mode, not the motive, determines the action: his Magdalens weep to be seen, his Hero throws herself over Leander, Herodias holds the head of her victim, his Lucretias stab themselves, with the studied airs, and ambitious postures, of buskined heroines; it would, however, be unjust not to allow there are exceptions from this affectation in his works. Helen departing with Paris, is one which alone niight atone for every other blemish. In her divine face, the sublime purity of the Niobe is mixed with the charms of the Venus; the wife, the mother, give indeed way to the lover; but spread a soft melancholy which tempers her fervour with dignity. This expression is supported by the careless unconscious elegance of her attitude, whilst that of Paris, stately, courteous, insipid, gives him more the air of an ambassador, attending her as proxy, than that of a lover carrying her off for himself.”

Great were the honours this painter received from Paul V. from all the cardinals and princes of Italy, from Lewis XIII. of France, Philip IV. of Spain, and from the king of Poland and Sweden, who, besides a noble reward, made him a compliment, in a letter under his own hand, for an Europa he had sent him. He was extremely handsome arul graceful in his person; and so very beautiful in his younger days, that his master Luclovico, in painting his angels, took him always for his model. Nor was he an angel only in his looks, if we may jDelieve what Gioseppino told the pope, when he asked his opinion of Guido’s performances in the Capella Quirinale, “Our pictures,” said he, “are the works of men’s hands, but these are made by hands divine.” In his behaviour he was modest, gentle, and very obliging; lived in great splendour both at Bologna and Rome; and was only unhappy in his immoderate love of gaming. To this in his latter days he abandoned himself so entirely, that all the money he could get by his pencil, or borrow upon interest, was too little to supply his losses: and he was at last reduced to so poor and mean a condition, that the consideration of his present circumstances, together with reflections on his former reputation and high manner of living, brought a languishing distemper on him, of which he died in 1642.

, an eminent oriental scholar in France, was born at Pointoise, Oct. 19, 1721. He studied the oriental languages under the celebrated Stephen Fourinont, and was appointed king’s interpreter in 1741, and a member of the academy of belles lettres in 1753. Having minutely investigated the Chinese characters, and compared them with those of other languages, he fancied he had discovered that they were only monograms formed of three Egyptian letters, and deduced from this that China had been originally peopled by an Egyptian colony. The same notion had been adopted before his time by Huet, Kircher, and Moiran; but other learned men, Deshauteraies, Paw, and the Chinese missionaries, have fully refuted it. De Guignes was for thirty-five years engaged in the “Journal des Sgavans,” which, as well as the Memoirs of the academy of belles lettres, he enriched with a great number of learned papers on the religion, history, and philosophy, of the Egyptians and Chinese Indians, &c. One very important service he rendered his country by discovering the punches and matrices of the oriental types which Savary de Breves, ambassador from Henry IV. at Constantinople, had brought into France, but which were now in such a state that Guignes was the only person who could put them in order, and give instructions for using them. From them he was enabled to cast fonts of the Arabic, Turkish, Persian, Syriac, Armenian, Hebrew, and Chinese, acquisitions of great consequence to his inquiries. With their aid he passed the greater part of his life among his books, without ambition for more than a competence suited to his literary wants. In his old age, however, the revolution deprived him even of this, but he still preserved his cheerful temper and independent spirit. Some help he derived from a legacy of 3000 livres, which Grosley, his fellow academician, and a distant relation, bequeathed to him. He died at Paris March 22, 1800, and was said at that time to be the only person in Europe perfectly acquainted with the Chinese language. His publications are, 1. “Abrege de la vie d'Etienne Fourmont,” Paris, 1747, 4to. 2. “Histoire generale des Huns, des Turcs, des Mogols, et des antres Tartares occidentaux,” 1756, 4 vols. 4to, taken from Chinese and oriental manuscripts, and without doubt, his greatest work, and that on which he had bestowed infinite labour, but in which there is a want of taste, and of style suited to the subjects, with frequent repetitions, which make it a book rather to be consulted than read. 3. The “Memoire,” already noticed, in which he attempts to prove that the Chinese were a colony from Egypt, 1759, 12mo. 4. “Chou-King,” 1770, 4to. Gaubil had published a translation of this sacred book among the Chinese, which de Guignes now reprinted with notes. 5. L'Art militaire de Chinois,“4to. 6.” Essai historiquf* sur la typographic orientate et Grecque,“1787, 4to. 7.” Principes de composition typographique," 1790, 4to, for the use of the compositors who were employed on the oriental types. He wrote also many notices of Arabian manuscripts for the catalogue preserved in the royal library.

, an eminent Scotch divine, the son of an opulent tradesman in Aberdeen, was born in that city in 1586, and received *a liberal education at Marischal college, then recently founded, with a view to the church. Before he took orders, however, he appeared as an autii:>r, by publishing, when only in his twentieth year, a treatise entitled “The New Sacrifice of Christian Incense,” London, 1608 and the same year, “The only way to Salvation,” printed also at London. Immediately after the publication of these, he appears to have taken orders, and was called to the pastoral charge of the parish of King EJward in the presbytery of Turriff and synod of Aberdeen. Here he passed some of the happiest years of his life, in high favour with Jiis parishioners and here in 1610 he married Katherine Rowen, daughter of Mr. Rowen or Rolland of Disblair, by whom he had no issue. In 1617, when king James I. visited Scotland, with a view to establish episcopacy, and brought bishop Andrews of Ely with him to assist in the management of that very delicate and ultimately unsuccessful attempt, Dr. Andrews, among other eminent men of the Scotch clergy whom he consulted, paid great regard to Mr. Guild; and the following year, when Andrews was promoted to the see of Winchester, Mr. Guild dedicated to him, one of his most useful works, entitled “Moses unveiled,” pointing out those fgures in the Old Testament which allude to the Messiah. Mr. Guild became, much about the same time, acquainted with Dr. Young, a countryman of his own, dean of Winchester, who introduced him to the king, by whom he was appointed one of the royal chaplains. This obligation he afterwards acknowledged in the dedication to his “Harmony of the Prophets,” a work which he published in the beginning of the reign of Charles I. It was afterwards printed with his “Moses unveiled,” in an edition now before us, dated Edinburgh, 1684.

As his attention to public affairs did not prevent him from applying diligently to his private studies, he continued, during his residence at King Edward, to exercise his talent for composition, and occasionally sent to the press some useful tracts. Most of his performances were of the popular kind, and all of them appear to have been adapted, as much as possible, to common use; but his literary merit was acknowledged by those who were more competent judges than the multitude. Men of learning knew him to be learned the academical honour of D. D. was conferred upon him, and he was ranked, while yet a young man, among the ablest divines in the church of Scotland. In 1625 and 1626 he published the “Ignis Fatuus” against the doctrine of purgatory, and “Popish glorying in antiquity turned to their shame,” both printed at London. His next publication, entitled “A compend of the Controversies of Religion,” was printed at Aberdeen.

In 1631 he was removed to be one of the ministers of Aberdeen. He had long before this afforded proof of his attachment to his native city, by giving a house of considerable value in order to enlarge the gateway to Marischal college; and now contributed to the restoration of the Grey Friars church, which had for some years been unfit for public service. But the greatest of his benefactions was given to the incorporated trades of Aberdeen, for the use of whom he built a hall, and endowed an hospital, which, with the assistance of subsequent benefactors, is now in a flourishing state, and of great utility. The charter for the hospital appears to have been obtained in 1633.

When the commotions took place in consequence of king Charles’s endeavours to establish episcopacy in Scotland, the Perth articles, as they were called, were opposed by the Scotch covenant, which was subscribed by the majority of the clergy and people of Scotland, but not being so rigorously enforced as to prohibit all exercise of private judgment, Dr. Guild was permitted to subscribe it under such limitations as he was pleased to specify, which implied a loyal adherence to the king, but no condemnation of the articles of Perth, or of episcopal government. He was afterwards one of the commissioners in the general assembly of Scotland which met in 1638, and abolished the hierarchy of the church; and after his return from Glasgow, where this assembly met, officiated as formerly at Aberdeen in the pastoral function, and, with a view to beal the animosities then prevailing between the episcopal and presbyterian party, published “A friendly and faithful advice to the nobility, gentry, and others,” recommending that moderation which was then impossible, while the two great bodies who divided the sentiments of the two kingdoms, persisted in mutual encroachments. Yet notwithstanding an obvious leaning to the loyal side in Dr. Guild’s conduct, he was, on a vacancy, elected principal of King’s college, Aberdeen, in 1640, and preached his last sermon, as minister of Aberdeen, in June 1641. This was followed by a special mark of favour from his majesty, who bestowed upon Dr. Guild “a free gift of a house and garden, which had formerly been the residence of the bishop of Aberdeen.” He did'not, however, allow this to increase his private fortune, but wiih his usual liberality, devoted it to the service of the public, in benefactions to the college, the town, and the poor of the adjoining parish.

His attachment to the royal cause, however, soon involved him in the sentence passed on all who held such sentiments, and in 1651 he was deposed by five commissioners of general Monk’s army. From this time he appears to have resided in a private station at Aberdeen, improving his charitable foundation, and adding to it exhibitions for three scholars of Marischal college. He also during this retirement wrote “An Explication of the Song of Solomon,” London, 1658, 8vo “The Sealed Book opened,” or an explanation of the Revelation of St. John and “The Novelty of Popery discovered,” Aberdeen, 1656, 16mo.

