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

In the only character extant of him, it is said that “he filled up every station of life with the greatest integrity and most untainted honour; and discharged the duties of his profession to the general satisfaction of all that had any opportunity of observing his conduct. Nor did his speedy advancement from one post to another procure him the envy even of the gentlemen of the long robe, who constantly paid him the regard that is due to the greatest merit when he was alive, and by whom the loss of him is now as generally regretted. The skill and experience he had in the laws of fads country, and the uncommon penetration he discovered in the decision of such causes of equity as came before him, were not more known in Westminster-hall, than his unwearied pursuit of mathematical studies (when his affairs would permit), as well as his fine taste of the more polite parts of learning, were to men of the most exalted genius in either.” He was interred in a vault built for the purpose in the abbey church at Bath, in which city he died. A monument was afterwards erected to his memory in the Temple church, London. His works are, 1. “Law of Devises, last Wills, and Revocations,” Lond. 1730, 8vo^ reprinted 1756 and 1773. 2. “The Law of Uses and Trusts,” 1734, 8vo, reprinted 1741. 3. “The Law and Practice of Ejectments,” 1734, 8vo, reprinted 1741 and 1781, by Charles Runnington, esq. 4. “Reports of Cases in Equity and Exchequer,” 1734, reprinted 1742, fol. 5. “Law and Practice of Distresses and Replevins,” no date, reprinted 1780, and 1794, by William Hunt, esq. 6. “History and Practice of Civil Actions in the Common-pleas,” 1737, 1761, and 1779. 7. “Treatise of the Court of Exchequer,” partly printed in 1738, 8vo, but completely in 1753. 8. “Treatise of Tenures,” third edition, 1757, 8vo. 9. “Treatise of Rents,” 8vo. 10. “History and Practice of the high court of Chancery,” 1758, 8vo. An erroneous Irish edition had preceded this. 11.“Cases in Law and Equity,” 1760, 8vo. 12. “The Law of Executions,” &c. 1763, 8vo. 13. “Theory or Law of Evidence,” 1761, 8vo, reprinted a fourth time in 1777, again in 1791, 1792, and 1796, 4 vols. 8vo, by Capel Lofft, esq. with some account of the life of the author, from which the present article is taken, Gilbert’s “Abridgment of Locke’s Essay on the Human Understanding,” and his argument in a case of homicide. 'The first volume was again reprinted in 1801, by J. Sedg. wick, esq. Besides these there are in Mr. Hargrave’s collection two manuscripts of lord chief baron Gilbert, the one a “History of the Feud,” the other “A Treatise of Remainders.”

, a nonconformist divine of very considerable abilities, was the son of William Gilbert of Priss, in Shropshire, and was born in 1613. In 1629 he was admitted a student of Edmund-hall, Oxford, where he took his bachelor’s degree, and after a short residence in Ireland, returned and took that of master in 1638. By the favour of Philip lord Wharton, he became minister of Upper Winchington, in Buckinghamshire; and in 1647, having taken the covenant, and become a favourite with the usurping powers, he was appointed vicar of St. Lawrence’s, Reading, and next year was created B. D. at the parliamentary visitation of the university of Oxford. About the same time he obtained the rich rectory of Edgemond, in his native county, where he was commonly called the bishop of Shropshire. In 1654 he was appointed an assistant to the commissioners of Shropshire, Middlesex, and the city of Westminster, for the ejection of such as were styled “scandalous, ignorant, and insufficient ministers and schoolmasters;” and according to Wood, was not sparing of the power which this sweeping commission gave him. After the restoration, he was ejected for nonconformity, and, retiring to Oxford, lived there very obscurely, with his wife, in St. Ebbe’s parish, sometimes preaching in conventicles, and in the family of lord Wharton. Nor was he without respect from some gentlemen of the university on account of his talents. Calamy informs us that, in a conversation with the celebrated Dr. South on the subject of predestination, he so satisfied him, that South became ever after an assertor of that doctrine. When a toleration or temporary indulgence was granted to the nonconformists in 1671, although a professed independent, he joined with three presbyterians in establishing a conventicle in Thames street, in the suburbs of Oxford; but this indulgence was soon called in. In his last days he was reduced to great distress, and was supported by the contributions of private persons, and of several heads of colleges. He died July 15, 1694, and was buried in the church of St. Aldate. He was esteemed a good philosopher, disputant, and philologist, and a good Latin poet. He published, 1. “Vindicise supremi Dei dominii,” against Dr. Owen, Lond. 1655, 8vo. 2. “An Assize Sermon,” ibid. 1657, 4to. 3. “England’s Passing-Bell, a poem written soon after the year of the plague, the fire of London, and the Dutch war,” 1675, 4to. 4. “Super auspicatissimo regis Gulielmi in Hiberniam descensu, et salva ex Hibernia reditu, carmen gratulatorium,” 1690, 4to, written in his eightieth year. 5. “Epitapbia diversa,” chiefly on persons not of the church of England. 6. “Julius Secundus,” a dialogue, Ox. 1669, 12mo, and 168O, 8vo. To this is prefixed a preface, also in the form of a dialogue, proving that piece to have been written by Erasmus. Dr. Jortin seems of the same opinion, and has reprinted it in his Life of Erasmus, pointing out some curious omissions by Gilbert. With the second edition, Gilbert republished “Jani Alex. Ferrafii Euclides catholicus,” an ironical work against the Romish church, written by an English convert who chose to conceal his true name. Gilbert translated into Latin a considerable part of Francis Potter’s book entitled “An interpretation of the number 666,” printed at Amsterdam, 1677. He is likewise supposed to have been concerned in the pamphlets called “Anni mirabiles,” printed in 1661, 1662, and the following years."

, a learned physician, who first discovered several of the properties of the load -stone, was born at Colchester, where his father was recorder, in 1540; and after an education at a grammarschool, was sent to Cambridge. Having studied physic for some time, he went abroad for his farther improvement; and in one of the foreign universities, had the degree conferred upon him of M. D. He returned to England with a considerable reputation for his learning in general, and had especially the character of being deeply skilled in philosophy and chemistry; and resolving to make his knowledge useful to his country by practising in this faculty, be presented himself a candidate to the college of physicians in London, and was elected a fellow of that society about 1573. Thus, every way qualified for it, he practised in this metropolis with great success and applause; which being observed by queen Elizabeth, whose talent it was to distinguish persons of superior merit, she sent for him to court, and appointed him her physician in ordinary; and gave him, besides, an annual pension, to encourage him in his studies. In these, as much as his extensive business in his profession would permit, he applied himself chiefly to consider and examine the various properties of the load-stone; and proceeding in the experimental way, a method not much used at that time, he discovered and established several qualities of it not observed before. This occasioned much discourse; and spreading his fame into foreign countries, great expectations were raised from his treatise on that subject, which were certainly not disappointed when he printed it, in 1600, under the following title, “De Magnete, magneticisque Corporibus & de rnagno magnete Tellure, Physioiogia nova,” i.e. “Of the Magnet (or Loadstone) and magnetical Bodies, and of that great magnet the Earth.” It contains the history of all that had been written on that subject before his time, and is the first regular system on this curious subject, and may not unjustly be styled the parent of all the improvements that have been made therein since. In this piece our author shews the use of the declination of the magnet, which had been discovered by Norman in finding out the latitude, for which purpose also he contrived two instruments for the sea. This invention was published by Thomas Blondeville, in a book entitled “Theoriques of the Planets, together with the making of two Instruments for Seamen, For finding out the Latitude without Sun, Moon, or Stars, invented by Dr. Gilbert,” 1624. But the hopes from this property, however promising at first, have by a longer experience beeo found to be deceitful.

After the death of Elizabeth, the doctor was continued as chief physician to James I. but he enjoyed that honour only a short time, dying Nov. 30, 1603. His corpse wa interred in Trinity Church, at Colchester, where he was burn, and where there is a handsome monument raised to his memory a print of which is to be seen in Morant’s “History and Antiquities of Colchester.” By a picture of him in the school-gallery of Oxford, he appears to have been tall of stature, and of a chearful countenance. His character stood very high with the philosophers of his age and country. Carpenter tells, us, that he had trodden oat a new path to philosophy. Sir Kenelm Digby compares him with Harvey, the discoverer of the circulation. Barrow ranks him with Galileo, Gassendus, Mercennus, and Des Cartes; whom he represents as men resembling the ancients in sagacity and acuteness of genius . Nor was his fame less celebrated among foreigners; the famous Peiresc often lamented, that when he was in England he was not acquainted with our philosopher.

Besides his principal work printed in his life-time, he left another treatise in ms. which coming into the hands of sir William Boswell, was from that copy printed at Amsterdam in 1651, 4to, under this title, “DC mundi nostro sublunari Philosophia nova.” As he was never married, he gave by his last will all his library, consisting of books, globes, instruments, &c. and a cabinet of minerals, to the college of physicians; and this part was punctually performed by his brothers, who inherited his estate, which must have been somewhat considerable. Wood observes, he was the chief person in hi parish at Colchester.

, the first practical writer on medicine whom this country produced, is placed by Bale (who calls him Gilbertus Legleus, and says he was physician to Hubert, archbishop of Canterbury,) in the reign of king John, about 1210; but Leland, without stating the grounds of his opinion, makes him more modern, and Dr. Freind thinks that he must have lived in the beginning of the reign of Edward 1.; “for he quotes Averrhoes,” Dr. Freind remarks, “who reached the close of the twelfth century; and whose works could not have been translated so early, and indeed were not translated till the middle, at least, of the thirteenth, as Bacon, a good voucher, informs” us: and the mention he makes of a book, * de Speculis,' which, without doubt, is that written by Bacon, and what he transcribes from Theodorick, concerning a leprosy, evidently shews that he lived low in this century, &c.“According to Leiand, he maintained a high character for his knowledge in philosophy and physic, which he had acquired by great study and much travelling; and he was very successful in his practice. His writings are principally compiled from those of the Arabian physicians, like the works of his contemporaries in other nations; sometimes, indeed, he transcribes whole chapters word for word, especially from Rhazes. He is represented as the first English physician who ventured to expose the absurd practices of the superstitious monks, who at that time engrossed much of the treatment of diseases, and is said to have contrasted with them the methods recommended by the ancients. The principal work of Gilbert, entitled” Compendium Medicinse tain morborum universalium quam particularium,“was corrected by Michael Capella, and printed at Lyons in 1510; and afterwards at Geneva, in 1608, under the title of” Laurea Anglicana, seu Compendium totius Medicinse.“His other treatises were,” De viribus Aquarum“”De Re Herbaria;“” Thesaurus Pauperum“and” De tuenda valetudine."

, a Scotch physician of eminence, was born at Dumfries in 1707. He began the study of medicine at Edinburgh, which he afterwards prosecuted at London and Paris. He obtained his degree of M. D. from the university of Rheims; and in 1732 he returned to the place of his nativity, where he afterwards constantly resided, and continued the practice of medicine till his death in 1774. Few physicians of the last century have been more successful in the exercise of their profession, or have contributed more to the improvement of the healing art. Having engaged in business at an early period of life, his attention was wholly devoted to observation. Endowed by nature with a judgment acute and solid, with a genius active and inventive, he soon distinguished himself by departing, in various important particulars, from established but unsuccessful modes of practice. Several of the improvements which he introduced have procured him deserved reputation both at home and abroad. In different medical collections are to he found several of his performances) which prove that he had something new and useful to offer upon every subject to which he applied his attention. But those writings which do him most credit are two long dissertations on “Neivous Fevers,” in the “Medical Essays and Observations” published by a society at Edinburgh and a “Treatise on the use of Sea-voyages in medicine,” which first made its appearance in 1756, and was reprinted in 1771. In the former, his recommendation of wine in nervous fevers^ and in the latter, of sea-voyages in cases of consumption, has been generally attended t in modem practice, and with great advantage.

, the oldest British historian, surnamed The Wise, was, according to Leland, born in Wales, in the year 511, but according to others, in 493. Where he was educated is uncertain; but from his writings he appears to have been a monk. Some writers say that he went over to Ireland others, that he visited France and Italy; but they agree that after his return to England, he became a celebrated and assiduous preacher ofChristianity. Leland says that he retired to one of the small islands in the Bristol Channel called the Hulms; but that, being disturbed by pirates, he removed thence to the monastery of Glastonbury, where he died. But all this is supposed to belong to another of the name, called Gildas Albanius. Du Pin says he founded a monastery at Venetia in Britain. The place and time of his death are as uncertain as ther particulars of his history which may be found in our airthorities. He is the only British author of the sixth century whose works are printed; and they are therefore valuable on account of their antiquity, and as containing the only information of the times in which he wrote. The only book, however, attributed to him with certainty, i$ his “Epistola de excidio Britanniæ, et castigatio ordinis ecclesiastici,” Lond. 1525, 8vo, Basil, 1541, 8vo, Lond. 1567, 12mo, Paris, 1576, Basil, 1568, 12mo, and by Gale, in his “Rerum Anglic. Scriptores veteres,” fol. 1684—7. There is also an English translation, Lond. 1652, 12mo. In this he laments over the miseries and almost total ruia of his countrymen, and severely reproves th corruption and profligacy of the age. The first part contains a vague accwnnt of events from the Roman invasion to his own umes. There were two other Gildas’s of the sixth century, whom some make distinct persons, and others consider as one and the same.

, a dramatic and miscellaneous writer, was born at Gillingham, near Shaftesbury, in Dorsetshire, in 1665. His parents and family were Roman catholics, and consequently endeavoured to instill the same principles into our author, but without success. His father was a member of the society of Gray’s-inn, and had suffered considerably in the royal cause. Mr. Gildon received the first rudiments of his education at Gillingham; but when twelve years of age, his parents sent him over to Doway, and entered him in the English college of secular priests there, with a view of bringing hi<m up likewise to the priesthood; but, during a progress of five years’ study he only found his inclinations more strongly confirmed for a quite different course of life.