The life of Dr. Guild, suitably to its benevolent progress, terminated with acts of charity. By his last will, written in 1657, he bequeathed seven thousand marks to be secured on land, and the yearly profit applied to the maintenance of poor orphans. His library he left to the unU versity of St. Andrew’s, except one valuable manuscript, supposed to be the original of the memorable letter from the states of Bohemia and Moravia, to the council of Constance, 1415, relative to John Huss and Jerome of Prague. This Dr. Guild bequeathed to the university of Edinburgh, He died in August 1657. His widow so far followed his benevolent example, that by her munificence are still maintained, six students of philosophy, four scholars at the public school, two students of divinity, six poor widows, and six poor men’s children. Before her death she sent up to Dr. John Owen a manuscript of her husband’s, who had intended to have published it with a dedication to that celebrated nonconformist, although not personally known to him. Dr. Owen accordingly published it, under the title ft The Throne of David, or an exposition of the Second (Book) of Samuel," Oxford, 1659, 4to; with a recommendatory preface, which shews how little there was of difference in religious opinion between Dr. Guild and the party that thought him unworthy to continue his ministerial labours.

, a Prussian botanist, whose proper name was Wieland, was born at Koenigsberg, and after several extensive journeys into Palestine, Egypt, Africa, and Greece, was carried prisoner into Barbary; but being redeemed by the celebrated Fallopius, afterwards succeeded him in the botanical chair at Padua, and died in 1587 or 1589. Haller characterizes him as a learned but desultory writer, an acrimonious critic, even of the excellent Conrad Gesner, but especially of Matthiolus, whom he violently hated. He had little or no merit as a practical botanist, nor did he scarcely attempt to describe or define any plants. He published a learned essay on the “Papyrus,” in quarto, at Venice, in 1572, and various controversial epistles. His “Synonyma Piantarum,” one of the earliest works of its kind, appeared long after his death, in 1608, at Franc fort, in octavo.

, one of the most celebrated surgeons of the sixteenth century, was a native of Orleans, and the pupil of the famous Ambrose Paré, and attained very high professional reputation in the army as well as at home. He received the honourable appointment of surgeon to the sovereigns Charles IX. and Henry IV. by both of whom he was highly esteemed. He died at Paris March 13, 1609. His first publication was a translation of Ambrose Paré's Treatise on Surgery into Latin, printed at Paris in 1582, folio. His next work was a small treatise, entitled “Apologie pour les Chirurgiens,” 1593. The remainder of his writings is contained in a collection of his “Œuvres de Chirurgie,” printed at Paris in 1598, and in 1612; and at Rouen in 1649, some of which were published separately. These are, “Tables Anutomiques,” with figures from Vesalius; “Histoire de tous les Muscles du corps humain,” &c.; “Traité de la Generation de l'homme;” “L'heureux Accouchement des femmes;” “Traité sur les abus qui se commettent sur les procédures de l'Impuissance des hommes et des femmes;” “La Chirurgie Françoise, recueillies des anciens Médecins et Chirurgiens, &c.;” “Traité des plaies recueillies des Leçons de M. Courtin;” “Operations de Chirurgie recueillies ides anciens Medecins et Chirurgiens;” “Traité des maladies de l'iŒil;” and lastly, “Traité de la parfaite methode d'Embaumer les corps;” which contains a report of that operation, as performed upon the bodies of Charles IX. and Henry III. and IV.

, a French historian, was born about 1625, at Thiers in Auvergne, and became the first historiographer of the academy of painting and sculpture to which office he was elected in 1682. H& died at Paris, April 6, 1705. He was author of many works of considerable reputation, as “Athene Ancienne et Nouvelle;” “Lacedemone Ancienne et Nouvelle,” both printed in 1675, 12mo, and known to be his own productions, though he pretended to have taken them from the papers of his younger brother, who had travelled in that country. He published also “A History of the grand viziers’ Caprogji,” c. “The Life of Mahomet II.;” “The History of Castrucio Castracani,” translated from the Italian of Machiavel; “Les Arts de l‘homme d’Epee, ou Dietionnaire du Genlilhomme,” 1670, in two volumes. His “Ancient and modern Athens” involved him in a serious dispute with Spon, in which he was said to have gained the victory, as far as style and mannerly writing were concerned.

, a heraldic writer, was son of John Guillim of Westburg in Gloucestershire, but born in Herefordshire about 1565. He was sent to a grammar school at Oxford, and apparently entered a student of Brazen* nose college in 1581. Having completed his pursuit of literature in the university, he returned to Minsterworth in Gloucestershire; and had been there only a short space, when he was called to London, and made a member of the society of the college of arms, by the name of Portsmouth; and hence promoted to the honours of rouge-croix pursuivant of arms in ordinary in 1617 in which post he continued till his death, which happened May 7, 1621. His claim to a place in this work arises from the concern he had in a work entitled “The display of Heraldry,” published by him in 1610, folio, which has gone through many editions. To the fifth, which came out in 1679, was added a treatise of honour, civil and military, by captain John Loggan. The last was published, with very large additions, in 1724, and is generally esteemed the best book extant upon the subject, but the entire merit of it does not belong to Guillim, %ut to Barkham (See Barkkam), chaplain to archbishop Bancroft, who gave the manuscript to Guillim, and allowed him to publish it in his own name.

, a French anatomist, was born 1487, at Andermach. He was physician to Francis I. and retired to Strasburg, to avoid the troubles which arose about religion, and became professor of Greek there, as he had been at Louvain; and also practised physic, but was afterwards obliged to resign his professorship. He died Oct. 4, 1574. Guintier translated several treatises from Galen and other authors, and published some tracts in Latin “On the Plague,” 8vo and “On Pregnant Women and Children,” 8vo. He is sard to have been the first who gave the name of pancreas to the glandular substance which is fixed to the peritonaeum; and made some other discoveries, for which Winslow praises him highly, but Vesalius speaks contemptuously of his anatomical skill.

, a French antiquary, and counsellor of the presidial court of Nismes, was born in that city in 1600, of protestant parents, and early acquired a reputation for learning and probity. The court frequently employed him in affairs of importance, in all which he acquitted himself with ability. Henry Frederic of Nassau, prince of Orange, having appointed him counsellor of the parliament of that city, Louis XIV. permitted him to retain with it his office in the presidial of Nismes, one of the most considerable of the kind in that kingdom. He died at Nismes, in 1680. His antiquarian pursuits produced a dissertation entitled, 1. “Explicatio duorum vetustorum numismatum Nemausensium ex sere,” 1655, 4to, twice reprinted, and inserted in Sallengre’s “Thesaurus.” 2. “Recherches historiques et chronologiques, concernant l'etablissement et la suite de seuechaux de Beaucaire et de Nimes,” 1660, 4to. He left also in manuscript three folio volumes of the antiquities of Nismes, with drawings, which were sold by his heirs to baron HohendorfF, and are said to be now in the imperial library at Vienna. Guiran had a fine collection of medals and other antiques, which were dispersed after his death.

, called Quintus Icilius, an able writer on military tactics, was born at Magdeburg, and studied at the universities of Halle, Marpurg, and Leyden, where he applied to the classics, theology, and the oriental languages. He first carried arm* in the service of the United Provinces, and while thus einployed found leisure to prepare materials for his “Memoirs Militaires sur les Grecs et les Remains,” which induced him to obtain permission to visit England, where he re^­mained a year. The work was at length published, in two volumes quarto, 1757, received with much approbation, and went through five editions in France and Holland. In the same year he entered as a volunteer in the allied army, acquired the esteem of Ferdinand of Brunswick, and was recommended to the notice of Frederic II. of Prussia, who kept him near his person, often conversed with him on the art of war, and on account of his great knowledge on this subject, gave him the name of Quintus Icilius, the com* mander of Caesar’s tenth legion, when he appointed him to the command of a regiment formed out of the refuse of all nations, during the heat of the war. At the general peace he was one of the few persons whom his majesty admitted into his convivial parties at Potsdam, and to whom he gave the freest access to his library and coins, which latter Guise-hard increased so much, that he valued both at the sum of a hundred thousand dollars. The king, however, in his latter days, treated him with much disrespect, and took every opportunity to mortify him in the presence of others. Giiiscliard died May 13, 1775. Frederic purchased his library of his heirs for the sum of 12,000 dollars. Besides the work already mentioned, he was author of a very useful work to military or classical students, entitled “Memoires Critiques et Historiques sur plusieurs Points d'Antiquites Militaires,” in 4 vols. Hvo. Gibbon, who read his “Military Memoirs” with great attention, bestows high encomiums on him, and considers him as very superior to Folard, whom however Guischard affected too much to undervalue.

, an English divine, was born at Ablond’s or Abbey-load’s court, near Gloucester, in 1653, and entered in 1669 a commoner of Oriel-college, Oxford, which he changed for All souls, where he was chosen fellow a little before he took his first degree in arts, April 4, 1674. He commenced M. A. in 1677, and entered into orders; but marrying in 1680, he resigned his fellowship. However, he still continued at Oxford, and took a house in St. Michael’s parish, resolving not to leave the university, on account of his studies, which he prosecuted with indefatigable industry, and soon became a great master of the oriental learning and languages. He translated into English, and illustrated with a commentary, Dr. Bernard’s work entitled “Misnae pars ordinis prim”! Zeraim Tituli septem,“1690, 4to, and a tract” De Victimis humanis,“8vo, and was preparing an edition of Abulfeda’s Geography, when he was seized with the small-pox, which carried him off' Sept. 3, 1684, aged only thirty-one. Thomas Smith gives him the title of” Vir longe eruditissimus,“and observes, that his death was a prodigious loss to the republic of letters; and the editors of the” Acta Eruditorum“style him a” person of great learning, and the immortal ornament of the university of Oxford." He was buried at St. Michael’s church in that city, where a monument was erected to his memory by his widow, with a Latin inscription. He left issue a son John, who, being bred to the army, raised himself to the highest posts there, and was well known in the military world, by the title of General Guise. He died in 1765, and bequeathed his large collection of paintings to Christ-church Oxford, where he was educated, and where they are now placed in the lower library.

, an Italian poet of the thirteenth century, was usually called Fra Guittone, as belonging to a religious and military order, now extinct, called the cavalieri gaudenti, established in 1208, during the barbarous crusade carried on against the Albigenses. This abominable massacre, however, was over before Guittone became a member. Little else is known of his history, except that he founded the monastery of St. Mary at Florence, and died in the same year, 1293. The Florence “Collection of the ancient Italian poets,” 1527, contain his poetical works, amounting to about thirty sonnets and canzoni, partly on subjects of love, and partly of devotion, or of both mixed. In most of these is a harmony, taste, and turn of sentiment, more polished than is to be found among his predecessors, and which Petrarch has evidently studied, and sometimes imitated. His letters, published by Bottari, “Lettere de fra Guittone d'Arezzo con note,” Rome, 1745, are curious, not perhaps for intrinsic merit, but as the first specimens of Italian letter-writing.

, a celebrated traveller, of whose various performances a list is given in “Coxe’s Travels,” vol. I. p. 162, was born at Riga, in 1745. On account of his great skill in natural history and knowledge of foreign languages, he was invited to Petersburg, where he was made professor. He was absent three years on his travels. He first went to Astracan and KisJar, and afterwards to the eastern extremity of Caucasus. Here he collected vocabularies of the language spoken in those parts, and discovered some traces of Christianity among the people. He next proceeded to Georgia, was introduced to prince Heraclius, and carefully examined the adjacent country. He then explored the southern districts, inhabited by the Turcoman Tartars, and penetrating into the middle chain of Mount Caucasus, visited Mingrelia, Middle Georgia, and Eastern and the Lower Imeretia. It was his intention next to have journeyed to Crim Tartary, but he was recalled to Petersburg, where he died of a fever in March 1781. His death was much regretted, as he was a man possessed of every requisite for the accomplishment of the purposes which he had in view.

, a German lawyer and historian, was born February 25, 1671, near Nuremberg, and was the son of a clergyman, who died 1689. He was successively professor of philosophy, rhetoric, and the law of nature and nations, at Halle; and frequently consulted on public affairs at Berlin, where his talents were so well known, that he obtained the title of privy-counsellor for his services on various occasions. Gundling was indefatigable, had an excellent memory, great wit, vivacity, and eloquence; but his warmest admirers wished that his numerous writings had contained less satire, and more moderation and politeness. He died rector of the university of Halle, December 16, 1729, leaving several valuable works on literature, history, law, and politics: the principal are, 1.“Historia Philosophic moralis,” 8vo. 2. “Otia,” or a collection of dissertations on various physical, moral, political, and historical subjects, 3 vols. 8vo. 3. “De jure oppignorati Territorii,” 4to. 4. “Status naturalis Hobbesii in corpore juris civilis defensus et defendendus,” 4to. 5. “De statu Reipublicae Germanicse sub Conrado I.” 4to. Ludwig has refuted this work in his “Germania Princeps.” 6. “Gundlingiana,” in German. 7. “Commentaria de Henrico Aucupe,” 4to. 8. “Via ad veritatem,” or a course of philosophy, 3 vols. 8vo. Gundling had a great share in the “Observationes Hallenses,” an excellent collection in 11 vols. 8vo.

, a German prelate and naturalist, was born at Christiana, in Norway, in 1718. He was educated at the public school of Christiana, and in 1737 removed to Copenhagen, where he pursued his studies with great success. In 1742 he began the study of theology, philosophy, and mathematics in the university of Halle, and in 1754 was invited to be extraordinary professor of theology at Copenhagen, preacher at Herlufsholm, and lecturer in theology and the Hebrew language in the public school of that place. Shortly after this, he was ordained priest at Copenhagen, and in 1758 was appointed by his majesty Frederic V. bishop of Drontheim. He was the founder of the royal Norwegian society at Drontheim, of which he was elected vice-president, and in the Transactions of which, he published several curious and useful papers on subjects of natural history. He was a zealous student in botany, and so highly esteemed by Linnæus, that he gave the name of Gunnera to a plant in his system. He was enrolled among the members of the academies of Stockholm, Copenhagen, and other learned societies. He published “Flora Norvegica,” in two parts, fol. 1766, &c. containing 1118 species, to each of which are added the medical uses. The author died in 1773.

, bishop of Ely, was the son of Peter Gunning, vicar of Hoo, in Kent, and born there in 1613. He had his first education at the king’s school in Canterbury, where he commenced an acquaintance with Somner the antiquary, his school -fellow. At fifteen he was removed to Clare-hall, in Cambridge, was promoted to a fellowship in 1633, and became an eminent tutor in the college. Soon after he commenced M. A. and had taken orders, he had the cure of Little St. Mary’s from the master and fellows of Peter-house. He acquired much fame as a preacher, and was licensed as such by the university in 1641, when he distinguished himself by his zeal for the church and king, particularly by protesting publicly against the faction, when most formidable, and urging the university to publish a formal protestation against the rebellious league, in a sermon at St. Mary’s. About the same time, paying a visit to his mother at Tunbridge, he exhorted the people, in two sermons, to make a charitable contribution for the relief of the king’s forces there; which conduct rendered him obnoxious to the powers then in being, who imprisoned him for a short time, and, on his refusing to take the covenant, deprived him of his fellowship. This obliged him to leave the university, but not before he had drawn up a treatise against the covenant, with the assistance of some of his friends, who took care to publish it.

Being thus ejected, he removed to Oxford, where he was incorporated M. A. July 10; 1644, and kindly received by Dr. Pink, warden of New-college, who appointed him one of the chaplains of that house. During his residence there, he officiated two years at the curacy of Cassington, under Dr. Jasper Mayne, near Oxford, and sometimes preached before the court, for which service he was complimented, among many other Cambridge men, with the degree of B. D. June 23, 1646, the day before the surrender of that place to the parliament. Being thus obliged to quit the university, he became tutor to the lord Hatton and sir Francis Comptoti, and then chaplain to sir Robert Shirley, who was so much pleased with his behaviour in some disputations with a Romish priest, as well as with hris great worth and learning in general, that he settled upon him an annuity of 100l. Upon the decease of sir Robert, he held a congregation at the chapel of Exeter-house, in the Strand, where he duly performed all the parts of his office according to the liturgy of the church of England; yet he met with no other molestation from the usurper Cromwell, than that of being now and then sent for and reproved by him. On the return of Charles II. he was restored to his fellowship, and created D. D. by the king’s mandate, Septembers, 1660, having been first presented to a prebend in the church of Canterbury; soon after which he was instituted to the rectories of Cotesmore in Rutland, and of St^ke-Bruern in Northamptonshire. But this was not all; for, before the expiration of the year, he was made master of Corpus-Christi college, in Cambridge, and also lady Margaret’s professor of divinity, which he quitted on succeeding to the regius professorship of divinity, and the headship of St. John’s college, upon the resignation of Dr. Tuckney, who had been obliged June 12, 1661, to give way for Gunning; he being looked upon as the properest person to settle the university on right principles again, after the many corruptions that had crept into that body.

All the royal mandates, indeed, for his several preferments, were grounded upon his sufferings and other deserts for he was reckoned one of the most learned and best-beloved sons of the church of England and as such was chosen proctor both for the chapter of the church of Canterbury, and for the clergy of the diocese of Peterborough, in the convocation held in 1661; one of the committee upon the review of the liturgy, when it was brought into that state of sufficiency where it has rested ever since; and was principally concerned in the conference with the dissenters at the Savoy the same year. In 1670, he was promoted to the bishopric of Chichester, which he held with his regius professorship of divinity till 1674, when he was translated to Ely; where, after nearly ten years enjoying it, he died a bachelor, in his seventy-tirst year, July 6, 1684. His corpse was interred in the cathedral of Ely, under an elegant monument of white marble, the inscription upon which has been often printed.

He was reckoned one of the most learned prelates of his time, and was of a very charitable disposition, and a liberal benefactor to all places with which he was connected. Besides his constant acts of charity and generosity in his life-time, in relieving the poor, supporting many scholars at the university, and adding to the maintenance of poor vicars in the sees of Chichester and Ely he gave 500l. towards building St. Paul’s, London '2001. to the rebuilding Clare-hall, where he had been fellow, and by his will left them 300l. towards a new chapel; to St. John’s college, where he had been master, he bequeathed his library, valued at 500l., and 600l. in money.

But these and other acts of munificence were not sufficient to protect his memory from being severely attacked. The part he took in the Savoy conference, and afterwards against the nonconformists, has been censured as unbecoming and intemperate. Bishop Burnet says, that at the conference all the arts of sophistry were used by him in as confident a manner as if they had been sound reasoning; that he was unweariedly active to very little purpose, and being very fond of the popish rituals and ceremonies, he was much set upon reconciling the church of England to Rome. Mr. Masters states the disputed points in his character to be whether his head was as good as his heart whether he was equally clear in his ideas and discernment, as lively in his imagination and expressions whether his judgment was as solid as his parts were quick whether there was more of scholastic learning, sophistry, or the art of logic, than of real truth and strength in his reasonings and disputations; whether his zeal or his knowledge were predominant, both in the forming and maintaining his opinions and schemes about civil and ecclesiastical polity; and whether he had more regard in his plan of Christian faith, doctrine, and discipline, to the traditions and authorities of the fathers, than to plain scriptural proofs and principles: and upon those points his biographers are divided.