At nineteen years of age he returned to England, and when he was otage, and by the entrance into his paternal fortune, which was not inconsiderable, rendered in every respect capable of enjoying the gaieties and pleasures of this polite twn, he came up to London. Here he soon spent the best part of what he had, and crowned his imprudences by marrying a young lady without any fortune, at about the age of twenty-three, adding to his other incumbrances that of a growing family, without any way of improving his reduced finances. During the reign of James II. he studied the religious controversies of that period, which ended in his becoming an infidel. In 1693 he ushered into the world “The Oracles of Reason,” written by Charles Blount, esq. after that author’s unhappy end, with a pompous eulogium and a defence of self-murder. He was afterwards, however, as Dr. Leland informs us, “convinced of his error; of which he gave a remarkable proof, in a good book whijch he published in 1705, entitled * The Deist’s Manual; or, a rational enquiry into the Christian Religion;' the greatest part of which is taken up in vindicating the doctrines of the existence and attributes of God, his providence and government of the world, the immortality of the soul, and a future state.”

Having greatly injured his fortune by thoughtlessness and dissipation, he was now obliged to consider on some method for retrieving it; or, indeed, rather for the means of sdbsistence; and he himself candidly owns, in his essays, that necessity was his first motive for venturing to be an author; nor was it till he had arrived at his two-and-thirtieth year, that he made any attempt in the dramatic way.

He died Jan. 12, 1723-4. His literary character is given in Boyer’s Political State, vol. XXVII. p. 102, as “a person of great literature, but a mean genius; who, having attempted several kinds of writing, never gained much reputation in any. Among other treatises he wrote the ‘ English Art of Poetry,’ which he had practised himself very unsuccessfully in his dramatic performances. He also wrote an English grammar; but what he seemed to build his chief hopes of fame upon was his Critical Commentary On the duke of Buckingham’s * Essay on Poetry,' which last piece was perused and highly approved by his grace.”

Much of this is certainly true. His plays, enumerated in the “Biog. Dramatics,” procured him little reputation. He had some talent, however, for criticism, and Pope was weak enough to believe that Addison employed Gildon to write against him. Pope introduced him into the Dunciad for another reason, his “New Rehearsal, or, Bays the Younger; containing an examen of Mr. Rowe’s plays, and a word or two on Mr. Pope’s ‘ Rape of the Lock,’” 1714. Gildon wrote the “Life of Betterton,” published in 1710.

, a learned general of the Augustines, and cardinal, was so called from the place of his birth. He was well skilled in languages, and much consulted by the learned of his age on that account. He opened the Lateran council under Julius II. 1512, and conducted several affairs of importance for Leo X. He died November 12, 1532, at Rome. This cardinal left “Commentaries” on some of the “Psalms;” “Remarks on the First Three Chapters of Genesis” “Dialogues, Epistles, and Odes,” in praise of Pontanus, &c. which may be found in Martenne’s “Amplissima Collectio,” and contained many useful notices respecting the state of learning and events of his time.

, head master of St. Paul’s school, was born in Lincolnshire, Feb. 27, 1564, and admitted scholar of Corpus college, Oxford, in Sept. 1583. He took his master’s degree in 1590, when he left college, and is supposed to have taught school at Norwich, as he was in that city in 1597, and there wrote his “Treatise concerning the Trinity,” 8vo, to which Wood gives the date of 1601. In 1608 he became chief master of St. Paul’s sf hool, in which his method of education is said to have been eminently successful. He was not more esteemed as a man of learning, and an excellent Latin scholar, than as a divine and critic. He died at his house in St. Paul’s church-yard, Nov. 17, 1635, and was buried in the antichapel belonging to Mercers’ hall. His other works are, 1. “Logonomia Anglica,” 1721, 4to; and 2. “Sacred Philosophy of Holy Scripture; or a Commentary on the Creed,” fol. 1635.

, son and successor to his father, the subject of the preceding article, was born in London, in 1597, and entered of Trinity college, Oxford, in 1612, on an exhibition from the Mercers’ company. When he had taken his master’s degree, he became usher under his father in St. Paul’s school, and under Thomas Farnaby, in his private school, but succeeded his father in 1635, and next year took the degree of D. D. He held the school only five years, being dismissed, as Knight thinks, for excessive severity. An allowance, however, was made to him of 25l. yearly, with which he set up a private school in Aldersgate-street, where he died in 1642, and was buried in the church of St. Botolph, Aldersgate. Wood speaks of his “unsettled and inconstant temper,” and of his “many changes, rambles, and some imprisonments,” but upon what account he does not inform us. Some light, however, is thrown upon the circumstance of imprisonments at least, in a late publication of Aubrey’s Lives. In his account of Chillingworth he says, “Dr. Gill, films doctorisGill, schoolmaster of Paules school, and Chillingworth, held weekely intelligence one with another for some years, wherein they used to nibble at state-matters. Dr. Gill, in one of his letters, calls king James and his sonne, the old foole and the young one, which letter Chillingworth communicated to W. Laud, A. B. Cant. The poore young Dr. Gill was seised, and a terrible storme pointed towards him, which by the eloquent intercession and advocation of Edward earle of Dorset, together with the teares of the poore old doctor, his father, and supplication on his knees to his majestic, was blowne over.” Most of his Latin poetry, in which he excelled, is published in a volume entitled “Poetici Conatus,” 1632, 12mo, but he has other pieces extant both in Latin and English, some of which are enumerated by Wood, who had seen others in manuscript. When usher of St. Paul’s school, he had the honour of having Milton under him, who was his favourite scholar. Three of Milton’s familiar Latin letters to him are extant, replete with the strongest testimonies of esteem and friendship. Milton also pays him high compliments on the excellence of his Latin poetry. He gave to the library of Trinity college the old folio edition of Spenser’s “Faerie Queene,” Brayton’s “Polyolbion,” by Selden; and Bourdelotius’s “Lucian,” all having poetical mottos from the classics in his own hand-writing, which shew his taste and track of reading; and in the “Lucian” are the arms of the Gills elegantly tricked with a pen, and coloured by him. He had two brothers, George and Nathaniel, who were both of the same college.

, D. D. an eminent dissenting divine, and the most able and learned baptist writer of the last century, was born at Kettering in Northamptonshire, Nov. 23, 1697, of parents in humble life. His father was a deacon of the baptist meeting at Kettering; and having, from various causes, some of which appear rather imaginary, a strong impression on his mind that this son would become a preacher, and an eminent character, exerted his utmost to give him a suitable education. His first attempts were crowned with such success as to confirm his father’s hopes. Being sent to the grammar school, he soon exceeded his equals in age, and even his seniors. At his eleventh year, he had not only gone through the common school books, but had read the principal Latin classics, and made considerable proficiency in the Greek language. Such was at the same time his avidity of knowledge, that he constantly frequented a bookseller’s shop (which was open only on market-days), where his acquirements became noticed by some c.f the neighbouring clergy; and he repaired so regularly to this repository of books, that it became a sort of asseveration, “such a thing is as sure as John Gill is in the bookseller’s shop.” Unfortunately, however, his progress at school was interrupted by an edict of the master, requiring that all his scholars, without exception, should attend prayers at the church on week-days. This, of course, amounted to an expulsion of the children of dissenters, and of young Gill among the rest. His parents not being able to send him to a distant school, some efforts were made to get him upon one of the dissenting funds of London, that he might be sent to one of their seminaries. In order to procure this favour, his progress in literature was probably stated as very extraordinary, and the application produced an answer fully as extraordinary namely, “that he was too young and, should he continue, as it might be supposed he would, to make such rapid advances in his studies, he would go through the common circle of learning before he could be capable of taking care of himself, or of being employed in any public service.” Notwithstanding this illiberal and absurd repulse, young Gill went on improving himself in Greek and Latin, by eagerly studying such books in both languages as he could procure, and added to his stock a knowledge of logic, rhetoric, moral and natural philosophy. Without a master also, he made such progress in the Hebrew as soon to be able to read the Bible with facility; and ever after this language was his favourite study. He read much in the Latin tongue, and studied various systematic works Oh divinity; but all this appears to have been done at such hours as he could spare from assisting his father in his business. In November 1716, he made a public profession of his religious sentiments before the baptist meeting, and was baptised according to the usual forms; soon after which he commenced preacher, and officiated first at Higham Ferrars, where in 1718 he married; he also preached occasionally at Kettering until the beginning of 1719, when he was invited to become pastor of the baptist congregation at Horslydovrn, Southwark, and soon became very popular in the metropolis.

In 1724 he appeared as an author by the publication of two sermons; but in 1726 he first distinguished himself as a champion for the peculiar tenet which divides the baptists from other denominations, by engaging in a controversy with Mr. Maurice, an independent minister. Zealously, however, as Dr. Gill was attached to the baptist tenets, and frequently as he wrote in favour of them, it was for the most part in his own defence. “Intimate witli him as I was,” says Mr. Toplady, “I never so much as once ueard him drop a single hint, in all our conversations, directly or indirectly, concerning the article of baptism.” In 1728 he published his “Exposition of the Song of Solomon,” folio. The year before it appeared, Whiston had published a pamphlet in which he endeavoured to prove that the Song of Solomon was a spurious book, and not fit to stand in the canon of scripture. To all this Gill answered with great ability. It does not appear whether Whiston had seen this answer, but he himself informs us that in 17 J-& he had heard a great character of Dr. Gill for his skill in the Oriental languages, and had a mind to hear him preach, but being informed that he had written a folio book, on the Canticles, he declined to go and hear him; a proof that Whiston’s dislike to bigotry was to the bigotry of others only. In 1751 a new edition of the "Exposition*' was published in 4 to, with corrections and additions, and a third, likewise: with additions, in 1767.

In the same year (1728) he published “The Prophecies of the Old Testament respecting the Messiah, considered, and proved to be literally fulfilled in Jesus,” in answer to Collins’ s “Scheme of literal Prophecy considered.” Becoming now a preacher of high reputation among dissenters of all denominations, many of whom wished to hear Dr. Gill frequently, but could not be expected to join his congregation, a weekly lecture was established by subscription in 1729, which he continued to preach until 1756, when age, and a multiplicity of engagements, obliged him to resign it. Here a numerous congregation heard those sermons, many of which he moulded afterwards into treatises for publication, particularly his “Treatise on the doctrine of the Trinity,” which appeared in 1731. One object of this treatise was to check the progress Sabellianism had at this time made among the baptists. In 1735, and following years, he published his “Cause of God and Truth,” 4 vols. 8vo, a defence of the Calvinistic against the Arminian sentiments, on the subjects of election, original sin, &c. Dr. Gill’s supralapsarian opinions in this (for such he held with great zeal) being animadverted on in an anonymous pamphlet, he published an answer called “Truth defended, c.” In 1737 he again engaged in controversy on the subject of baptism, with Mr. Samuel Browne, a dissenting minister.

When he first came to settle in London, in 1719, he became intimately acquainted with Mr. John Skepp, author of“The Divine Energy,” and in 1751 new-modelled that work for a second edition. Skepp was an able Hebraist, and had formed a good collection of Hebrew and Rabbinical books, which Gill bought on his death in 1721, and bestowed many years in a careful study of them, reading the Targums, the Mishna, the Talmuds, the book of Zohar; and having collected a vast mass of useful observations, he employed them as illustrations for his Exposition of the Bible. Of this voluminous work> the New Testament appeared first in 3 vols. t'ol. 1746, 1747, and 1748. In this last year he received the degree of D. D. from the Marischal college, Aberdeen, professedly “on account of his learned defence of the true sense of the holy scriptures against deists and infidels.” This diploma was decreed to him in the handsomest manner, without his knowledge, and the fees were remitted. His Exposition of the Old Testament was published afterwards in various years, forming, along with the New, 9 vols. fol. which, becoming of late years in much demand, and the price being greatly raised, a new and very neat edition was published in 1810—12, in 10 vols. 4to, by Mr. Bagster, of the Strand. In 1767 Dr. Gill published a “Dissertation on the Antiquities of the Hebrew Language, Letters, Vowel-points, and Accents,” and in the same year collated the various passages of the Old Testament quoted in the Mishna, in the Talmuds, both Jerusalem and Babylonian, and in the Rabbath; and extracted the variations in them, from the modern printed text, which he sent to Dr. Kennicott, who politely acknowledges the obligation in his “State of his Collation,” published in 1767. In 1769 Dr. Gill published a “Body of doctrinal Divinity,” 2 vols. 4to, and in 1770 a “Body of practical Divinity.” This was the last of his numerous publications, in the preparation of which he liad spent many years of his long life. He died at his house at Camberwell, Oct. 14, 1771; his wife had been dead some years before, and his only surviving son died in 1804, aged seventy-seven. Dr. Gill’s private character was so excellent, that the admirers of his writings have said that “his learning and labours were exceeded only by the invariable sanctity of his life and conversation.” His extensive learning and reading cannot be called in question, but as a writer he is in general too copious and diffuse.

, a distinguished scholar and traveller, was born 1490, at Albi. After travelling over France, and into Italy, he spent some time, at his return, with George d'Armagnac, bishop of Rhodes, afterwards cardinal, who was his patron; and, at this prelate’s request, wrote his 16 books on the nature of animals, “De vi et natura Animalium,” Lyons, 1533, 4to, extracted from Ælian, Porphyry, Heliodorus, and Oppian to which he has added his own observations, and a book of the fish found at Marseilles. He dedicated this work to Francis I. and entreated him, in the dedication, to send some learned men into foreign countries, at his own expence. Francis approved this plan, and the author was sent to the Levant some time after but, receiving nothing from the king during his stay there, he was obliged, at the king’s death, 1547, to enlist himself in the service of Soliman II. for a maintenance. In 1550, however, he returned to France with M. d‘Aramont, ambassador from that kingdom to the Porte; he went afterwards to cardinal d’Armagnac at Rome, being entrusted with the affairs between France and the holy see, and died in that city in 1555. Besides his work above mentioned, he left “Elephanti descriptio,” 8vo; “De Bosphoro Thracio,” 24to; “De Topographia Constantinouoleos,” 24to; and in Banduri’s Imperium Orientate, editions of Demetrius of Constantinople in “Rei Accipitrariae Auctores,” 1612, 4toj of Tbeodpret’s “Commentary on the Twelve minor Prophets;” and of the “Hist, of Ferdinand, king of Arragon,” by Laurentius Valla.