His works were, “A contention for truth, in two publick disputations upon infant baptism, between him and Mr. Henry Denne, in the church of St. Clement-Danes, 26 Nov. 1657,” Lond. 16.58, 4to. “Schism unmasked; or a late conference between him and Mr. John Pierson, minister, on the one part, and two disputants of the Romish persuasion on the other, in May 1657.” This was published in 8vo, the year following, with a large preface, by a catholick at Paris. “A view and correction of the Common Prayer,” 1662. “The Paschal or Lent Fast, Apostolical and perpetual,” Lond. 1662, 4to. Besides these, it ought never to be omitted that he wrote that excellent prayer in our Liturgy, called “The general supplication.”

, an English mathematician, was of Welsh extraction, from a family at Gunter’s-town, in Brecknockshire but his father being settled in the county of Hereford, had this son born to him there in 1581. As he was a gentleman possessed of a handsome fortune, he thought proper to give him a liberal education, to which end he was placed by Dr. Busby at Westminster-school, where he was admitted a scholar on the foundation, and elected student of Christ-church, Oxford, in 1599. Having taken both his degrees in arts at the regular times, he entered into orders, and became a preacher in 1614, and proceeded B. D. November 23, 1615. But genius and inclination leading him chiefly to mathematics, he applied early to that study; and about 1606, merited the title of an inventor by the new projection of his sector, which he then described, together with its use, in a Latin treatise; and several of the instruments were actually made according to his directions. These being greatly approved, as being more extensively useful than any that had appeared before, on account of the greater number of lines upon them, and those better contrived, spread our author’s fame universally their uses also were more largely and clearly shewn than had been done by others and though he did not print them, yet many copies being transcribed and dispersed abroad, carried his reputation along with them, recommended him to the patronage of the earl of Bridgewater, brought him into the acquaintance of the celebrated Mr. Oughtred, and Mr. Henry Briggs, professor of geometry at Gresham; and thus, his fame daily increasing the more he became known, he was preferred to the astronomy-chair at Gresham-college, on March 6, 1619.

He had invented a small portable quadrant, for the more easy finding of the hour and azimuth, and other solar conclusions of more frequent use, in 1618; and in 1620, he published his Latin “Canon Triangulorum, or Table of artificial Sines and Tangents to the Radius 10,000,000 parts, to each Minute of the Quadrant.” This was a great improvement to astronomy, by facilitating the practical part of that science in the resolution of spherical triangles without the use of secants or versed sines, the same thing being done here (by addition and subtraction only) for performing which the former tables of right sines and tangents required multiplication and division. This admirable help to the studious in astronomy was gratefully commemorated, and highly commended, by several of the most eminent mathematicians who were his contemporaries, and who at the same time did justice to his claim to the improvement, beyond all contradiction.

The use of astronomy in navigation unavoidably draws the astronomer’s thoughts upon that important subject; and accordingly we find Gunter discovering a new variation in the magnetic needle, or the mariner’s compass, in 1 Gilbert, in the beginning of that century, had incontestibly established the first discovery of the simple variation; after which the whole attention of the studious in these matters was employed in settling the rule observed by nature therein, without the least apprehension or suspicion of any other; when our author, making an experiment at Deptford in the above year, found that the direction of the magnetism there had moved no less than five degrees within two minutes, in the space of forty-two years. The fact, however, was so surprising, and so contrary to the opinion then universally received of a simple variation only, which had satisfied and bounded all their curiosity, that our author dropt the matter apparently, expecting, through modesty, an error in his observation to have escaped his notice in his experiment. But afterwards, what he had done induced his successor at Gresham, Mr. Gellibrand, to pursue it; and, the truth of Gunter’s experiment being confirmed by a second, farther inquiry was made, which ended in establishing the fact. We have since seen Halley immortalize his name, by settling the rule of it in the beginning of the last century.

The truth is, Gu-nter’s inclination was turned wholly the same way with his genius; and it cannot be denied that he reached the temple of fame by treading in that road. To excite a spirit of industry in prosecuting mathematical knowledge, by lessening the difficulties to the learner; to throw new light into some things, which before appeared so dark and abstruse as to discourage people of ordinary capacities from attempting them; and by that means to render things of wonderful utility in the ordinary employment of life so easy and practicable as to be managed by the common sort; is the peculiar praise of our author, who effected this by that admirable contrivance of his famous rule of proportion, now called the line of numbers, and the other lines laid down by it, and fitted in his scale, which, after the inventor, is called “Gunter’s scale;” the description and use of which he published in 1624, 4to, together with that of his sector and quadrant already mentioned. His fame having reached the ears of his sovereign, prince Charles gave directions, that he should draw the lines upon the dials in Whitehall garden, which were destroyed in Charles Il.'s time, and give a description and use of them; and king James ordered him to print the book the same year, 1624. There was, it seems, a square sj;one there before of the same si?e and form, having five dials upon the upper part, one upon each of the four corners, and one in the middle, which was the principal dial, being a large horizontal concave; besides these, there were others on the sides, east, west, north, and south; but the lines on our author’s dial, except those which shewed the hour of the day, were greatly different. And Dr. Wallis tells us, that one of these was a meridian, in fixing of which great care was taken, a large magnetic needle being placed upon it, shewing its variation irom that meridian from time to time. If the needle was placed there with that intention by our author, it is a proof that his experiment at Deptford had made so much impression upon him, that he thought it worth while to pursue the discovery of the change in the variation, of which the world would doubtless have reaped the fruits, had his life been continued long enough for it. Unfortunately, however, for science, he died December 10, 1G26, about his forty-fifth year, and in the prim of life, at Gresham college, and was buried in St. Peter the Poor, Broad-street, without any monument or inscription; hut his memory will always be preserved in the mathematical world as an inventor, and the parent of instrumental arithmetic. The 5th edition of his works was published by Mr. Leybourn in 1674, 4to.

, a learned protestant divine, was born at Basil, Dec. 8, 1654, where his father was a merchant. Until the fourteenth year of his age, he was instructed by private tutors, and profited so much as to be then fit for the university of Basil, where, after studying languages, philosophy, mathematics, and history, for three or four years, he was on July 2, 1672, admitted to the degrees of master of arts and doctor in philosophy. He tnen studied divinity, and had for one of his masters Peter Werenfels, father of the celebrated Samuel VVerenfels. In about two years, he was appointed to lecture on theology during the vacations, and acquitted himself with great credit. In March 1676, he was admitted a preacher, and the following year passed six months at Geneva, whence he went into France, and visited the university of Saumur, where he heard the lectures of Henry Philiponeau de Hautecour, who was afterwards his colleague in the university of Franeker. His reputation having by this time extended to Germany, he was invited to Heilborn to be professor of philosophy and rhetoric, and rector of the classes, of which office he took possession in 1685, with a public harangue, “de fato philosophico in ecclesia Christiana.” As divinity was still his favourite study, he continued improving his knowledge of it; and having visited Heidelberg during the third jubilee of that university, he received his degree of D. D. with every mark of distinction, even from the learned catholics who heard him maintain a thesis on this occasion, the subject of which was “Christ’s kingly office.” After he had remained about two years at Heilborn, he was requested to accept the theological chair at Hanau, with which he complied. In 1696 he was again removed to Bremen as professor in ordinary of divinity, moderator of the schools, and perpetual rector magrdficus. To this place he drew a great concourse of students; but the fatigues attending his occupations here made him willing to accept the less laborious professorship of divinity at Deventer in 1699. In 1705 the curators of the university of Franeker offered him their theological chair, which he at first refused, but accepted it, on a second and more pressing invitation, in 1707. His constitution was now, however, so much worn down by repeated attacks of the gout, that he did not enjoy this office above four years, dying Sept. 28, 1711. Gurtler was a man of genuine piety, modesty, and candour, and of extensive knowledge in every branch of science, but especially in those connected with his profession. His works, which have generally received the approbation of catholics as well as protestants, are, 1. A Latin, German, Greek, and French Dictionary, published in 1682. 2. “Historia Templariorum observationibus ecclesiasticis aucta,” Amst. 1691, 8vo, and 1702, with additions. 3. “Institutiones Theologies,” ibid. 1794, 4to. 4. “Voces Typico-propheticiT,” Bremen, 1698, 4to, and Utrecht, 1715, considerably enlarged. 5. “Dialogi Eucharistici,” Bremen, 1699, 4to. 6. “SystemaTheologise propbeticse,” Amst. 1702, 4to, considered as one of the best works of the kind. 7. “Origines mundi, et in eo regnorum,” &c. Amst. 1708, 4to. 8. “Dissertationes de Jesu Christo in gloriam evecto,” Franeker, 1711. 9. “Forma sanorum verborum,” a short abridgment of divinity, which he used as a text-book, 1709, 12mo. Gurtler wrote also a “History of the Churches of France,” in German.