, an eminent English divine, and for his excellent character and usefulness, called the “Apostle of the North,” was descended from a good family in Westmoreland, and born in 1517, at Kentmire in that county. He was the son of Edwin Gilpin, by Margaret daughter of William Laton of Delain in Cumberland. From his earliest youth he was inclined to a contemplative life, thoughtful, reserved, and serious, which giving his parents an early presage of his future piety, they determined to educate him for the church. His first years wete spent at a public school, whence he was removed to Oxford, and at the age of sixteen was entered upon the foundation at Queen’s college. Besides his academical studies, to which he applied with great industry, he appears to have read while here some of the works of Erasmus, which at their first appearance were not very popular, and discovered in them a treasure of real learning, which he had in vain sought after in the writings then in most esteem. But as he had now determined to apply himself to divinity, he made the Scriptures his chief study; and was particularly anxious to gain an accurate knowledge of the Greek and Hebrew languages, in the study of which he was much assisted by Mr. Neal, a fellow of New college, and afterwards Hebrew professor at Oxford. He had not been long in the university before he was considered as a young man of good parts and considerable learning, and admired and loved for a remarkable sweetness of disposition, and unaffected sincerity in his manners. At the usual term he took the degree of M. A. and about the same time was elected fellow of his college.

If at this time, from perusing the writings of Erasmus, or by any other means, he entertained scruples respecting the religion of the Romish church, in which he had been bred up, he had the discretion to suppress his sentiments, and before he said any thing which might shake the faith of others, he determined to establish his own. He had not been long settled in his fellowship before a very public testimony was given to the reputation he had acquired, by his being one of the first in Oxford who were recommended to cardinal Wolsey for Christ Church college, which he had just founded, and accordingly Mr. Gilpin removed thither from Queen’s, and continued his former studies. From the nature of these, and the ingenuity and honesty of his disposition, it is not improbable that he might in time have been led by his own reasonings to that discovery of truth he aimed at; but Providence rewarded a pious endeavour, by throwing in his way the means of an earlier attainment of it. Under the patronage of Edward VI. who had now succeeded Henry VIII. Peter Martyr went to Oxford, where he read divinity lectures in a strain to which the university had been hitherto little accustomed, and particularly refuted the doctrine of tl^e corporal pretence. This occasioned a controversy of much warmth, such was Mr. Gilpia't credit at the university that the popish party were very solicitous to engage him on theic side. But, although he was as yet but imperfectly acquainted with the arguments of the reformers, he had, it seems, lately discovered, through a dispute he had been engaged in with Dr. Hooper, afterwards bishop of Worcester, that several of the Romish doctrines were not so well supported by Scripture as was commonly imagined; and, with a mind in this unsettled condition, he thought himself but ill qualified to espouse either side publicly. lit consequence, however, of repeated importunities, he ventured to appear in a public disputation against Peter Martyr, the consequence of which was, his ingenuously owning that he could not maintain his opinions, and a determination to enter into no more controversies until he had gained the full information he was in pursuit of. Peter Martyr acknowledged this candid behaviour, so different from that of Gilpin’s fellow disputants, Chedsey, Morgan, Tresham, &c. and often told his friends that it was the subject of his daily prayers that God would be pleased at length to touch the heart of this pious papist with the knowledge of true religion. Nor, says his biographer, did he pray in vain; for Mr. Gilpin from this time became every day more reconciled to the reformers.

He now began with great diligence to read over the Scriptures, and the writings of the fathers, the result of which was a more favourable opinion of the doctrines of the reformers. He also communicated some of his doubts to Cuthbert Tonstal, bishop of Durham, who was his mother’s uncle, and had always expressed a great regard for him, and to other learned men of the university, whose answers appear to have had a tendency to increase his scruples, and finally to make him declare himself a protestant; and it is certain, that while at Christ Church, he became fully convinced of the errors of popery. Such, however, was his diffidence in his own acquirements, and such his fear lest protestantism might suffer by the inexperience of its teachers, that he resisted many solicitations to leave the university, and undertake the cure of souls. These scruples detained him at Oxford until the thirty-fifth year of his age; about which time he yielded so far to the earnest solicitations of his friends as to accept the vicarage of Norton, in the diocese of Durham, in Nov. 1552. Before he went to Beside he was appointed to preach before the king, who was at Greenwich, which appears then to have been a custom before being presented to any benefice. On this occasion, with the true spirit of a reformer, he inveighed against the luxurious and corrupt manners of the times among all ranks, and although the king was not then present, delivered what he intended as an address to his majesty, not doubting, as he said, but that it would be carried to him. This courage recommended him to the notice of many persons of the first rank; particularly to sir Francis Russel, and sir Robert Dudley, afterwards earls of Bedford and Leicester, who from that time professed a great regard for him; and, when in power, were always ready to patronize him. Gilpin received their offered friendship with humility and gratitude, but never solicited it on his own account. He sometimes indeed applied to lord Bedford in behalf of his friends, but does not appear to have once asked any favour of the earl of Leicester, whose real character could not be unknown, or agreeable to him. He is likewise said to have been noticed by secretary Cecil, afterwards lord Burleigh, who obtained for him a general licence for preaching, a matter of great favour in those days. This licence he sometimes used in oilier parts of the country, but confined his services chiefly to his parish of Norton.

Here he made it his principal endeavour to inculcate moral virtue, and to dissuade from those vices which he observed most prevalent. He seldom handled controversial points, for he was still scarcely settled in some of his religious opinions. Hence by degrees a diffidence of himself arose, which gave him great uneasiness. He thought he had engaged too soon in his office, that he could not sufficiently discharge it, that he should not rest in giving his hearers only moral instructions, and that, overspread as the country was with popish doctrines, he did ill to pretend to be a teacher of religion, if he were unable to oppose such errors. These thoughts made every day a greater impression on him. At length, quite unhappy, he wrote his relation bishop Tonstal an account of his situation. The bishop very liberally told him, that as he was so uneasy, he should think of nothing till he had fixed his religion, and that, in his opinion, he could do no better than put his parish into the hands of some person, in whom he could confide, and spend a year or two in Germany, France, and Holland; by which means he might have an pportunity of conversing with some of the most eminent professors on both sides of the question. He acquainted him likewise, that his going abroad at this time would do him also a considerable service; for, during his confinement, he had written two or three books, particularly one upon the Lord’s Supper, which he had a desire to publish; and as this could nor be so conveniently done at home, he would be glad to have it done under his inspection at Paris.

This letter gave Mr. Gilpin much satisfaction, a conference with some of the learned men abroad being what his heart had been long set on. One objection, however, was the expencc, but the bishop told him his living would do something towards his maintenance, and deficiencies he would supply; but this did not remove a greater difficulty. Mr. Gilpin’s notions of the pastoral care were so strict, that he thought no excuse could justify non-residence for so considerable a time as he intended to be abroad. He could not, therefore, think of supporting himself with any part of the income of his living, and having discovered a person, with whose abilities and inclinations to discharge the duties of it, he was well acquainted, he resigned it to him, and set out lor London, to receive his last orders from the bishop, and to embark. The bishop received him at first -with some displeasure, but such an instance of sincerity could not fail to raise him higher in his esteem, although be would afterwards frequently chide him for these qualms of conscience, and would be often reminding him, that if he did not look better to his interest, he would certainly die a beggar.

Gilpin now embarked for Holland, whence he immediately went to Mechlin to visit his brother George, then a 2ealous papist, but afterwards a warm advocate for the reformation, and the translator from Dutch into English of that keen satire against popery, entitled “The Beehive of the Roman church.” He went afterwards to Louvain, where he resolved to settle for sometime, making occasional excursions to other placet. Loinrain was then one of the chief places for students in divinity. Some of the most eminent divines on both sides of the question resided there, and the most important topics of religion were discussed with gfeat freedom. Of such opportunities he soon began to avail himself, and the consequence was his imbibing juster notions of the doctrines of the reformation: he saw things in a clearer and stronger light, and felt a satisfaction in the change he Uad made, to whichhe had hitherto been n stranger. While thus pursuing his studies, he heard the important news from England of queen Mary’s accession to the crown, whose bigotry was well known, and in whom the signs of a persecuting spirit already appeared; and at the same time learned that his relation bishop Tonstal was released from the Tower, and reinstated in his bishopric. The first consequence of this last event was the offer of a living, which Mr. Gilpin declined in a long letter, the unaffected piety of which disarmed all resentment on the part of the bishop, and led him rather to admire a behaviour, in which the motives of conscience shewed themselves so superior to those of interest. After remaining two years in Flanders, to which his countrymen were daily flocking to escape the sanguinary laws of queen Mary, he took a journey to Paris, in order to print the bishop of Durham’s book on the Sacrament, with which that prelate had intrusted him. This work of Tonstal’s was written so much in a spirit of moderation respecting the extravagant popish doctrine of the Sacrament, that Gilpin was generally supposed to have corrupted it, which he refuted by shewing the bishop’s letter of thanks for his “care and fidelity” as an editor. While Mr. Gilpin staid at Paris, he lodged with Vascosan, the eminent printer, to whom he had been recommended by his friends in the Netherlands, and who shewed him great regard, introducing him to the most considerable men in that city. Here popery became quite his aversion; he saw more of its superstition and craft than he had yet seen; the former among the people, the latter among the priests, who scrupled not to avow how little truth was their concern. Here also he found his old acquaintance Mr. Neat, of New college, who was now become an inflexible bigot to popery, and resisted all Gilpin’s endeavours to reclaim him. This was the same Neal, who was afterwards chaplain to bishop Bonner, and distinguished himself by being sole voucher of the very improbable and silly story of the Nag’s head consecration.

Mr. Gilpin having spent three years abroad, was now fully satisfied in all his more considerable scruples. He wanted no further conviction of the bad tendency of popery: he saw the necessity of some reformation, and began to think every day more favourably of the present one. The doctrine of the corporal presence indeed he had not yet fully considered; but he looked upon it as a mystery, which it rather became him to acquiesce in than examine. The principal end of his going abroad being thus answered, he was desirous, of return ing iion:eb,ut ap the Marian persecution was still raging, his mends suggested that it was little less than madness to think of going to a place, from whence all of his sentiments were endeavouring to withdraw themselves. But it is most probable, that his purpose to return at this time was in pursuance of the bishop of Durham’s advice; who, rinding the infirmities of age increase upon him, and believing his nephew totally unqualified to advance himself in life, might be desirous of providing for him before l.is death; and hoped that his power, in that remote part of the kingdom, would be a sufficient protection for him against his enemies. It is, however, certain that he came into England during the heat of the persecution, and went immediately to the bishop, who was then in his diocese. Here this humane prelate kept himself withdrawn during most of that violent reign, to avoid having any hand in measures which he abhorred.

The bishop received him with great friendship, and within a very little time, gave him the archdeaconry of Durham, to which the rectory of Easington was annexed. Upon removing to this parish, he found it in great disorder, and set himself in earnest to reprove vice publicly and privately; and to explain the nature of true religion, with a freedom by no means suited to those dangerous times. In his office of archdeacon he endeavoured to reform the clergy, to discountenance pluralities, and to repress their private vices; and this he persisted in, notwithstanding the bishop hinted to him that more caution would be necessary in such times. It is, however, a little surprising that the bishop had not foreseen how much he must necessarily expose his nephew to the popish party, by placing him in such a station. He knew he could not temporize; and he must know, that without temporizing, he would soon be most obnoxious to those in power; with whose persecuting principles he was well acquainted. The consequence was as might have been expected; a clamour was raised against Mr. Gilpin as a heretic, and he was accused in form before the bishop of Durham, who, however, very artfully screened him at this time; but soon after, Mr. Gilpin finding the duties of his archdeaconry and rectory too nauch for his strength, and that they could not be divided, resigned both, and was for some time without any office in the church, except that of living with the bishop as one of his chaplains.

How long he continued unbeneficed, does not appear. It could not, however, be very long, because the rectory of Houghton-le-spring fell vacant, before Easington and the archdeaconry were disposed of; and the bishop, in a jocular way, made him an offer of all the three, which it was not likely he would listen to. He thanked the bishop, however, and accepted Houghton. This rectory was of considerable value, about 400l. per annum, but the duty of it was proportionably laborious, it being so extensive as to contain no less than fourteen villages, overrun with the darkness of popish ignorance and superstition. Gilpin, however, did not despair. He implored the assistance of God, and his sincere endeavours met with it. The people crowded about him, and heard him with attention, perceiving him a teacher of a different kind from those to whom they had hitherto been accustomed. This very cause, however, increased the malice of his enemies, and he was again formally accused before the bishop of Durham. How the bishop behaved at this time, we are not particularly informed; but no man knew better how to act upon an emergency; and it is certain that Mr. Gilpin was acquitted. The malice of his enemies succeeded, however, in part, for the bishop’s favour to him from this time visibly declined; though it is questionable, whether he really felt the indifference he expressed; or perhaps he might think it advisable thus far to temporize; hpping to deduct the sum of his own from the ill-will of others. Be this as it may, Mr. Gilpin acknowledged his great obligations to the bishop; was sorry to see him disgusted; and would have given up any thing to have him satisfied, except his conscience.