, or more properly Gustavus Ericson, king of Sweden, was the son of Eric Vasa, and descended from the ancient kings of Sweden. He was born in 1490. His great passion was the love of glory, and this difficulties and dangers increased rather than diminished. He lived at a time when the greatest part of the wealth of Sweden was in the hands of the clergy, when every nobleman was, in his own territories, a sovereign, and, lastly, when Steeno was administrator of the realm. In the war which was originally prosecuted betwixt the Swedes and Christian king of Denmark, this last, having got Gustavus into his power, kept him a prisoner many years in Denmark. He at length made his escape, and through innumerable dangers got back to his native country, where, for a long period, he used every effort to rouse his countrymen to resist and repel their invaders and victorious enemies. In this, however, he was not successful; and Christian of Denmark having got possession of Stockholm and Coltnar, exercised the cruelest tyranny on all ranks, and in one day put to death ninety-four nobles, among whom was the father of Gustavus. Gustavus at length prevailed on the Dalecarlians to throw off the yoke; and, at the 4 head of a considerable body of forces, entered the provinces of Halsingia, Gestricia, and some others. After a series of desperate adventures, temporary successes, and frequent defeats; he recovered Upsal; for which disappointment Christian put to death the mother and sister of Gustavus in cruel torments. Having overcome East Gothland, and blockaded Stockholm, he convened the Staters-General, and was by them offered the title of King. This he refused, and was satisfied with the regal power, and title of administrator. A short time afterwards, a revolution took place in Denmark; Christian was driven from his dominions; and Frederic duke of Holstein, uncle of Christian, was made his successor. There was now nothing to oppose Gustavus; he therefore summoned the States to meet at Stregnez, filled up the vacancies of the senate, and was proclaimed king with the usual forms of election. He also prevailed on the States to render the crown hereditary to the male heirs; and, to make the life of Gustavus yet more remarkable in history, it was in his reign that Lutheranism was established as the natural religion of Sweden. The latter part of his life was spent in cultivating the arts of peace, and in decorating his metropolis with noble edifices. He died at Stockholm, of a gradual decay, on the 9th of September, 1560, in the seventieth year of his age, and was quietly succeeded in his throne by his eldest sou Eric.

, king of Sweden, commonly called the Great, a title which, if great valour united with great wisdom, great magnanimity with regard to himself, and great consideration of the wants and infirmities of others, have any claim, he seems well to have deserved. He was born at Stockholm in 1594. His name Gustavus he inherited from his grandfather Gustavus Vasa, and he was called Adolphus from his grandmother Adolpha. His education was calculated to form a hero, and seems, in all respects, to have resembled that bestowed on Henry the Fourth of France. He had a great genius, a prodigious memory, and a docility and desire of learning almost beyond example. He ascended the throne of Sweden in 1611, being then no more than fifteen; but the choice he made of ministers and counsellors proved him fully adequate to govern. His valour in the field was tried first against Denmark, Muscovy, and Poland. He made an honourable peace with the two first, and compelled the last to evacuate Livonia. He then formed an alliance with the protestants of Germany against the emperor, and what is commonly called the league. In two years and a half he overran all the countries from the Vistula as far as the Danube and the Rhine. Every thing submitted to his power, and all the towns opened to him their gates. In 1631 he conquered Tilly, the imperial general, before Leipsic; and a second time at the passage of the Lech. In the following year, he fought the famous battle in the plains of Lutzen, where he unfortunately fell at the immature age of thirty-eight, Nov. 16, 1632. Besides his other noble qualities he loved and cultivated the sciences. He enriched the university of Upsal; he founded a royal academy at Abo, and an university at Dorp in Livonia. Before his time there were no regular troops in Sweden; but he formed and executed the project of having 80,000 men constantly well armed, disciplined, and cloathed. This he accomplished without difficulty, on account of the love and confidence which his subjects without reserve reposed in their king. Some historians have delighted to draw a parallel between Gustavus and the great Scipio, and it is certain that they had many traits of character in common. Scipio attacked the Carthaginians in their own dominions; and Gustavus undertook to curb the pride of Austria by carrying the war into the heart of her country. Here indeed the advantage is with Gustavus; for, the Carthaginian power was already debilitated; but the emperor’s had before never received any check. He died literally, as it is said of him, with the sword in his hand, the word of command on his tongue, and victory in his imagination. His life has been well written by our countryman Harte; and he appears in all respects to have deserved the high and numerous encomiums which writers of all countries have heaped upon his memory. Some have suspected this exalted character to have lost his life from the intrigues of cardinal Richelieu; others from Lawemburgh, one of his generals, whom Ferdinand the emperor is said to have corrupted. He left an only daughter, whom he had by the princess Mary of Brandenburg, and who succeeded her father at the age of five. This princess was the celebrated Christina queen of Sweden.

, an eminent clergyman of the presbyterian church of Scotland, descended from the ancient family of Pitforthy in the shire of Angus, was horn on his father’s estate of Pitforthy in 1620, and educated at the university of St. Andrew’s under his cousin, professor James Guthrie, who was executed at the restoration for his opposition to episcopal government, although he had with equal zeal opposed the usurpation of Cromwell. Under this tutor our author became a very hard student, well versed in the classical languages; and after taking his degree of M. A. studied divinity under professor Samuel Rutherford. He became afterwards private tutor to the eldest son of the earl of London, chancellor of Scotland, and in November 1644 was presented to the church of Finwick, a newly erected parish, and consisting of inhabitants rude and unacquainted with religion. The pains he bestowed upon them, however, soon produced a favour able change in their manners, and his easy and affable address and example had a remarkable elfcct upon them. With this view, as he was fond of fishing, fowling, and other field sports, he took those opportunities to mix among his people, and recommend morals and piety. He was not less happy in curbing the insolence of Cromwell’s army when in Scotland, by addressing them with an eloquence and air of authority which they could not resist. In the mean time his great fame as a preacher procured him invitations from the more eligible churches of Renfrew, Linlithgow, Stirling, Glasgow, and Edinburgh, to all which he preferred his humble situation at Finwick, and continued among his parishioners until 1664, when he was ejected by Burnet, archbishop of Glasgow, notwithstanding the solicitations of the earl of Glencairn, then chancellor of Scotland, and other persons of rank, who represented Mr. Guthrie as an excellent man and well affected to government. He did not long survive this sentence, dying Oct. Jo, 1665. Some spurious publications were attributed to him; but the only genuine work extant is his “Christian’s Great Interest,” which has long been a standard book in Scotland, and has been translated into Dutch and French, and, as reported, into one of the Eastern languages, at the expence of the Hon. Robert Boyle.

, a miscellaneous writer and compiler, whose name is now chiefly preserved by a geographical grammar, which it is said he did not write, was a gentleman descended from an ancient family, being the representative of the Guthries of Haukerton, in the county of Angus, Scotland. He was born at Brichen in that county in 1708, and educated at King’s college, Aberdeen, where he took his degrees, and followed the profession of a schoolmaster. He is said to have removed to London, in consequence of a love-affair, which created some disturbance in his family; others report that having but a small patrimony, and being an adherent of the unfortunate house of Stuart, he could not accept of any office in the state; he came therefore to London, and employed his talents and learning as, what he himself calls, “an author by profession.” His talents and learning were not of the inferior kind, when he chose to employ them leisurely; but he wrote hastily, and often in need, and seems to have cared little for his reputation, by lending his name frequently where he did not contribute with his pen. Among his first employments was that of compiling the parliamentary debates for the Gentleman’s Magazine, before Dr, Johnson had undertook that business; for this purpose Guthrie sometimes attended the house, but more frequently had to depend on very slight information. Connecting himself terwards with the booksellers, he compiled a variety of work among which are “A History of the English Peerage,” “History of the World,” 12 vols. 8vo, “A History of England,” “History of Scotland,” 10 vols. 8vo, and the well-known “Geographical Grammar,” said to have been really compiled by Knox the bookseller. Besides these, he translated “Quintilian,” 3 vols. 8vo, “Cicero’s Offices,” 8vo, and “Cicero’s Epistles to Atticus,” 2 vols. 12mo. Of his original compositions we have heard only of a beautiful poem, “The Eagle and Robin Red-breast,” in the collection of poems called the “Union,” where, however, it is said to be written by Archibald Scott, before 1600; “The Friends, a sentimental history,” 1754, 2 vols. 12mo; and “Remarks on English Tragedy,” a pamphlet. He was engaged, however, in many political papers and pamphlets, to which his name did not appear; and in 1745-6, received a pension of 200l. from government, for the services of his pen, which was continued during his life. In 1762 he renewed the offer of his services to the minister of the day, and they probably were accepted. He had the pen of a ready writer, and his periodical essays were perhaps his best. Much was expected from his “Peerage,” in which he was assisted by Mr. Ralph Bigland, each individual article being submitted to the inspection of the representative of the noble family treated of; yet, notwithstanding all this care, the work abounds with errors, contradictions, and absurdities His “History of England” merits greater praise, and had at least the honour of irritating Horace Wai pole to a gross abuse of Guthrie, because he had anticipated some of Walpole’s opinions concerning Richard III. Guthrie wrote at that time in the Critical Review, and pointed out his own discoveries. Boswell informs us, that Dr. Johnson esteemed Guthrie enough to wish that his life should be written. This, however, was neglected when the means of information were attainable. He died March I', 177O, and was interred in Marybone burial-ground, with a monument and inscription against the east wall.

, called also Gænsfleisch de Sulgeloch, the reputed inventor of the art of printing, was born at Mentz, of noble and wealthy parents, about 1400. In 1427 he came to reside at Strasburgh a merchant, but appears to have returned to Mentz in 1430, and to have been a man of property in 1434. Between this and the year 1439 he had conceived and perhaps made some trials of the art of printing with metal types. In the archives of the city of Mentz, Schoepflin discovered a document of a process carried on by Guttenberg against one George Dritzehen, from which we learn that the former had promised to make the latter acquainted with a secret art that he had recently discovered. In the same document mention is made of four forms kept together by two screws, or press-spindles, and of letters and pages being cut up and destroyed, to prevent any person from discovering the art. The ablest writers have, however, differed upon the subject of the materials with which Guttenberg at first printed. Schoepflin supposed them to have been metal; Fournier, Meerman, and Fischer, were of opinion that they were composed of wood. In the years 1441-2 Guttenberg lived at Strasburg, as a wealthy man, and continued in the same place till 1446, when he returned again to Mentz, and seems to have opened his mind fully tc Fust, a goldsmith of the same place (See Fust), and prevailed on him to advance large sums of money in order to make more complete trials of the art. Between 1450 and 1455, the celebrated Bible of 637 leaves, the first important specimen of printing with metal types, was executed between Guttenberg and Fust. Exclusively of the Bible, Guttenberg is supposed to have printed some other works, but there is no book whatever extant with his name subscribed. He died about the latter end of 1467. More ample information and discussion on the invention of this noble art, and the claims of Guttenberg, may be found in Oberlin’s “Essai sur les annales de la vie de Jean Gutenberg,” 1801; Fischer’s “Essai sur les monumens Typographiques de Gutenberg,” 1802, 4to Danou’s “Analyse des opinions diverses sur l'origine de Plmprimerie,” 1803, Svojand the better known works of Schoepflin, Meerman, Fournier, Heinecken, and Lambinet.