His enemies, in the mean time, were not thus silenced. Though they had been defeated a second time, they were only the more spirited up by that additional rancour which generally attends the baffled designs of the malicious. Convinced how impossible it was to work up the bishop of Durham’s zeal to the height they wished, they therefore laid thirty-two articles against their intended victim before bishop Bonner. Bonner extolled their laudable zeal for religion, and promised that the heretic should be at a stake in a fortnight. Of this determination Mr. Gilpin’s friends in London apprized him by a special messenger, but he had long been preparing to suffer for the truth, and now determined not to decline it. He even had a garment made in which he might go decently to the stake, and used to put it on evejy day until Bonner’s messengers apprehended him. In his way to London, it is said he broke his leg, which put a stop for some time to his journey, and before he was able to travel, queen Mary died, and he was get at liberty. This account of his accident has been doubted, but it is certain that the news of the queen’s death met him upon the road, and put a stop to any farther prosecution. He then returned to Houghton through crowds of people, triumphantly expressing the utmost joy, and blessing God for his deliverance.

When the popish bishops were deprived, and many sees by that means vacant, Mr. Gilpin’s friends at court, particularly the earl of Bedford, thought it a good opportunity to use their interest in his favour, and he was accordingly nominated to the see of Carlisle, but notwithstanding the pressing solicitations of his noble friends, and of Sandys, bishop of Worcester, he persisted in declining this high honour, as being unworthy of it. It is somewhat strange that Nicolson in his “Historical Library,” and Heylin in his “Church History,” should ascribe his conduct to lucrative motives, a calumny which has been amply refuted by his biographer. Both these writers indeed seem to have been very little acquainted with Mr. Gilpin’s character, in which disinterestedness bore so principal a part. The year after his refusal of*the bishopric of Carlisle, he was offered the provostship of Queen’s college, Oxford, which he also refused; and thus having had in his option almost every kind of preferment which an ecclesiastic i capable of holding, he sat down with one living, which gratified the utmost of his desires.

Soon after queen Elizabeth’s accession, a general visitation was held. An assembly of divines, among whom were Parker, Grindal, and Sandys, having finished a body of injunctions aud articles, commissions were issued out, impowering proper persons to enforce them; the oath of supremacy was to be tendered to the clergy, and a subscription imposed. When the visitors came to Durham, Mr. Gilpin was requested to preach before the clergy, against the pope’s supremacy. To this he had no objection, but did not like the thoughts of subscribing, having some doubts with regard to one or more of the articles. His curate having not these scruples, he hoped that his subscription might satisfy the visitors; but next clay, when the clergy were assembled to subscribe, as an instance of respect Mr. Gilpin was first called upon. The emergency allowed him no time for reflection. He just considered with himself, that upon the whole these alterations in religion were certainly right; that he doubted only in a few immaterial points; and that, if he should refuse, it might be a means to keep others back. He then took up the pen, and, with some hesitation, at length subscribed. Afterwards retiring, he sent a letter to the visitors, acquainting them in what sense he subscribed the articles; which they accepted very favourably.

When in order to enlighten the nation in true learning and religion, public schools began to be recommended, Mr. Gilpin endeavoured to promote the good work with the utmost of his ability. As his manner of living was most affluent and generous, and his hospitality and charities made daily a larger demand upon him, it was thought extraordinary, that, amidst such great expences, he should entertain the design of building and endowing a grammar school; yet his exact ceconomy soon enabled him to accomplish this, and the effects of his endowment were very quickly seen: his school was no sooner opened than it began to flourish, and to afford the agreeable prospect of a succeeding generation rising above the ignorance and errors of their forefathers. He not only placed able masters in his school, whom he procured from Oxford, but himself constantly inspected it, and took an active part in the education of the scholars. Such was his benevolence that whenever he met with a poor boy upon the road, he would make trial of his capacity l)y a few questions; and if he found it such as pleased him, he would provide for his education. From the school also he sent several to the universities, where he maintained them wholly at his own expence. Nor was this munificent and uncommon care unrewarded. Many of his scholars became great ornaments to the church, and exemplary instances of piety, among whom have been particularly mentioned, Henry Ayray, afterwards provost of Queen’s college; George Carleton, bishop of Chichester; and Hugh Broughton. It was also at Mr. Gilpin’s suggestion that his friend bishop Pilkington founded a school at the place of his nativity in Lancashire, the statutes of which he revised and corrected at the bishop’s request. Mr. Gilpin’s general reputation for learning and piety, made it the desire of persons of all religious persuasions to have their cause credited by his authority; and among others, the first dissenters, or puritans, who had contracted prejudices against certain church ceremonies, habits, &c. made early applications to Mr. Gilpin, but without effect. The reformation, he said, was just; essentials were there concerned; hut at present he saw no ground for disaffection. " The church of England, he thought, gave no reasonable offence. Some things there might be in it, which had been perhaps as well avoided (probably meaning the use of the vestments), but to disturb the peace of a nation for such trifles, he thought, was quite unchristian. And what indeed appeared to him chiefly blameable in the dissenters, was, that heat of temper with which they propagated their opinions, and treated those who differed from them. Such was not his practice, for he confined all his dislike to their sentiments, urged with intemperate warmth, but bore not the least ill-will to their persons. One of the most intimate friends he ever had was Mr. Lever, a minister of their persuasion, and a sufferer in their cause. It is almost needless to add, that he found it equally or more easy to resist the solicitations of the papists, who lamented, as they well might, that so good a man had forsaken their communion, and consequently they left no methods untried to bring him back.

His hospitable manner of living was the admiration of the whole country, and strangers and travellers met with a cheerful reception. Even their beasts had so much care taken of them, that it was humorously said, “if a horse was turned loose in any part of the country, it would immediately make its way to the rector of Moughton’s.” Every Sunday, from Michaelmas to Easter, was a sort of public day with him. During this season, he expected to see all his parishioners and their families, whom he seated, according to their ranks, at three tables; and when absent from home, the same establishment was kept up. When lord Burleigh, then lord treasurer, was sent on public affairs into Scotland, he unexpectedly paid a visit to Mr. Gilpin, but the reconomy of his house was not easily disconcerted, and he entertained the statesman nnd his retinue in such a manner as made him acknowledge “he could hardly have expected more at Lambeth.” On looking back from an eminence, after he had left Houghton, Btirleigh eould not help exclaiming, “There is the enjoyment of life indeed! who can blame that man for not accepting of a bishopric! what doth he want to make him greater, or happier, or more useful to mankind!” Mr. Gilpin’s labours extended beyond his own parish; he every year visited divers neglected parishes in Northumberland, Yorkshire, Cheshire, Westmoreland, and Cumberland; and that his own flock might not suffer, he was at the expence of a constant assistant. In all his journeys he did not fail to visit the gaols and places of confinement; and by his labours and affectionate manner of behaviour, he is said to have reformed many abandoned persons in those abodes of human misery. He had set places and times for preaching in the different parts of the country, which were as regularly attended as the assize towns of a circuit. If he came to a place in which there was a church, he made use of it; if not, of barns, or any other large building, where great crowds of persons were sure to attend him, some for his instructions, more, perhaps, to partake of his bounty; but in his discourses he had a sort of enthusiastic warmth, which roused many to a sense of religion who had never thought of any thing serious before. The dangers and fatigues attending this employment were, in his estimation, abundantly compensated by the advantages which he hoped would accrue from them to his uninstructed fellow-creatures. He did not spare the rich; and in a discourse before Barnes, bishop of Durham, who had already conceived a prejudice against him, he spoke with so much freedom, that his best friends dreaded the result; they rebuked him for giving the prelate a handle against him, to which he replied, “If the discourse should do the good he intended by it, he was regardless of the consequences to himself.” He then waited on the prelate, who said, “Sir, I propose to wait upon you home myself.” When they arrived at the rectory, and entered the house, the bishop turned suddenly round, and grasped him eagerly by the hand, saying, “Father Gil pin, I know you are fitter to be bishop of Durham, than I am to be parson of this church of yours. I ask forgiveness for past injuries. Forgive me, father, I know you have enemies, but while I live bishop of Durham, none of tjiem shall cause you any further trouble.”

For many interesting and honourable anecdotes of the conduct of this extraordinary man we must refer to his life by his descendant the late rev. William Gilpin. The present article has reached its utmost length, but will not be useless it' it direct the attention of the reader to one of the most exemplary pieces of biography in our language. It remains only to notice, that after a life devoted to every virtue that can dignify the character of an ecclesiastic, he found himself in February 1583 so weak, from a fall, and the infirmities of age, as to be sensible that his end wag drawing near. He told his friends of his apprehensions, and spoke of his death with great composure. He was soon confined to his chamber; but retained his senses to the last. A few days before his death, he desired his friends, acquaintance, and dependents, &c. might be called into his chamber; and being raised in his bed, addressed himself to them on matters of eternal concern. He also sent for several persons, who had hitherto made no good use of his advice, and upon whom he imagined his dying words might have a better eftect, but his speech began to faulter before he had finished his exhortations. The remaining hours of his life he spent in prayer, and broken conversation with some select friends, mentioning often the consolations of the gospel, declaring they were the only true ones, and that nothing else could bring a man peace at the last. He died March 4, 15S3, in the sixtysixth year of his age.

Thus died Bernard Gilpin, who, for his exemplary piety, laborious virtue, and unbounded benevolence, deserves to have his name transmitted to posterity with respect and reverence, and who obtained, and most deservedly, among his contemporaries, the title of the Northern Apostle. By his unwearied application he had amassed a great stock of knowledge, and was indeed ignorant of no part of learning at that time in esteem. He had given more than common attention to the study of the dead languages, to history and divinity; he is said to have excelled in poetry, but he expended little time in the pursuit of any thing that was foreign to his profession. His temper was naturally warm, but, by degrees, he succeeded in obtaining an entire command of himself. His disposition was serious, yet, among his particular friends, he was cheerful and even facetious. His severity had no other object but himself: to others he was mild, candid, and indulgent. His “Sermon preached at the court at Greenwich, before K. Edward VI.” in 1552, is the only revised composition of Mr. Gilpin’s that has survived him. It is printed in his Life by bishop Carleton, 1636, 12mo, fourth edition; and in that more elaborate and elegant life by his descendant, first printed in 1753, 8vo.

, a nonconformist divine and physician, probably of the same family with the preceding, was a native of Cumberland, and educated in Queen’s college, Oxford, whence he took the degree of M. D. but afterwards entered into holy orders, and became minister of Greystock, in his own county; but preached with great applause in London, at Lambeth, the Savoy, &c. and in many other parts of the kingdom; till he was silenced for refusing to comply with the act of uniformity, 1662. He afterwards practised physic in the north of England, particularly at Newcastle, where he was greatly esteemed by all that knew him, both as a physician and a divine. He died in 1657. He was the author of several treatises; but his discourse on “Satan’s Temptations,” 1677, 4to, is most esteemed.

, a late artist, and a descendant of the Apostle of the North, was born at Carlisle in 1733, from whence, after having acquired some relish for the art from his father, who was a captain in the army, he came to London, and was articled to a ship-painter. His first interesting works were composed of some market groups which struck his eye from his window. Soon after he went to Newmarket, being encouraged by the late William, duke of Cumberland, where he executed many compositions which might have vied with Hogarth in point of character. In the duke’s stud he acquired that knowledge of the horse, which he afterwards displayed with such superior spirit and beauty; and when we see with what felicity he applied it to the higher departments of the art, to historic compositions in the triuiph of Camillas, the election of Darius, the story of Phaeton, we must lament that such talents should have been drawn aside to the meaner employment of horse-portrait painting, which occupied too much of his valuable life.

His drawings of animals, in pencil and water-colours, display a degree of taste and skill seldom attained. Many of his most capital pictures are in the possession of noblemen and collectors; his chef-d'oeuvre, a group of tigers, is in the possession of S. Whitbread, esq. The etchings of cattle which accompany his brother’s descriptive writings, are his productions. As a man he was equally esteemed for probity of character and simplicity of manner, and, as a member of the royal academy, he added honour to the institution. He died at Brompton, March 8, 1807, three years after his learned and amiable brother, the rev. William Gilpin.

, a voluminous and useful French writer of the last century, was born at Paris, Nov. 17, 1726, and being educated in the profession of the law, became successively counsellor of the parliament of Paris, and member of the grand council. He died in that city in 1807. His countrymen owe to him various translations, which are held in high repute, particularly one of Homer, first printed in 1784, 8vo, of which there were afterwards two splendid editions printed by Didot; and translations of Hesiod, Theocritus, Demosthenes, and Goldsmith’s Vicar of Wakefield. His original works were, 1. “Traite de Peloquence de barreau,” 1767, 12mo. 2. “De la” Religion, par un homme du monde,“1778, and following years, 5 vols. 8vo. This work, though loaded with a superabundance of quotations, which render it too prolix, was well received. In 17 85 he published a judicious abridgment of it, under the title of” Nouveaux Melanges de Philosophic et de la Litterature,“exhibiting in a regular plan the fundamental principles of religion in general, and the moral government of the Deity. 3.” Les vrais principes du Governement Francaise,“Geneva, 8vo, Paris, 8vo, and 2 vols. 12mo. 4.” Analyse raisonnée du droit Français," Paris, 1782, 4to.

, to whom the invention of the compass has been ascribed, was a Neapolitan, and born about the year 13OO. At that time the sovereigns of Naples were younger branches of the royal family of France; and, to mark the circumstance of this invention of the compass originating with a subject of Naples, Gioia distinguished the north with a fleur de lis, a, particularity which has been adopted by all nations, to whom the use of this instrument is known. Some have pretended that the ancients wer6 not ignorant of the power of the magnet; but it is certain 'that Pliny, who often speaks of the load-stone, knew nothing of its appropriate direction to the pole. Some authors also have conferred the honour of this important discovery on the Chinese, and it has by Dr. Wallis been ascribed to the English. However this may be, the territory of Principato, which is part of the kingdom of Naples, and in which place Gioia was born, bears a compass for its arms. If it be only an improvement of an invention, though but partially known, which may be imputed to Gioia, he is without dispute entitled to a distinguished place in the rank of those who have contributed to the benefit of society.

, a skilful mathematician, was born December 13, 1633, at Bitonto. He spent his youth in idleness and debauchery, and married a young woman without any fortune; and having killed one of his brothersin-law, who reproached him with his indolence and laziness, he entered as a soldier in a fleet fitted out by the pope against the Turks. The admiral, finding that he did not want genius, gave him a writer’s place which happened to be vacant; and Giordani, being obliged in consequence to learn arithmetic, eagerly studied that of Clavius, and acquired a taste for mathematics. Returning to Rome, in 1659, he was made keeper of the castle of St. Angelo, and devoted the leisure that office afforded him to mathematical studies, in which he made so rapid a progress, that queen Christina chose him for her mathematician during her stay at Rome; and Louis XIV, appointed him to teach mathematics in the academy of painting and sculpture which he had founded in that city, 1666. Giordani was made engineer to the castle of St. Angelo by pope Clement X., appointed mathematical professor at the college della Sapienza 1685, and admitted into the academy of the Arcadi, May 5, 1691. He died November 3, 1711. His principal works are, “Euclide restitute,” foiio; “De componendis gravium momentis,” folio; “Fundamentum doctrines motus gravium,” 1705, folio; “Ad Hyacinthum Christophorum Epistola,” 1705, folio.

, an eminent artist, was born at Naples, in 1629, and at first was the disciple of Spagnoletto, and afterwards of Pietro da Cortona.When. h quitted the school of the latter, he went to Lonabarcly, to study Corregio 3 and then travelled to Venice, to improve himself hy the colouring and compositions of the besi Venetian artists. He had a fruitful imagination, and a surprising readiness and freedom of hand; his tone of colouring is agreeable; and his design, when he chose, correct. He studied the manners and particularities of the greatest masters with such care and judgment, and possessed so happy a memory, that he not only retained in his mind a distinct idea of the style of every celebrated master, but had the skill and power to imitate them with such a critical exactness, as to deceive even the ablest connoisseurs. In his early time this might have been the effect of study, and an attempt to arrive at excellence; but we may observe the same disposition of mind in those pictures which he painted in the best periods of his life, many of them being in the peculiar manner of Titian, Tintoretto, Guido, and Bassan. Some of those paintings are so like, that it is said there are in the most capital collections in England, some called Titian’s which are incontestably the sportings of Giordano’s pencil. One of his most considerable productions is the altar-piece of the church of the Ascension at Naples, representing the fall of Lucifer. And at Genoa, is a fine picture of Seneca dying in the Bath; of which, also, there is a duplicate in the gallery at Dresden. In Spain he executed many compositions at Madrid, Toledo, and at the Escurial; and employed only two years to paint ten arched ceilings of the church and staircase of that palace. He was exceedingly industrious, generally painting six or seven hours every day; and being highly favoured by the king, became exceedingly rich. In 1692 he first arrived at Madrid, and did not return to Italy till 1702, when he accompanied Philip V. to Naples, and in 1704 died there. The appellation of “Luca fa Presto” was accidentally applied to Giordano; not on account of the fame he had acquired by his expeditious manner of painting, but from the mercenary eagerness of his father, who sold at a high price the designs of Luca, which he m<Cde after the compositions of the great masters, while he pursued his studies. The father of Luca scarce allowed him time to refresh himself, but still said to him while he was at his meals as well as at his work, “Lucn, fa presto,” or, “Luca, make haste;” from which expression perpetually uttered, his companions gave him the nick-name of “Fa Presto.”

, an Italian ecclesiastic of considerable learning, was born in 1711 at St. Maur in the diocese of Rimini. In 1727 he entered the Augustin order, and studied in their various schools at Verona, Bologna, Padua, &c. where he became an accomplished scholar, particularly in the oriental languages. He afterwards was professor at various Italian seminaries until 1745, when pope Benedict XIV. invited him to Rome to the theological chair of La Sapienza, which he filled with great reputation for some time. The same pontiff also made him librarian del Angelica, and ordered him to efface from the Index Expurgatorius of the Spanish inquisition, the works of cardinal de Novis, which that tribunal had condemned. During the height of his reputation the emperor Francis I. endeavoured to persuade him to settle at Vienna, and made him most liberal offers, which he repeatedly declined. When the missionaries were sent by the college de Propaganda to Thibet, they found themselves much embarrassed to understand the language of that country, notwithstanding the assistance afforded by Hyde, Lacroix, Vespiere, and other authors, but were much relieved by a valuable publication of Giorgi’s, which appeared in 1761, entitled “Alphabetum Thibetanum,” 4to, enriched with valuable dissertations on the geography, mythology, history and antiquities of Thibet; and in this he explains with great ability the famous manuscripts found in 1721 near the Caspian sea by some Russian troops, and sent by Peter I. to M. Bignon. His next publication was not less important to the learned world, ^ Fragmentum Evangelii S. Johannis Grseco-Copto Thebaicum sseculi quarti; additamentum ex vetustissimis membranis lectiortum evangelicarum divinse Missae Cod. Diaconici reliquiae, et liturgica alia fragmenta, &c." Rome, 1789, 4to. His other works, enumerated by Fabroni, consist of letters, and dissertations on subjects of oriental criticism and antiquities, and some polemical treatises. Among his unpublished writings, was one on the Greek marbles of the temple of Malatesi at Rimini. Giorgi died May 4, 1797.

, an eminent artist, whose name was Gioggio Barbarellj, but was generally known by the appellation of Giorgione, from loftiness of figure and gait, or the grandeur that stamps his style, was born at Castelfranco, in Frioul, 1477, and became the scholar of Giovanni Bellini. Even then he dismissed the minuteness which chained his master, and substituted that freedom, that disdainful superiority of handling, which, if it be not the result of manner, is the supreme attainment of execution. Ample outlines, bold fore-shortening, dignity, and vivacity of aspect and attitude, breadth of drapery, richness of accompaniment, more natural and softer passages from tint to tint, and forcible effects of chiaroscuro, marked the style of Giorgione. This last, the great want of the Venetian school, had, indeed, already been discovered to Upper Italy, by Lionardo da Vinci. To him, or rather to certain pictures and drawings of his, all unknown to us, Vasari pretends that Giorgione owes his chiaroscuro; but neither the line and forms peculiar to Vipci, nor his system of light and shade, seem to countenance this assertion. Gracility and amenity of aspect characterize the lines and fancy of Lionardo; fulness, roundness, those of Giorgione. Fond of a much wider diffusion of shades, and gradually diminishing their mass, the Tuscan drives light to a single point of dazzling splendour. Not so the Venetian; more open, less dark, neither brown nor ferrugineous in his demi-tints, but transparent and true; to tell the whole, he is nearer to Corregioi He may, however, have inspected and profited by the example of Lionardo, the inventor of chiaroscuro; but so as Corregio did by the fore-shortening of Mantegna. His greatest works were in fresco, of which little but the ruins remain. His numerous oil-pictures, by rigorous impasto, and fulness of pencil, st^ll preserve their beauty. Of these, his portraits have every excellence which mind, air, dignity, truth, freshness, and contrast, can confer; he sometimes indulged in ruddy, sanguine tints, but, on the whole, simplicity is their standard. His compositions are few; the most considerable was, perhaps, that of the “Tempest allayed,” in the school of St. Marco at Venice. Some consider as his master-piece “Moses taken from the Nile, and presented to the daughter of Pharaoh,” in the archiepiscopal palace at Milan, in which a certain austerity of tone gives zest to sweetness. One large picture of a holy family is in possession of the marquis of Stafford, which is highly laboured as to effect. But, perhaps the most perfect work of his in this country, is a small picture in the collection of the earl of Carlisle, a portrait of Gaston de Foix, with a servant putting on his armour. We are not acquainted with any picture that has more truth or beauty of colour, and style of character. It is told of Giorgione, that having a dispute concerning the superiority of sculpture or painting; and it being argued, that sculpture had the advantage, because the figures it produces may be seen all around; he took the adverse side, maintaining, that the necessity of moving, in order to see the different sides, deprived it of its superiority; whereas the whole figure might be viewed at one glance, in a minute. To prove his position, he painted a figure, and surrounded it with mirrors, in which all the various parts were exhibited, and obtained great applause for his ingenuity. This artist is said to have fallen in love with a young beauty at Venice, who was no less charmed with him, and submitted to be his mistress. She fell ill with the plague; but, not suspecting it to be so, admitted Giorgione to her bed, where, the infection seizing him, they both died in 1511, he being no more than 33.

, an eminent painter, sculptor, and architect, was born in 1276, at a village near Florence, of parents who were plain country people. When a boy, he was sent out to keep sheep in the fields; and, having a natural inclination for design, he used to amuse himself with drawing his flock after the life upon sand, in the best manner he could. Cimabue travelling once that way, found him at this work, and thence conceived so good an opinion of his genius for painting, that he prevailed with his father to let him go to Florence, and be brought up under him. He had not applied himself long to designing, before he began to shake off the stiffness of the Grecian masters. He endeavoured to give a finer air to his heads, and more of nature to his colouring, with proper actions to his figures. He attempted likewise to draw after the life, and to express the different passions of the mind; but could not come up to the liveliness of the eyes, the tenderness of the flesh, or the strength of the muscles in naked figures. What he did, however, had not been done in, two centuries before, with any skill equal to his. Giotto’s reputation was so far extended, that pope Benedict IX. sent a gentleman of his court into Tuscany, to bring him a just report of his talents; and withal to bring him a design from each of the Florentine painters, being desirous to have some notion of their skill. When he came to Giotto, he told him of the pope’s intentions, which were to employ him in St. Peter’s church at Rome; and desired him to send some design by him to his holiness. Giotto, who was a pleasant ready man, took a sheet of white paper, and setting his arm close to his hip to keep it steady, he drew with one stroke of his pencil a circle so round and so equal, that “round as Giotto’s O” afterwards became proverbial. Then, presenting it to the gentleman, he told him smiling, that “there was a piece of design, which he might carry to his holiness.” The man replied, “I ask for a design:” Giotto answered, “Go, sir, I tell you his holiness asks nothing else of me.” The pope, who understood something of painting, easily comprehended by this, how much Giotto in strength of design excelled all the other painters of his time; and accordingly sent for him to Rome. Here he painted many pieces, and amongst the rest a ship of Mosaic work, which is over the three gates of the portico, in the entrance to St. Peter’s church, and is known to painters by the name of Giotto’s vessel. Pope Benedict was succeeded by Clement V. who transferred the papal court to Avignon; whither, likewise, Giotto was obliged to go. After some stay there, having perfectly satisfied the pope by many fine specimens of his art, he was largely rewarded, and returned to Florence full of riches and honour in 1316. He was soon invited to Padua, where he painted a new-built chapel very curiously; thence he went to Verona, and then to Ferrara. At the same time the poet Dante, hearing that Giotto was at Ferrara, and being himself then in exile at Ravenna, got him over to Ravenna, where he executed several pieces; and perhaps it might be here that he drew Dante’s picture, though the friendship between the poet and the painter was previous to this. In 1322, he was again invited abroad by Castruccio Castrucani, lord of Luca; and, after that, by Robert king of Naples. Giotto painted much at Naples, and chiefly the chapel, where the king was so pleased with him, that he used very often to go and sit by him while he was at work: for,Giotto was a man of pleasant conversation and wit. One day, it being very hot, the king said to him, “If I were you, Giotto, I would leave off working this hot weather” “and so would I, Sir,” says Giotto, “if I were you.” He returned from Naples to Rome, and from Rome to Florence, leaving monuments of his art in almost every place through which he passed. There is a picture of his in one of the churches of Florence, representing the death of the blessed Virgin, with the apostles about her: the attitudes of which story, Michael Angelo used to say, could not be better designed. Giotto, however, did not confine his genius altogether to painting: he was both a sculptor and architect. In 1327 he formed the design of a magnificent and beautiful monument for Guido Tarlati, bishop of Arezzo, who had been the head of the Ghibeline faction in Tuscany: and in 1334 he undertook the famous tower of Sancta Maria del Fiore; for which work, though it was not finished, he was made a citizen of Florence, and endowed with a considerable yearly pension. His death happened in 1336: and the city of Florence erected a marble statue over his tomb. He had the esteem and friendship of most of the excellent men of the age in which he lived and among the rest, of Dante and Petrarch. He drew, as already noticed, the picture of the former and the latter mentions him in his will, and in one of his familiar epistles.

Giotto is said to have been the inventor of Mosaic work, and of crucifixes. The former has been disproved in our Archasologia. The latter rests on a story which we hope has as little foundation. It is thus related: “Giotto, intending one day to draw a crucifix to the life, wheedled a poor man to suffer himself to be bound to a cross for an hour, at the end of which he was to be released, and receive a considerable reward for it; but instead of this, as soons he had fastened him, he stabbed him dead, and then fell to drawing when he had finished his picture, he carried it to the pope, who liked it so well, that he was resolved to place it over the altar of his own chapel: Giotto told him, as he liked the copy so well, he would show him the original. What do you mean, said the pope? Will you show me Jesus Christ on the cross in person? No, said Giotto, but I will show your holiness the original from whence I drew this, if you will absolve me from all punishment. The pope promised this, which Giotto believing, attended him to the place where it was: as soon as they were entered, he drew back a curtain, which hung before the dead man on the cross, and told him what he had done. The pope, troubled at so barbarous an action, repealed his promise, and told Giotto, that he should surely be put to an exemplary death. Giotto, with a seeming resignation, only begged leave to finish the piece before he died, which was granted him, and a guard set upon him to prevent his escape. As soon as the picture was delivered into his hands, he took a brush, and dipping it into a sort of stuff ready for that purpose, daubed the picture all over with it, so that nothing of the crucifix could be seen. This made his holiness stark mad, and he swore, that Giotto should he put to the most cruel death, unless he drew another equal to the former; if so, he would not only give him his life, but also an ample reward in money. Giotto, as he had reason, desired this under the pope’s signet, that he might not be in danger of a second repeal. This was granted to him; and taking a wet spunge, he wiped off all the varnish he had daubed on the picture, so that the crucifix appeared the same in all respects as it did before. Upon this, the pope remitted his punishment. And they say, that this crucifix is the original, from which the most famous crucifixes in Europe are drawn.”