, founder of Guy’s hospital, was the son of Thomas Guy, lighterman and coal-dealer in Horseleydown, Southwark. He was put apprentice, in 1660, to a "bookseller, in the porch of Mercers’ chapel, and set up trade with a stock of about 200l. in the house that forms the angle between Cornhill and Lombard-street. The English Bibles being at that time very badly printed, Mr. Guy engaged with others in a scheme for printing them in Holland, and importing them; but, this being put a stop to, he contracted with the university of Oxford for their privilege of printing then), and carried on a great Bible trade for many years to considerable advantage. Thus he began to accumulate money, and his gains rested in his hands; for, being a single man and very penurious, his expences were very trifling. His custom was to dine on his shop-counter, with no other table,-cloth than an old newspaper; he was also as little nice in regard to his apparel. The bulk of his fortune, however, was acquired by the less reputable purchase of seamen’s tickets during queen Anne’s wars, and by South-sea stock in the memorable year 1720.

To shew what great events spring from trivial causes, it may be observed, that the public are indebted to a most trifling incident for the greatest part of his immense fortune’s being applied to charitable uses. Guy had a maidservant, whom he agreed to marry; and, preparatory to his nuptials, he had ordered the pavement before his door to be mended so far as to a particular stone which he marked. The maid, while her master was out, innocently looking on the paviours at work, saw a broken place they had not repaired, and mentioned it to them; but they told her that Mr. Guy had directed them not to go so far. “Well,” says she, “do you mend it: tell him I bade you, and I know he will not be angry.” It happened, however, that the poor girl presumed too much on her influence over her wary lover, with whom the charge of a few shillings extraordinary turned the scale entirely against her; for, Guy, enraged'to find his orders exceeded, renounced the matrimonial scheme, and built hospitals in his old age.

In 1707 he built and furnished three wards on the north side of the outer court of St. Thomas’s hospital in Southwark, and gave 100l. to it annually for eleven years preceding the erection of his own hospital. Some time before his death he erected the stately iron gate, with the large houses on each side, at the expence of about 3000l. was seventy-six years of age when he formed the design of building the hospital near St. Thomas’s which bears his name. The charge of erecting this vast pile amounted to 18,793l. besides 219,499l. which he left to endow it: and he just lived to see it roofed in. He erected an almshouse, with a library, at Tarn worth, in Staffordshire (the place of his mother’s nativity, and which he represented in parliament), for fourteen poor men and women; and for their pensions, as well as for the putting out of poor children apprentices, bequeathed 125l. a year. To Christ’s hospital he gave 400l. a year for ever; and the residue of his estate, amounting to about 80,000l. among those who could prove themselves in any degree related to him.

, an eminent critic, was born of a good family at Angers, in 1575. He lost his father and mother when a child; and the small estate they left him was wasted by the imprudence of his guardians. He applied himself, however, intensely to books; and, with a view to improve himself by the conversation of learned men, he took a journey to Paris in 1599. The acquaintance he formed with the sons of Claudius du Puy proved very advantageous to him; for, the most learned persons in Paris frequently visited these brothers, and many of them met every day in the house of Thuanus, where Mess, du Puy received company. After the death of that president, they held those conferences in the same place; and Guyet constantly made one. He went to Rome in 1608, and applied himself to the Italian tongue with such success as to be able to write Italian verses. He was much esteemed by cardinal du Perron and several great personages. He returned to Paris by the way of Germany, and was taken into the house of the duke d'Epernon, to teach the abbot de Granselve, who was made cardinal de la V alette in 1621. His noble pupil, who conceived so great an esteem for him as always to entrust him with his most important affairs, took him to Rome, and procured him a good benefice; but Guyet, after his return to Paris, chose to live a private life rather than in the house of the cardinal, and resided in Burgundy college. Here he spent the remainder of his life, employed in his studies; and wrote a dissertation, in which he pretended to shew that the Latin tongue was derived from the Greek, and that all the primitive words of the latter consisted only of one syllable; but of this they found, after his death, only a vast compilation of Greek and Latin words, without any order or coherence, and without any preface to explain his project. But the reading of the ancient authors was his favourite employment, and the margins of his classics were full of notes, many of which have been published. Those upon Hesiod were imparted to Graevius, who inserted them in his edition of that author, 1667. The most complete collection found among his papers was his notes upon Terence; and therefore they were sent to Boeclerus, and afterwards printed. He took great liberties as a critic: for he rejected as supposititious all such verses as seemed to him not to savour of the author’s genius. Thus he struck out many verses of Virgil discarded the first ode in Horace and would not admit the secret history of Procopius. Notwithstanding the boldness of his criticisms, and his free manner of speaking in conversation, he was afraid of the public; and dreaded Salmasius in particular, who threatened to write a book against him if he published hjs thoughts about some passages in ancient authors. He was generally accounted a man of great learning, and is said to have been a sincere and honest man. He was cut for the stone in 1636; excepting which, his long life was hardly attended with any illness. He died of a catarrh, after three days illness, in the arms of James du Puy, and Menage his countryman, April 12, 1655, aged eighty. His life is written in Latin, with great judgment and politeness, by Mr. Portner, a senator of Ratisbon, who took the supposititious name of Antonius Periander Rhaetus; and is prefixed to his notes upon Terence, printed with those of Boeclerus, at Strasburg, in 1657, an edition in no great estimation.

, a French lady of fashion, remarkable for simplicity of heart, and regularity of manners, but of an enthusiastic and unsettled temper, was descended of a noble family, and born atMontargis, April 13, 1648. At the age of seven she was sent to the convent of the Ursulines, where one of her sisters by half-blood took care of her. She had afforded proofs of an enthusiastic species of devotion from her earliest infancy, and bad made so great a progress in what her biographers call “the spiritual course” at eight years of age, as surprized the confessor of the queen mother of England, widow of Charles I. who presented her to that princess, by whom she would have been retained, had not her parents opposed it, and sent her back to the Ursulines. She wished then to take the habit; but they having promised her to a gentleman in the country, obliged her to marry him. At twenty-eight years of age she became a widow, being left with two infant sons and a daughter, of whom she was constituted guardian; and their education, with the management of her fortune, became her only employment. She had put her domestic affairs into such order, as shewed an uncommon capacity; when of a sudden she was struck with an impulse to abandon every worldly care, and give herself up to serious meditation, in which she thought the whole of religion was comprised.

In this disposition of mind she went first to Paris, where she became acquainted with M. d'Aranthon, bishop of Geneva, who persuaded her to go to his diocese, in order to perfect an establishment he had founded at Gex, for the reception of newly-converted catholics. She accordingly Went in 1681, and took her daughter with her. Some time afterwards, her parents desired her to resign the guardianship of her children to them, and all her fortune, which was 40,000 livres a-year. She readily complied with their request, reserving only a moderate pension for her own subsistence. On this the new community desired their bishop to request her to bestow this remainder upon their house, and become herself the superior; but she refused to comply with the proposal, not approving th^ir regulations; at which the bishop and his community took such offence, that he desired her to leave the house.

She then retired to the Ursulines at Thonon, and from thence to Turin, Grenoble, and at last to Verceil, by the invitation of that bishop, who had a great veneration for her piety. At length, after an absence of five years, her ill state of health made her return to Paris, in 1686, to have the best advice. During her perambulations abroad, she composed the “Moyen court et tres facile de faire Oraison;” and another piece, entitled “Le Cantique tie Cantiques tie Salomon interprete, selon le sens mystique,” which were printed at Lyons, with a licence of approbation; but as her irreproachable conduct and extraordinary virtues made many converts to her system, which was culled Quietism, she was confined, by an order from the king, in the convent des Filles de la Visitation, in 1688. Here she was strictly examined for the space of eight months, by order of M. Harlai, archbishop of Paris; but this served only to establish her innocence and virtue; and madame Miraniou, the superior of the convent, representing the injustice of her detention to madame Maintenon, the latter pleaded her cause so effectually to the king, that she obtained her discharge, and afterwards conceived a particular affection and esteem for her.

Not long after her deliverance, she was introduced to Fenelon, afterwards archbishop of Cambray, who became her disciple. She had besides acquaintance with the dukes de Chevreuse and Beauvilliers, and several other distinguished persons, who, however, could not protect her from the ecclesiastics, who made violent outcries on the danger of the church from her sect. In this exigence, she was persuaded to put her writings into the hands of the celebrated Bossuet, bishop of Meaux, and submit them to his judgment; who, after reading all her papers, both printed and Mss. including a life she had written of herself, had a conference with her, and was well satisfied with her principles; but her enemies among the churchmen bt-ing not equally satisfied, an order passed for the re-examination of her two books already mentioned. Bossuet was at the head of this examination, to whom the bishop of Chalons, afterwards cardinal de Noailles, was joined, at the request of madame Guyon; and to these two were added, M.Tronson, superior of the society of St. Sulpice, and Fenelon. During the examination, madame Guyon retired to a convent at Meaux, by the desire of Bossuet, who at the end of six months drew up thirty articles, sufficient as he thought to set the sound maxims of a spiritual and mystic life in a proper light, to which four more were added by way of qualification by M. Fenelon, and the whole were signed at Issy near Paris, by all the examiners, March 10, 1695. Madame Guyon having signed them by the advice of Bossuet, he prevailed with her likewise to subscribe a submission, in which, among other things, she said, “I declare nevertheless, without any prejudice to the present submission, that I never had any design to advance any thinw that is contrary to the mind of the catholic apostolic Iloman church, to which I have always been, and shall always continue, by the help of God, to be submissive even to the last breath of my life; which I do not say by way of excuse, but from a sense of my obligation to declare my sentiments in simplicity. I never held any of those errors which are mentioned in the pastoral letter of M. de Meaux; having always intended to write in a true catholic sense, and not then apprehending that any other sense could be put upon my words.” To this the bishop subjoined an attestation, dated July 16, 1695, signifying that “madam Guyon having lived in the house, by the order and permission of their bishop, for the space of six months, had never given the least trouble or pain, but great edification; that in her whole conduct, and all her words, there appeared strict regularity, simplicity, sincerity, humility, mortification, sweetness, and Christian patience, joined to a true devotion and esteem for all matters of faith, especially for the mystery of the incarnation, and the holy infancy of our Lord Jesus Christ; and that, if the said lady would choose to pass the rest of her life in their house, the community would esteem it a favour and happiness, &c.” In consequence of these submissions, and of this testimony, Bossuet declared himself satisfied with her conduct, and continued her in the participation of the holy sacrament, in which he found her; and added that he had not discovered her to be any wise involved in the abominations, as he was pleased to term them, of Molina (see Molina), or others elsewhere condemned; and that he never intended to comprehend her in what he had said of those abominations in his ordonnance of April 15th preceding.

Thus acquitted she returned to Paris, not thinking of any further prosecution.; but all these attestations and submissions were not sufficient to allay the storm, and she soon found herself involved in the prosecution or rather persecution of the archbishop of Cambray. This amiable prelate, when Bossuet desired his approbation of the book he had composed, in answer to madame Guyon’s sentiments, not only refused it, but openly declared that this pious woman had been treated with great partiality and injustice, and that the censures of her adversary were unmerited and groundless. Fenelon also, in the same year, published a book, in which he adopted several of the tenets of madame Guyon, and especially that favourite doctrine of the mystics, which teaches that the love of the Supreme Being must be pure and disinterested, that is, exempt from all views of interest and all hope of reward. What followed with respect to the archbishop may be seen in another place (art. Fenelon); but madame Guyon was imprisoned before the expiration of 1695, in the castle of Vincennes, whence she was removed to a convent, and afterwards sent to the Bastille, where she underwent many rigorous examinations, and continued in prison as a criminal till the meeting of the general assembly of the clergy of France in 1700, when nothing being proved against her, she was released. After this she went first to the castle belonging to her children, whence she was permitted to retire to Blois, the next town to that castle.

From this time till her death, which was twelve years, she remained in perfect oblivion, and her uniform and retired life is an evident proof, that the noise she had made in the world, proceeded not from any ambition she had of making a figure in it: her whole time being employed in the contemplation of God. The numerous verses which proceeded from the abundance of her heart, were formed into a collection, which was printed after her death, in five volumes, under the title of “Cantiques Spirituels, ou d‘Emblemes sur l’Amour Divin.” Her other writings consist of twenty volumes of the Old and New Testament, with “Reflections et Explications concernant la Vie imerieure” f< Discours Chretiennes,“in two volumes” Letters to several Persons,“in four” Her Life,“written by herself, in three a volume of” Visitations,“drawn from the most venerable authors, which she made use of before her examiners, and two of” Opuscles."

, a French historian, was born in 1701 at Lous-le-Saunier in Fi'unche-comte, and entered the congregation of the oratory, which he afterwards quitted, and came to Paris, and passed his days in literary labours. He died here in 1771. His principal works are, 1. A continuation of “Echard’s Roman History,” from Constantine to the taking of Constantinople by Mahomet II. 10 vols. 12mo, which Voltaire has thought proper to undervalue; but others say that in point or style and accuracy, it may rank among the best productions of the kind from the French press. 2. “Histoire des empires et des republiques,” 1733, &c. 12 vols. 12mo, of which it is said, that, if compared with Rollin’s, it is less agreeable and elegant: but it proves that Guy on drew his materials from the original sources of the ancients; whilst, on the contrary, RolJin has often copied the moderns. 3. “Histoire des Amazones ancienneset modernes,” Paris, 1740, 2 vols. 12mo, a curious, and in many respects an original work. 4. “Histoire des Indes,” 3 vols. 12mo, inferior in every respect. 5. “Oracle des nouveaux philosophes,” not so remarkable for style, as for an able confutation of the new philosophy of his time, and the uneasiness it gave Voltaire. 6. “Bibliotheque ecclesiastique,” 1772, 8 vols. 12mo, &C.

, an agreeable French writer, was born at Marseilles in 1720, and became a merchant of distinguished probity. Having often had occasion to visit Constantinople, Smyrna, &c. in the course of business, he conceived the idea of comparing the ancient and modern Greeks, and endeavouring to trace among the latter what was yet to be found of the grandeur, spirit, and institutions of their ancestors. For this purpose he made frequent excursions from Constantinople, where he lived under the immediate protection of the king of France, into Greece, with Homer in his hand; and how extensive and minute his observations were, appeared in his “Voyage Litteraire de la Grece,” on which his fame chiefly rests, and which was first published in 1771, 2 vols. 12mo; in 1783, 4 vols. 8vo. He was taking another voyage in order to correct and enlarge a new edition of this work, when he died at Zante in 1799. This work procured him a very considerable name in the literary wprld; but in whatever reputation it was held in Europe, he afforded such satisfaction to the subjects of his inquiry) that the modern Greeks, to testify to him their gratitude for his having so well defended them from their detractors, unanimously offered him the diploma of citizen of Athens; reviving^ in his favour, an ancient ceremony fallen into desuetude for a great many centuries. Some years before, he had received a similar compliment from a northern power. This true philosopher, without ceasing to serve his country, knew how to extend his beneficent views beyond the limits of his country. The “Voyage Litteraire de la Grece,” however, is the chief work of C. Guys. His other pieces are, a “Relation Abrege*e de ses Voyages en Italic et dans le Nord;” and a translation in verse of the elegies of Tibullus, an essay upon the antiquities of Marseilles his native place, and the eloge of Duguay-Trouin. A translation of his Journey was published in English in 1772, 3 vols. 12mo, with the improper title of a “Sentimental Journey.”

, an eminent dissenting divine, of the independent persuasion, was a native of Hertford, where he was born in 1680, and having shewn a pious disposition from his youth, was admitted a member of the dissenting congregation of that place. He afterwards pursued his studies, with a view to the ministry, under Mr. Payne of Saffron Walden, and being admitted to preach at the age of twenty, became assistant to the rev. Mr. Haworth of Hertford, whom he afterwards succeeded in that congregation. Here he continued some years, and was very successful in opposing the Arian doctrines which had crept in among his Hock; and to strengthen his efforts he published in 1719, a small volume on the divinity of Christ, and in 1721, another on the divinity of the Holy Ghost. In 1727 he was invited to London, and became minister to a congregation in New Broad-street. In 1732 he received the degree of D. D. from one of the universities of Scotland. Besides his regular duty at New Broad-street, he was for niany years a preacher of the Tuesday’s lecture at Pinners* Hall, and of that at St. Helen’s on a Friday. In his avowal of his religious principles (those called Calvinistic) he was open, steady, and consistent, and his character and conduct were, in every point of view, uniform, and amiable. The goodness of his natural disposition, heightened by a spirit of real religion, exerted him to an activity which rendered his life very important. He was a kind and useful friend to the young, and extremely liberal to the poor, always devoting a tenth part of his annual income to charitable uses. After enjoying a considerable share of health for many years, he became lame and blind, but was enabled to continue his public services almost to the time of his death, which took place Nov. 22, 1761. Jle published a great variety of occasional sermons, and of pious tracts, and had a short controversy with Dr. Chandler, in which the latter is said to have appeared to very little advantage. But his great work was his “Paraphrase on the New Testament,” 1739 1752, 3 vols. 4to, and reprinted in 6 vols. 8vo, which is said to display a sound judgment, intimate acquaintance with the original, and considerable critical powers.

, the Ovid of Wales, and one of the most famous Welsh bards, was born in 1340 at Brogydin, in the county of Cardigan. He was brought up in the family of Llewelyn ap Guilym Fychan, styled lord of Cardigan, at Emlyn, until he was fifteen years of age; at which period he removed, after a short stay with his parents, and settled as steward and private tutor in the family of Ivor Hael. Like other itinerant bards of that age, he often visited different parts of the principality, and was so universally admired, that he has been claimed by the men of Anglesea as their countryman; and was generally known by the name of David of Glamorgan, and the nightingale of Teivi vale, in Cardiganshire. He died about 1400. Excepting music and a few Latin words, which he might pick up at mass, it cannot be ascertained from his works, that he had any acquaintance with the sciences or learned languages; for his poems consist chiefly of lively descriptions of nature, written in pure unadulterated Welsh. His “Poems” were published in 1792, 8vo, by Mr. Owen Jones and Mr. William Owen, who think that in invention, harmony, perspicuity, and elegance of language, Gwilym has not been excelled by any of his successors. A translation, however, is yet wanting to enable the English reader to appreciate his merits.