, in Latin Gy raid us, an ingenious and learned Italian critic, was born at Ferrara in 1479, of an ancient and reputaWe-family. He learned the Latin tongue and polite literature under Baptist Guarini; and afterwards the Greek at Milan under Demetrius Chalcondyles. He retired into the neighbourhood of Albert Picus, prince of Carpi, and of John Francis Picus, prince of Mirandula; and, having by their means access to a large and well-furnished library, he applied himself intensely to study. He afterwards went to Modena, and thence to Rome, but being unfortunately in this city when it was plundered by the soldiers of Charles V. in 1527, he lost his all in the general ruin; and soon after his patrou cardinal Rangone, with whom he had lived some time. He was then obliged to shelter himself in the house of the prince of Mirandula, a relation of the great Picus, but had the misfortune to lose this protector in 1533, who was assassinated in a conspiracy headed by his nephew. Giraldi was at that time so afflicted with the gout, that he had great difficulty to save himself from the hands of the conspirators, and lost all which he had acquired since the sacking of Rome. He then returned to his own country, and lived at Ferrara, where he found a refuge from his misfortunes. The gout, which he is said to have heightened by intemperance, tormented him so for the six or seven last years of his life, that, as he speaks of himself, he might be said rather to breathe than to live. He was such a cripple in his hands and feet, that he was incapable of moving himself. He made, however, what use he could of intervals of ease, to read, and even write: and many of his books were composed in those intervals. He died at length of this malady in 1552 and was interred in the cathedral of Ferrara, where an epitaph, composed by himself, was inscribed upon his tomb.

His works consist of seventeen productions, which were first printed separately; but afterwards collected and published in 2 vols. folio, at Basil 15SO, and at Leyden 1696. The most valued pieces among them are, “Historia de Deis Gentium,” <( Historian Poetarum tarn Grajcorum, quam Latinorum Dialogi decem,“and,” Dialogi duo de Poetis nostrorum.“The first of these books is one of the last he composed, and full of profound erudition. The other two, which make up 'the history of the ancient and modern poets, are written with great exactness and judgment. Vossius speaks highly of this work, as the production of great judgment and learning, as well as industry, and observes, that though his professed design is to collect memoirs concerning their persons, characters, and writings in general, yet he has occasionally interspersed many things, regarding the art of poetry, which may be useful to those who intend to cultivate it. Joseph Scaliger, indeed, would persuade us, though not very consistently, that nothing can be more contemptible than the judgment be passes on the poets he treats of: for in another place he allows all the works of Giraldus to be very good, and that no man knew better how to temper learning with judgment. There is a work also by Giraldus,” De annis & mensibus, ciEterisque temporis partibus, una cum Kalendario Romano & Grocco,“written with a view to the reformation of the kalerular, which was afterwards effected by pope Gregory XIII. about 1582. There are likewise among his works a few poems, the principal of which is entitled,” Epistola in qua agitur de incommodis, quse in direptione Urbana passus est ubi item est quasi catalogus suorum, umicorurn Poetarum, & deileaiur interitus Herculis Carclinalis Rangonis.“This poem is annexed to the Florentine edition of th6 two dialogues concerning his contemporary poets; and contains a curious literary history of that time. To other praises bestowed upon Giraldus by authors of the first name, we may add that of Casaubon, who calls him,” vir solide doctus, & in scribendo accuratus,“a man solidly learned and an accurate writer. Thuanus says, that” he was excellently skilled in the Greek and Latin tongues, in polite literature, and in antiquity, which he has illustrated in several works; and that, though highly deserving a better fate, he struggled all his life with illhealth and ill-fortune." His books he bequeathed to his relatives John Baptist Giraldi and Pasetius.

, an Italian poet, of the same family with the preceding, was born at Ferrara in 1504. His father, being a man of letters, took great care of his education; and placed him under Cselio Calcagnini, to study the languages and philosophy. He made an uncommon progress, and then applied himself to the study of physic; in which faculty he was afterwards a doctor. At 21 years of age, he was employed to read public lectures at Ferrara upon physic and polite literature. In 1542, the duke of Ferrara made him his secretary; which office he held till the death of that prince in 1558. He was continued in it by his successor: but envy having done him some ill offices with his master, he was obliged to quit the court. He left the city at the same time, and removed with his family to Mondovi in Piedmont; where he taught the belles lettres publicly for three years. He then went to Turin but the air there not agreeing with his constitution, he accepted the professorship of rhetoric at Pavia which the senate of Milan, hearing of his being about to remove, and apprized of his great merit, freely offered him. This post he filled with great repute; and afterwards obtained a place in the academy of that town. It was here he got the name of Cintio, which he retained ever after, and put in the title-page of his books. The gout, which was hereditary in his family, beginning to attacR him severely, he returned to Ferrara; thinking that his native air might afford him relief. But he was hardly settled there, when he grew extremely ill; and, after languishing about three months, died in 1573.

His works are all written in Italian, except some orations, spoken upon extraordinary occasions, in Latin. They consist chiefly of tragedies: a collection of which was published at Venice 1583, in 8vo, by his son Celso Giraldi; who, in his dedication to the duke of Ferrara, takes occasion to observe, that he was the youngest of five sons, and the only one who survived his father. There are also some prose works of Giraldi: one particularly upon comedy, tragedy, and other kinds of poetry, which was printed at Venice by himself in 1554, 4to. Some make no scruple to rank him among the best tragic writers that Italy has produced; but perhaps the work by which he now is best known is his “Hecatommiti,” an hundred novels in the manner of Boccaccio, which have been frequently printed. There is a scarce volume of his poems printed at Ferrara in 1537, at the close of which is a treatise of Cielio Calcagnini, “De Imitatione,” addressed to Giraldi.

, an ingenious French writer, wa born at Clermont in Auvergne in 1678, and educated for the church. In his youth he had a canonry in the collegiate church of Notre Dame de Monferrand, but resigned it to one of his brothers, that he might be at liberty to go to Paris and devote his time to literary pursuits. There by the interest of some friends he was made almoner to the duchess of Berri, daughter of the regent, and also obtained the place of king’s interpreter for the Sclavonian and Russian languages. In 1744 he was admitted a member of the French academy. He died Feb. 4, 1748. The work by which he is best known, and to which indeed he chiefly owed his reputation in France, is his “Synonymes Fransais,” 12mo, of which a new edition, with some posthumous pieces by Girard, was published by M. Beauzee in 1769, 2 vols. 12mo. No grammatical work was ever more popular in France, nor more useful in denning the precise meaning of words apparently synonymous; and the elegance and moral tendency of the examples he produce* have been much admired. The abbe“Roubaud has since published” Les Nouveaux Synonymes Francais,“1786, 4 vols. 8vo, which may be considered as a supplement to Girard. Our author published also a grammar under the title of” Les vrais principes de la laugue Franc.ais," 2 vols. 12mp, far inferior in ingenuity to his former, and full of metaphysical whims on the theory of language, not unmixed with those infidel principles which were in his time beginning to be propagated.

, an ingenious young landscapepainter, was born Feb. 18, 1773, and received his first instructions from Mr. Fisher, a drawing-master in Aldt rsgatestreet, and was, for a short time, the pupil of Mr. Daves. He early made nature his model; but the first master that struck his attention forcibly was Canaletti, and, in the latter part of his life, he sedulously studied the colouring of Rubens. He was the first who introduced the custom of drawing upon cartridge-paper; by which means he avoided that spotty, glittering glare so common in drawings made on white paper; and some of his later productions have as forcible and spirited an effect as an oil-picture, and are more clear. In his first manner he made the outline with a pen, but afterwards did away that hard outline, which gives so edgy an effect to drawings that are not, in other respects, destitute of merit; and, having first given his general forms with Indian ink, finished his work by putting on his different tints. This, if judiciously managed, is certainly a great improvement in the art. It has been said, that he made great use of the rule, and produced some of his most forcible effects by trick, but this was not the case. His eye was peculiarly accurate; and by that he formed his judgment of proportions. Whoever inspected his pallet would find it covered with a greater variety of tints than almost any of his contemporaries employed. Mr. Moore was his first patron, and with him he went a tour into Scotland. The prospects he saw in that country gave that wildness of imagery to the scenery of his drawings by which they are so pre-eminently distinguished. He also went with Mr. Moore to Peterborough, Lichfield, and Lincoln; and, indeed, to many other places remarkable for their rich scenery, either in nature or architecture. That gentleman had a drawing that Girtin made of Exeter cathedral, which was principally coloured on the spot where it was drawn; for he was so uncommonly indefatigable, that, when he had made a sketch of any place, he never wished to quit it until he h^d given it all the proper tints. He was early noticed by lord Harewood, Mr. Lascellos^ and Dr. Monro; in whose collections are some of those fine specimens of the arts by the study of which he formed his taste. The doctor has in his possession some of his earliest, and many of his finest, drawings. He painted two pictures in oil; the first was a view in Wales, which was exhibited, and much noticed, in 1801; and the second, the panorama view of London, which was exhibited in Spring-gardens. About twelve months before his death he went to France, where he staid till May. His la:>t, and indeed his best, drawings were the views of Paris, which were purchased by lord Essex, and from which aqun-tinta prints by other artists have since been made. This promising young artist died Nov. 9, 1802, of an astnmatic disorder, which Mr. Edwards seems to attribute to irregularity.

, advocate to the parliament of Paris, and to the council, and member of the French academy, was born at Paris in 1596. His abilities an 1 probity recommended him to some very honourable employments, and he particularly enjoyed the confidence of cardinal Mazarin. He was author of the following translations “Dialogues des Orateurs,” 4to. “l'Apologie de Socrate” “riiist. Sacree de Sulpice Severe;” “I'Apologetique de Tertullien,” for which he was received into the academy; “la Cite de Dieu, de St. Augustin,” I vol, 4to.; “Epitres Choisies de St. Augustin,” 5 vols. 12mo. He died in 1665, at Paris. His son, Francis, who was provincial of the Minim order, gained great reputation by some devotional works; but deserves little credit for his principal publication, “Les Vies des Saints,” fol. which although esteemed for its piety, is full of fables, and far from accurate as to facts. P. Raft'ron, of the same order, has written his life, 12mo.

, a Benedictine monk, first of St. Germaine d'Auxerre, and afterwards of Cluni, and a man of superstitious credulity, flourished in the eleventh century, and wrote a “Chronicle or History of France,” in the Latin language. It consists of five books, of which the first relates to the events of the monarchy previously to Hugh Capet, and the four subsequent ones to those following it, as far down as 1046. This work is defective as a composition, and, at the same time, full of fabulous stories, yet it contains much valuable information relative to those remote ages. It was printed in the collections of Pithou and Duchesne. He was author of a life of William, abbot of St. Benignus at Dijon.

, a learned philologist of the sixteenth century, was born at Munster. He studied under Melancthon at Wittemberg, and became very distinguished for his critical knowledge of Greek and Latin. In 1533 he disputed publicly against the anabaptists at Munster. After visiting the principal German academies, he was elected rector of the college at Hanover, but, upon some dispute, he quitted in 1555, and retiring to Goslar, was followed by iriost of his scholars; but here again he had the misfortune to render himself unpopular, and was obliged to leave the place in 1560, on which he went to Marpurg, and was made professor of history. He died in 1564. His works are, 1. “Sylva Carminum Elegiacorum” 2. “Descriptio Gentis Antoniac” 3. “Familiae Julias Gentis” 4. “Disticha Sacra et Moralia” 5. “Annotat. in Jul. Cæsaris Comment.;” 6. “Annotat. in Ciceroniæ Epist. Famil.;” 7. “Onomasticon Historiae Romanae.”

, a German physician, was born in 1595, at Cologne, where his father was a surgeon. His first application to letters was at Bremen; whence he returned to Cologne, and devoted himself to philosophy, physic, and chirurgery. He studied four years under Peter Holtzem, who was the elector’s physician, and professor in this city; and he learned the practical part of surgery from his father. To perfect himself in these sciences, he went afterwards into Italy, and made some stay at Padua; where he greatly benefited himself by attending the lectures of Jerome Fabricius ab Aquapendente, Adrian Spigelius, and Sanctorins. He was here made M. D. After having visited the principal towns of Italy, he returned to his country in 1618, and settled at Bremen; where he practised physic and surgery with so much success, that the archbishop of this place made him his physician in 1628. He was also made physician of the republic of Bremen. The time of his death is not precisely known; some say 1640, but the dedication of his last work is dated Oct. 8, 1652. He published at Bremen, “ Speculum Chirurgorum,” in 1619, 8vo; reprinted in 1628, 4to; “Methodus Medendse Paronychia?,” in 1633; “Tractatus de Polypo Narium affectu gravissimo,” in 1628; and “Gazophylacium Polypusium Fonticulorum & Setonum Reseratum,” in 1633. These four pieces were collected and published, with emendations, tinder the title of his Works, at London, in 1729, 4to, with his life prefixed, and some curious tracts on Roman antiquities. It must needs suggest an high opinion of this young physician, that though he died a young man, yet his works should be thought worthy of a republication 100 years after; when such prodigious improvements have been made in philosophy, physic, and sciences of all kinds, of which he had not the benefit.

, a writer of the fourteenth century, was an English Minorite, or Franciscan, of the family of the earls of Suffolk. He is said to have studied at Oxford, Paris, and Rome, and to have been very familiar with the writings of Aristotle, Plato, and Pliny; from which, with his own observations, he compiled his celebrated work “De Proprietatibus rernrn,” a kind of general history of nature; divided into nineteen books, treating of God, angels, and devils, the soul, the body, animals, &c. In some copies there is an additional book, not of his writing, on numbers, weights, measures, sounds, &c. Some v “Sermons” of his were printed at Strasburgh in 1495. But his work “De Proprietatibus*' appears to have been the chief favourite, and was one of the first books on which the art of printing was exercised, there being no fewer than twelve editions, or translations, printed from 1479 to 1494. The English translation printed by Wynkyn de Worde is the most magnificent publication that ever issued from the press of that celebrated printer, but the date has not been ascertained. A very copious and exact analysis of this curious work is given by Mr. Dibdin in the second Volume of his” Typographical Antiquities."

, younger son of John Glanvil of Tavistock in Devonshire, one of the justices of the common pleas (who died in 1600), was educated at Oxford, and after serving for some time in an attorney’s office, studied law in Lincoln’s-inn, where he preserved the reputation of legal ability for which his family had long beendistinguished. When he had been a barrister of some years standing, he was elected recorder of Plymouth, and burgess for that place in several parliaments. In the 5tU of Charles I. he was Lent reader of his inn, and in May 1639 was made serjeant at law. Being chosen speaker of the parliament which assembled in April 1640, he shewed himself more active in the king’s cause, than formerly, when he joined in the common clamour against the prerogative. In August 1641, being then one of the king’s serjeants, he received the honour of knighthood; and when his majesty was obliged to leave the parliament, sir John followed him to Oxford. In 1645, being accused as a delinquent, or adherent to the king, he was deprived of his seat in parliament, and afterwards committed to prison, in which he remained until 1648, when he made a composition with the usurping powers. After the restoration he was made king’s serjeant again, and would have probably attained promotion had he not died soon after, on Oct. 2, 1661. He was buried in the church of Broad H in ton in Wiltshire, the manor of which he had bought some years before. His works consist chiefly of speeches and arguments, most of which are in Rnshworth’s “Collections.” His “Reports of Cases of controverted Elections,” were published in 1775, by John Topham, esq.

, a grandson of the preceding, war born at Broad Hinton in 1664, and became at the age of fourteen a commoner of Trinity-college, Oxford. He studied law afterwards in Lincoln’s-inn, and was admitted to the bar. He is known by some minor poems, the best of which may be seen in Mr. Nichols’s Collection. He made the first English translation of Fontenelle’s “Plurality of Worlds.” He died at Broad Hinton in 1735.

, a distinguished writer, was born in 1636, at Plymouth in Devonshire, where he probably received the first rudiments of his education, and was entered at Exeter-college, Oxford, April 19, 1652. He was placed under Samuel Conant, an eminent tutor, and having made great proficiency in his studies, he proceeded B. A. Oct. II, 1655. The following year, he removed to Lincoln-college, probably upon some view of preferment. Taking the degree of M. A. June 29, 1658, he assumed the priestly office, according to the forms used by the sectaries at that time, and became chaplain to Francis Rouse, esq. then made provost of Eton-college, by Oliver Cromwell, and designed for one of his house of lords. Had tin* patron lived a little longer, Glanvil’s expectations would, no doubt, have been fully answered; since according to Wood, he entirely complied with the principles of the then prevailing party, to whom his very prompt pen must needs have been serviceable. But Rouse dying the same year, he returned to his college in Oxford, and pursued his studies there during the subsequent distractions in the state. About this time, he became acquainted with Mr. Richard Baxter, who entertained a great opinion of his genius, and continued his respect for him after the restoration; when they espoused different causes. The friendship was equally warm on Glanvil’s side, who, Sept. 15, 1661, addressed an epistle to his friend, professing himself to be an admirer of his preaching and writings; he v also offered to write something in his defence, but yielded to his advice, not to sacrifice his views of preferment to their friendship.

Accordingly, he had the prudence to take a different method; and turning his thoughts to a subject not only inoffensive in itself, but entirely popular at that time, viz. a defence of experimental philosophy against the notional way of Aristotle and the schools, he published it this year, under the title of “The Vanity of Dogmatizing, or confidence in opinions, manifested in a discourse of the shortness and uncertainty of our knowledge and its causes, with some reflections on Peripateticism, and an apology for philosophy,” 1661, 8vo. These meetings, which gave rise to the Royal Society, were much frequented at this time, and encouraged by learned men of all persuasions; and this small discourse introduced him to the knowledge of the literary world in a very favourable light. He had an opportunity of improving by the weakness of an antagonist, whom he answered in an appendix to a piece called “Scepsis Scientifica, or confessed ignorance the way to science, in an Essay on the Vanity of Dogmatizing, and confident opinion,” 1665, 4to. Our author dedicated this piece to the royal society, in terms of the highest respect for that institution; and the society being then in a state ef infancy, and having many enemies, as might be expected in an undertaking which seemed to threaten the ruin of the old way of philosophizing in the schools, the “Scepsis” was presented to the council by lord Brereton, at a meeting, Dec. 7, 1664; when his lordship also proposed the author for a member, and he was elected accordingly in that month.

In 1663, the house of John Mumpesson of Tedworth, in Wiltshire, being disturbed by the beating of a drum invisibly every night, our author turned his thoughts to that subject, and in 1666 printed, in 4to, “Some philosophical considerations, touching the being of Witches and Witchcraft.” In this piece he defended the possibility of witchcraft, which drew him into a controversy that ended only with his life: during the course of it, he proposed to confirm his opinion by a collection of several narratives relating to it. But as he held then a correspondence with Mr. Boyle, that gentleman, observing with how much warmth the dispute was carried on, gave him many cautions about managing so tender a subject; and hinted to him, that the credit of religion might suffer by weak arguments upon such topics. In answer to which, Glanvil professes himself much obliged for those kind admonitions, and promises to be exceeding careful in the choice of his relations: however, he made a shift to pick out no less than twenty-six modern relations, besides that of Mr. Mumpesson’s drummer. They were not, however, printed till after his death, in a piece entitled “Sadducismus Triumphans, in two parts,” 1681, 8vo; and again in 1682, with large additions, by Dr. Henry More, the editor of both editions to whom our author had addressed a letter on the subject and in an appendix to the first part concerning the possibility of apparitions, there is added an account of the nature of a spirit, translated by our author, from the two last chapters of More’s “Enchiridion Metaphysicum.”

His defence of the royal society having procured him many friends, some of them obtained for him the rectory of the abbey church at Bath, into which he was inducted June the same year, 1666. From this time he fixed his residence in that city; and, continuing on all occasions to testify his zeal for the new philosophy, by exploding Aristotle, he was desired to make a visit to Mr. Robert Crosse, vicar of Chew, near Pcnsford, in Somersetshire, a great zealot for the old established way of teaching in the schools. Our author accepted the invitation, and going to Pensford in 1677, happened to come into the room just as the vicar was entertaining his company with the praises of Aristotle and his philosophy. After their first civilities were paid, he went on with his discourse, and, applying himself to Mr. Glanvil, treated the royal society and modern philosophers with some contempt. Glanvil, not expecting so sudden an attack, was in some measure surprized, mud did not answer with that quickness and facility as he otherwise might probably have done. But afterwards, both in conversation and by letters, he attacked his antagonist’s assertion, that Aristotle had more advantages for knowledge than the royal society, or all the present age had or could have, because, “totam peragravit Asiam,” he trarelled over all Asia.

Glanvil likewise laid the plan of a farther defence of the royal society; but bishop Sprat’s history of it being then in the press, he waited to see how far that treatise should anticipate his design. Upon its. publication, in 1667, finding there was room left for him, he pursued his resolution, and printed his piece the following year, with this title, expressing the motives of writing it: “Plus Ultra, or the Progress and Advancement of Knowledge since the days of Aristotle, in an account of some of the most remarkable late improvements of practical useful learning, to encourage philosophical endeavours, occasioned by a conference with one of the notional way,” 1668, 12mo. In some parts of this piece he treated the Somersetshire yicar with rough raillery, and this the vicar returned, in a piece which was denied the press both at Oxford and London, for its scurrility. Glanvil somehow obtaining the contents, printed them at London, with proper remarks of his own, under the title of “The Chew-Gazette,” but of these there were only 100 taken off, and those dispersed into private hands, in order, as Glanvil said, that Crosse’s shame might not be made public, &c. After this letter was published, Crosse wrote ballads against our author and the royal society; while other wags at Oxford, pleased with the controversy, made doggrel ballads on them both.

This affair also involved Glanvil in a scurrilous dispute with Henry Stubbe, who was then, as Wood observes, a summer practitioner at Bath; and bearing no good-will to the proceedings of Glanvil, took Crosse’s part, and encouraged him to write against the virtuosi, and at the time entered the lists himself and the follpwing pamphlets passed between them. I. “The Plus Ultra reduced to a Nonplus,” &c. 1670, 4to, Stubbe. 2. “A prefatory Anwer to Mr. HenryStubbe, the doctor of Warwick, wherein the malignity, &c. of his Animadversions are discovered. 1 * 1671, 12mo, Glanvil. 3.” A Preface against Ecebolius Glanvil, F. R.S. subjoined to his Reply, &c. Oxford,“167 I, 4to, Stubbe. The doctor also fell upon his antagonist, in his” Epistolary Discourse concerning Phlebotomy,“167 t, 4to; upon which Glanvil immediately published” A farther Discovery of Mr. Stnbbe, in a brief reply to his last pamphlet,“1671, 8vo, to which was added,” Ad clerum Somersetensem Epistola Προσφωνησισ.“And the doctor among other things, having censured the new philosophy, as tending to encourage atheism our author published his” Philosophia Pia,“&c. 1671, 8vo, which closed the controversy. When, however, Dr. Meric Casaubon entered the lists in his” Letter to Peter du Moulin," 1663, and managed the argument with more candour and greater knowledge, Glanvil chose to be silent; because not willing to appear in a controversy with a person, as he says, of fame and learning, who had treated him with so much civility, and in a way so different from that of his other assailants. While he was thus pleading the cause of the institution in general, he shewed himself no unuseful member in respect to the particular business of it. The society having given out some queries to be made about mines, our author communicated a paper in relation to those of Mendip hills, and such as respect the Bath, which was well received, ordered to be registered, and afterwards printed in their transactions.

In the mean time, he was far from neglecting the duties of his ministerial function; on the contrary, he distinguished himself so remarkably by his discourses from the pulpit, that he was frequently desired to preach upon public and extraordinary occasions, and several of these sermons were printed in a collection after his death. But in justice to his memory we must not omit to mention one which was never printed. His old antagonist Stubbe, going from Bath on a visit to Bristol, had the misfortune on his return to fall from his horse into a river, which, though shallow, proved sufficient to drown him: his corpse being interred in the abbey-church, our rector paid an honourable tribute to his memory, in a funeral sermon on the occasion. He also wrote an “Essay concerning Preaching,” for the use of a young divine; to which he added, “A seasonable Defence of Preaching, and the plain way of it.” This was chiefly levelled against that affectation of wit and fine speaking which began then to be fashionable. This essay was published in 1678, and the same year he was collated by his majesty to a prebend in the church of Worcester. This promotion was procured by the marquis of Worcester, to whom his wife was related and it was the more easily obtained, as he had been chaplain to the king ever since 1672 in which year he exchanged the vicarage of Frome for the rectory of Street, with the chapel of Walton annexed, in Somersetshire, an exchange which was easily accomplished, since both the livings were in the patronage of sir James Thynne.

He published a great number of tracts besides what have been mentioned. Among which are, 1. “A Blow at Modern Sadducism,” &c. 1668, to which was added, 2. “A Relation of the fancied Disturbances at the house of Mr. Mumpesson;” as also, 3. “Reflections on Drollery and Atheism.” 4. “Palpable Evidence of Spirits and Witchcraft,” &c. 1668. 5. “A Whip for the Droll Fidler to the Atheist,” 1668. 6. “Essays on several important subjects in Philosophy and Religion,” 1676, 4to. 7. “An Essuy concerning Preaching,” 1678, 8Vo, to which was added, 8. “A seasonable Defence of Preaching, -and the plain way of it.” 9. “Letters to the Duchess of Newcastle.” 10. Three single Sermons, besides four printed together, under the title of “Seasonable Reflections and Discourses, in order to the Conviction and Cure of the scoffing Infidelity of a degenerate age.” As he had a lively imagination, and a flowing style, these came from him very easily, and he continued the exercise of his pen to the last; the press having scarcely finished his piece entitled “The zealous and impartial Protestant,” &c. 1680, when he was attacked by a fever, which baffling the physician’s skill, cut him off in the vigour of his age. He died at Bath, Nov. 4th, 1680, about the age of forty-four. Mr. Joseph Pleydel, archdeacon of Chichester, preached his funeral sermon, when his corpse was interred in his own parish church, where a decent monument and inscription was afterwards dedicated to his memory by Margaret his widow, sprung from the Selwins of Gloucestershire. She was his second wife; but he had no issue by either. Soon after his decease, several of his sermons, and other pieces, were collected and published with the title of “Some Discourses, Sermons, and Remains,” 1681, 4to, by Dr. Henry Horneck, who tells us that death snatched him away, when the learned world expected some of his greatest attempts and enterprizes. Horneck gave a large, and apparently very just character of Glanvil, who was unquestionably a man of learning and genius, and although he retained the belief in witchcraft, surmounted many of the other prejudices of his time.