, an English physician of considerable eminence in his day, was the son of Edward Gwinne, descended from an ancient family in Wales, who at this time resided in London. His son was educated at Merchant Taylors’ school, whence in 1574 he was elected a scholar of St. John’s college, Oxford, took the degree of B. A. May 14, 1578, and was afterwards perpetual fellow of the college. It was the custom at that time in Oxford for the convocation to appoint a certain number of regent masters, to read each of them upon some one of the liberal arts two years, for which they received a small stipend, levied upon the younger scholars. This provision was made, before the public professorships were settled and supported by fixed salaries. Agreeably to this practice, Mr. Gwinne was made regent-master in July 1582, and appointed to read upon music, and there is extant a manuscript oration of his upon that subject, spoken Oct. 15, of that year, in which he calls himself prelector musica publicus. When he had taken his degrees in arts, he studied physic, and practised in and about Oxford for several years. In 1588 he was chosen junior proctor of the university, and in 1592 distinguished himself in a disputation at Oxford before queen Elizabeth. On July 17, 1593, he was created doctor of physic. He obtained leave of the college in 1595, to attend sir Henry Union, ambassador from queen Elizabeth to the French court, and continued with him during his absence abroad.

Upon the settlement of Gresham college, he vras chosen the first professor of physic about the beginning of March 1596, being one of the two nominated by the university of Oxford. On the 25th June, 1604, he was admitted a candidate of the College of Physicians of London; at the beginning of 1605 was made physician of the Tower; and on Dec. 22 in the same year, was chosen a fellow of the college. In the month of August of that year, king James and his queen, with prince Henry and their courts, went to Oxford, where they were entertained with academical exercises of all kinds, in which Dr. Gwinne again distinguished himself, particularly in a question respecting the salutary or hurtful nature of tobacco, proposed in compliment to his majesty, who was a professed enemy to that weed. In the evening of the same day, a Latin comedy was acted at St. John’s college, written by Dr. Gwinne, and entitled “Vertumnus, sive Annus recurrens.”

Dr. Gwinne kept his professorship at Gresham college till Sept. 1607, and then quitted it very probably upon his marriage. After he left Gresham college, he continued to practise in London, and was much esteemed both in the city and couit. In 1620, he, and seven others, were appointed commissioners by his majesty, for garbling tobacco; and a power was granted to any five or more of them (one of whom was to be a physician, another a merchant, a third a grocer, and a fourth an apothecary), to draw up orders and directions in writing for garbling and distinguishing that commodity before it was exposed to sale. Dr. Gwinne died, at his house in Old Fish-street, in 1627. “He was,” says Dr. Ward, “a man of quick parts, a lively fancy and poetic genius, had read much, was well versed in all sorts of polite literature, accurately skilled in the modern languages, and much valued for his knowledge and success in the practice of physic. But his Latin style was formed upon a wrong taste, which led him from the natural and beautiful simplicity of the ancients, into points of wit, affected jingle, and scraps of sentences detached from old authors; a custom which at that time began to prevail both here and abroad. And, he seems to have contracted this humour gradually, as it grew more in vogue; for his ‘ Oratio in laudem musicæ,’ is not so deeply tinged with it, as his ‘Orationes duse,’ spoken many years afterwards in Gresham college.”

, a Swedish states. man and a man of learning, was descended of an ancient and respectable family, one of the members of which was created a count in the reign of Charles XII. The display of count Gyllenborg 7 s political fame was first made at London, where he resided for several years in quality of ambassador from the court of Stockholm, and where his conduct brought upon him a very singular misfortune. In 1716, Charles XII. irritated against George I. for his purchasing of the king of Denmark the duchies of Bremen and Verdeii (conquered from the Swedish monarch) formed a project of invading Scotland from Gottenburg, with 16,000 men, and placing the Pretender on the throne of Great Britain. After the very recent defeat of a plan of this kind, this new one may appear somewhat romantic. It was conducted, however, in concert with the English malcontents and refugees, by count Gyllenborg at London baron Goertz, the Swedish envoy, at the Hague, and baron Sparre, at Paris. But the English ministry being apprized of it, intercepted, copied, and then forwarded their correspondence; and just as the plot was ripe for execution (the Habeas Corpus act having been purposely suspended) caused the Swedish ambassador to be arrested in London, and published in their own justification, all the intercepted letters in French and English. Gyllenborg was first sent to a house in the country, where he was strictly guarded, and was afterwards conveyed to a sea-port, and dismissed the kingdom, in July 1717. As soon as he arrived at Stockholm, the British ambassador was likewise liberated from confinement, as the Swedish court had thoyght proper to use reprisals.

Gyllenborg afterwards waited on Charles XII. and was appointed, with baron Goertz, minister-plenipotentiary at the conferences of pacification which were opened with the court of Russia in the isle of Aland, but which terminated without success. In 1719 he was raised to the dignity of high chancellor of Sweden. In the beginning of the following year he also acted an important part in the negociations respecting the accession of Frederick I. to the throne, and gained constantly greater influence during the reign of this monarch, who appointed him counsellor of the Swedish empire, and chancellor of the university of Lund; and in 1739, when a great change took place in the senate and ministry, in which he took an active part, he was made president of chancery, minister for the foreign and home departments, and soon after chancellor of tin* university of Upsal. He died Dec. 14, 1746, with a high character for political talent, general learning, and ambition to promote learning and science in his country. He left to the university of Upsal, his valuable cabinet of natural history, remarkable for a great number of amphibious productions and corals, which Linnæus has described under the title “Amphibia Gyllenborgiana.” He appears also to have been a man of a religious turn of mind, from his translating into the Swedish language Sherlock’s “Discourse on Death,” but which he could not get licensed, as the Swedish clergy pretended to find some things in it contrary to sound doctrine. He procured it, therefore, to be printed in Holland, and distributed the whole edition for the benefit of his countrymen. He als* translated some English comedies, with alterations suitable to the genius of the Swedes, which were acted with applause at Stockholm. He had a concern in a periodical paper called the “Argus,” printed at Stockholm, but which, owing to the editor meddling imprudently with politics, appears to have been discountenanced. The count married an English lady, second daughter of John Wright, esq. attorney-general of Jamaica, and widow of Elias Deritt, esq. deputy o'f the great wardrobe under the duke of Montague, by whom he had no issue; the counts of his name in Sweden are his collateral relations. His lady’s daughter by Mr. Deritt, accompanying her mother to Sweden, was created countess Gyllenborg, and afterwards married Baron Sparre, on whose dqath she returned to England, where she died in 1766, and her daughter by the Baron died at Thirske in Yorkshire in 1778.

, who is said to have first suggested the weekly meetings of the royal society, and was one of its first fellows when established after the restoration, was born in 1605, at Newhausen, near Worms in the Palatinate, and educated at home. In 1625 he came to Oxford, and studied there about half a year, whence he went for the same time to Cambridge. He then visited some of the universities abroad, but returned to Oxford in 1629, and became a commoner of Gloucester-hall (now Worcester college). Here he remained three years, but without taking a degree, and, as Wood says, was made a deacon by Dr. Joseph Hall, the celebrated bishop of Exeter. He does not, however, appear to have proceeded farther in ecclesiastical ordination, and both in his translation of the “Dutch Annotations,” and in the lists of the royal society, we find him afterwards styled “Theodore Haak, Esq.” In the time of the German wars he was appointed one of the procurators to receive the benevolence money, which was raised in several dioceses in England to be transmitted to Germany, which he used to say “was a deacon’s work.” When the rebellion broke out in this country, he appears to have favoured the interests of parliament. In 1657 he published in 2 vols, folio, what is called the “Dutch Annotations upon the whole Bible,” which is a translation of the Dutch Bible, ordered by the synod of Dort, and first published in 1637. Wood says that the Dutch translators were assisted in this undertaking by bishops Carleton, Davenant, Hall, and other English divines, who were members of the synod of Dort; but, according to the preface, the only assistance they gave was in laying before the synod an account of the manner in which king James’s translation had been performed by the co-operation of a number of the most eminent divines in England. The synod accordingly adopted the same plan; and their annotations being considered of great value to biblical students, the Westminster assembly of divines employed Haak in making this English translation, and the parliament granted him a sole right in it for fourteen years from the time of publication. Haak also translated into Dutch several English books of practical divinity, and one half of Milton’s “Paradise Lost.” He left nearly ready for the press, a translation of German proverbs, but it does not appear that this was published. He was in 1645 one of several ingenious men (Dr. Wilkins, Dr. Wallis, Dr. Goddard, &c.) who agreed to meet once a week to discourse upon subjects connected with mathematics and natural philosophy, and it was he who first suggested this humble plan on which, the royal society was afterwards formed. Mr. Haak died at the house of his kinsman Dr. Slare, a physician near Fetter-lane, London, May 9, 1690, and was buried in St. Andrew’s church, Holborn. Dr. Horneck preached his funeral sermon. He appears to have been the friend and correspondent of the most learned men of his time, and has some observations and letters in the “Philosophical Collections,” published in May 1682. There is a portrait of him in the picture gallery at Oxford, which has never been engraved.

, a learned Lutheran divine, was born May 9, 1604, at Butzbach in Wetteraw, and descended from a noble and ancient family of Franconia. He, became pastor, superintendant, and professor of divinity, at Geissen, where he died, April 1676, having had 14 children and 46 grandchildren. He became eminent by his writings, and appeared with great distinction at several conferences on religious subjects. His principal works are, “Heptas disputationum Anti-Wallemburgicarum,” in which he takes great pains to overthrow the principles of Mess. de Walemburg, and in which he is esteemed verysuccessful by the Lutherans “Vindicatio Lutherans?, fidei contra H. Ulricum Hunmum,” 4to “Syntagma Dissertationum Theologicarum,” 1650 and 1652, 2 vols. 8vo; “Anti-Valerianus,” 1652, 4to; “Relatio Actorum Colloquii Rheinfelsani,” &c. All this author’s works are much valued by those of his communion.