, a Scotch clergyman, and founder of a sect, was born at Dundee, 1638, and educated in the New-college, at St. Andrew’s, where he took his degrees, and was settled minister of a country church, near the place of his nativity. In 1727 he published a treatise to prove that the civil establishment of religion was inconsistent with Christianity, for which he was deposed, and became the father of a new sect, called from him Glassites; and afterwards from another leading propagator, Sandemanians. Some account of their tenets will be given under the article Sandeman. Glass wrote a great number of controversial tracts, which have been published at Edinburgh, in 4 vols. 8vo. He died at Dundee, in 1773, aged seventy-five.

, son of the above, was born at Dundee, in 1725, and brought up a surgeon, in which capacity he went several voyages to the West Indies, but not liking his profession, he accepted the command of a merchant’s ship belonging to London, and engaged in the trade to the Brazils. Being a man of considerable abilities, he published in 1 vtol. 4to, “A Decription of Teneriffe, with the Manners and Customs of the Portuguese who are settled there.” In 1763 he went over to the Brazils, taking along with him his wife and daughter; and in 1765 set sail for London, bringing along with him all his property; but just when the ship came within sight of the coast of Ireland, four of the seamen entered into a conspiracy, murdered captain Glass, his wife, daughter, the mate, one seaman, and two boys. These miscreants, having loaded their boat with dollars, sunk the ship, and landed at Ross, whence they proceeded to Dublin, where they were apprehended and executed Oct. 1764.

, an eminent German divine and critic, was born May 20, 1593, at Sondershausen, in Thuringia, and after some education under a private tutor, was sent in 1612 to Jena, where he was admitted to the degree of D. D. and was made professor of divinity. He was also appointed superintendant of the churches and schools in the duchy of Saxe-Gotha, and exercised the duties of these offices with great reputation. He died at Gotha July 27, 1656. His principal work was published in 1623, 4to, entitled “Philologia Sacra,” which is pronounced by Mosheim and Buddeus to be extremely useful for the interpretation of Scripture, as it throws much light upon the language and phraseology of the inspired writers. There have been several editions, the last at Leipsic, in 1776, by professor Dathius, under the title “Philologia Sacra his temporibus accommodata.” He was author, likewise, of “Onomatologia Messiac Prophetica” “Christologia Mosaica et Davidica” “Exegesis Evangeliorum et Epistolarum,” and some other pieces.

, a celebrated chemist of Amsterdam, and called the Paracelsus of his age, was born in Germany in the beginning of the sixteenth century. He travelled much in the pursuit of chemical knowledge, and collected many secret processes; and his experiments contributed to throw much light on the composition and analysis of the metals, inflammable substances, and salts. In fact he passed the greater part of his life in the laboratory. He did not always see the proper application of his own experiments, and vainly fancied that he had discovered the panacea, and the philosopher’s stone, which were at that time objects of pursuit; and the disappointment of many persons who had been seduced by his promises, contributed to bring the art of chemistry into contempt. His theory is full of obscurity; but his practice has perhaps been misrepresented by those who listened to his vain and pompous pretensions; and who accuse him of a dishonourable traffick, in first selling his secrets to chemists at an enormous price, of again disposing of them to other persons, and lastly, of making them public in order to extend his reputation. Glauber published about twenty treatises; in some of which he appears in the character of physician, in others in that of an adept or metallurgist; in the latter he most particularly excelled. However, it would be unjust not to give him the praise of acuteness of mind, of facility and address in the prosecution of his experiments, and of extensive chemical knowledge. He was the inventor of a salt which to this day retains his name in the shops of our apothecaries. The works of Glauber have appeared in different languages; the majority of editions are in German, some in Latin, and others in French. A collection of the whole in Latin was published at Francfort in 1658, in 8vo, and again 165y, in 4to. An English translation was published by Christopher Pack, London, 1689, fol.

, an English physician, was son of William Glisson, of Rampisham, in Dorsetshire, and grafidson of Walter Glisson, of the city of Bristol. He appears to have been born in 1596. Where he learned the first rudiments of his grammar is not known; but he was admitted June 18, 1617, of Caius college, in Cambridge, apparently with a view to physic. He first, however, went through the academical courses of logic and philosophy, and proceeded in arts, in which he took both degrees, that of B. A. in 1620, and of M. A. in 1624; and being chosen fellow of his college, was incorporated M. A. at Oxford, Oct. 25, 1627. From this time he applied himself particularly to the study of medicine, and took his doctor’s degree at Cambridge in 1634, and was appointed regius professor of physic in the room of Ralph Winterton; which office he held forty years. But not chusing to reside constantly at Cambridge, he offered himself, and was admitted candidate of the college of physicians, London, in 1634, and was elected fellow, Sept. 30, the ensuing year.

In the study of his art, he had always set the immortal Harvey before him as a pattern; and treading in his steps, he was diligent to improve physic by anatomical dissections and observations. In 1639 he was appointed to read Dr. Edward Wall’s lecture, and in executing that office, made several new discoveries of great use in establishing a rational practice of physic; but on the breaking out of the civil wars, he retired to Colchester, and followed the bu* siness of his profession with great repute in those times of public confusion. He was thus employed during the memorable siege and surrender of that city to the rebels in 1648; and resided there some time after.

Amidst his practice he still prosecuted his anatomical researches, and from observations made in this way published an account of the rickets in 1650, in which he shewed how the viscera of such as had died of that disorder were affected. This was the more interesting, as the rickets had been then first discovered in the counties of Dorset and Somerset, only about fifteen years before. In this treatise he had the assistance of two of his colleagues, Dr. George Bate, and Dr. Ahasuerus Regemorter; and these with other fellows of the college, requesting him to communicate to the public some of his anatomical lectures which had been read before them, he drew those up in a continued discourse, printed with the title “Anatomia Hepatis,” Lond. 1654, which brought him into the highest esteem among the faculty, and he was chosen one of the electors of the college the year following, and was afterwards president for several years. He published other pieces besides those already mentioned; viz. 1. “De Lymphaxluctis nuper repertis,” Amst. 1659, wuh the “Anatomica prolegomena & Anatomia Hepatis.” 2. “De naturae substantia energetica, seu de via vitae naturae ejusque tribus primis facultatibus,” &c. Lond. 1672, 4to. His last work was a “Treatise of the Stomach and Intestines,” printed at Amsterdam in 1677, not long before his death, which happened that year in the parish of St. Bride, London, in his eighty-first year.

Wood observes, that he died much lamented, as a person to whose learned lucubrations and deep disquisitions in physic not only Great Britain, but remoter kindoms, owe a particular respect and veneration, and it is certain that he was exceeded in judgment and accuracy by none of the English anatomists, who followed the steps of Harvey. Boerhaave terms him “omnium anatomicorum exactissimus,” and Haller speaks in praise of all his writings. Several of his original manuscripts, which were in sir Hans Sloane’s possession, are now in the British Museum.

, an English poet, the son of Richard Glover, a Hamburgh merchant in London, was born in St. Martin’s-lane, Cannon-street, in 1712. Being prot>ably intended for trade, he received no other education than what the school of Cheam, in Surrey, afforded, which he was afterwards induced to improve by an ardent love of learning, and a desire to cultivate his poetical talents according to the purest models. His poetical efforts were very early, for in his sixteenth year he wrote a poem to the memory of sir Isaac Newton, which was supposed to have merit enough to deserve a place in the view of that celebrated author’s philosophy, published in 1728, by Dr, Henry Pemberton. This physician, a man of much science, and of some taste, appears to have been warmly attached to the interests of our young poet, and at a time when there were few regular vehicles of praise or criticism, took every opportunity of encouraging his efforts, and apprizing the nation of this new addition to its literary honours.

At the usual period Glover became engaged in the Hamburgh trade, but continued his attachment to literature and the muses, and was, says Dr. Warton, one of the best and most accurate Greek scholars of his time. It is mentioned in the life of Green, that he published “The Spleen” of that poet, in which he is complimented on account of his study of the ancient Greek poets, and his wish to emulate their fame. Green had probably seen some part of “Leonidas,” which was begun when he was young, and had been submitted in specimens to many of his friends. This poem was first published in 1737, in a 4to volume, consisting of nine books. Its reception was highly flattering, for in this and the following year it passed through three editions. It was dedicated to lord Cobham, one of his early patrons, and whom, it is supposed, he furnished with many of the inscriptions at Stowe, now erased. It was also strongly recommended by such of that nobleman’s political friends as were esteemed the arbiters of taste. Lord Lyttelton, in the periodical paper called “Common Sense,” praised it in the warmest terms, not only for its poetical beauties, but its political tendency, “the whole plan and purpose of it being to show the superiority of freedom over slavery; and how much virtue, public spirit, and the love of liberty, are preferable, both in their nature and effects, to riches, luxury, and the insolence of power.” The same nobleman also addressed verses to our author, in which he inveighs with much asperity against the degeneracy of the times, but, not very consistently, compares England to Greece, and France to Persia. Other writers, particularly Fielding, in the paper called “The Champion,” took up the pen in favour of “Leonidas,” which being published just after the prince of Wales had been driven from St. James’s, and began to keep a separate court, it was praised by the whole of this new court, and by the adherents in general of opposition, not beyond its merit, but too evidently from a motive which could not always prevail, and which ceased to animate their zeal in its favour, when Walpole, the supposed author of all our national grievances, was compelled to resign.

Amidst this high encouragement, the services of Dr. Pemberton must not be forgotten. Soon after the appearance of “Leonidas,” this steady friend endeavoured to fix the public attention on it, by a long pamphlet, entitled “Observations on Poetry, especially Epic, occasioned by the late poem upon Leonidas,” 1738, 12mo. In this, with, many just remarks of a general kind, the author carries his opinion of Glover’s production beyond all reasonable bounds. In the following year, Glover published “London, or the Progress of Commerce,” and the more celebrated ballad of “Hosier’s Ghost,” both written with a view to rouse the nation to resent the conduct of the Spaniards, and to promote what had seldom been known, a war called for by the people, and opposed by the ministry. During the same political dissentions, which, as usual, were warmest in the city of London, Glover presided at several meetings called to set aside, or censure the conduct of those city magistrates or members of parliament who voted for the court. His speeches at those meetings, if we may trust to the report of them in the periodical journals of 1739 and 1740, were elegant, spirited, and calculated to give him considerable weight in the deliberative assemblies of his fellow-citizens. The latter were, indeed, so fully convinced of his talents and zeal, as to appoinfe him to conduct their application to parliament, on the subject of the neglect shewn to their trade by the ruling administration. His services in this last affair may be seen in a pamphlet published in 1743, under the title of A short Account of the late application to parliament made by the merchants of London upon the neglect of their trade; with the substance of the evidence thereupon, as summed up by Mr. Glover."

In 1744, he was offered employment of a very different kind, being nominated in the will of the duchess of Marlborough, to write the duke’s life, in conjunction with Mallet. Her grace bequeathed 500l. to each on this condition, but Glover immediately renounced his share, while Mallet, who had no scruples of any kind where his interest was concerned, accepted the legacy, and continued to receive money from the late duke of Maryborough on the same account, although after twenty years of talk and boast, he left nothing behind him that could shew he had ever seriously begun the work. Glover’s rejection of this legacy is the more honourable, as at this time his affairs became embarrassed; from what cause we are not told. It may be conjectured, however, that he had shared the usual fate of those who are diverted from their regular pursuits by the dreams of political patronage. From the prince he is said to have received at one time a complete set of the classics, elegantly bound, and at another time, during his distresses, a present of 500l. But it does not appear that when the friends of “Leonidas” came into power, they made any permanent provision for the author.

During the period of his embarrassment, he retired from public notice, until the respect and gratitude of his humbler friends in the city induced them to request that he would stand candidate for the office of chamberlain of London, which was vacant in 1751, but his application was unfortunately made when the majority of the votes had already been engaged to sir Thomas Harrison. His feelings on this disappointment did him much honour, and were elegantly expressed in the speech he addressed to the livery on the occasion. In it he made an allusion to the favour of the prince of Wales, which was probably well understood at that time. By the death of that most illustrious personage, he no doubt lost a powerful patron.

In 1753, he began to try his talents in dramatic composition, and produced the tragedy of “Boadicea,” which was performed for nine nights at Drury-lane theatre. Dr. Pemberton, with his accustomed zeal, wrote a pamphlet to recommend it, and among the inferior critics, it occasioned a temporary controversy. Great expectations were formed of its success from the reputation of an author who had acquired so much praise from his “Leonidas.” At the rehearsal, he read his < Boadicea“to the actors, but his manner of conveying the meaning of his poem was very unhappy; his voice was harsh, and his elocution disagreeable. Mr. Garrick was vexed to see him mangle his own work, and politely offered to relieve him by reading an act or two; but the author imagining that he was the only person lit to unfold his intention to the players, persisted to read the play to the end, to the great mortification of the actors. In 1761 he published his” Medea," a tragedy, written on the Greek model, and therefore unfit for the modern stage. The author, indeed, did not intend it for representation, but Mrs. Yates considered the experiment as likely to procure a full house at her benefit, and brought it forward upon that occasion. It was afterwards acted a few nights, but without exciting much interest.

From this period, Glover’s affairs took a more promising turn, although in what way we are not told. At the accession of his present majesty, he was chosen member of parliament for Weymouth, and made a considerable figure in the many debates to which the confused state of affairs in India gave rise. In 1772, we find him an intelligent and active agent in adjusting the affairs of the bank of Douglas, Heron and Company, of Scotland, which failed about that time; and on other occasions, where the mercantile interests of London were concerned, he distinguished himself, not only by his eloquence, but by that general knowledge of commerce which inclines to enlarged and liberal measures. In 1775, the West India merchants testified the sense they entertained of his services in their affairs, by voting him a piece of place of the value of 300l. The speech which he delivered in the house of commons, on the application of these merchants, was afterwards printed, and appears to have been the last of his public services.

In 1770, he republished his “Leonidas,” in two vols. 12mo, extended from nine books to twelve, and the attention now bestowed on it, recalling his youthful ideas, strengthened by time and observation, probably suggested “The Athenaid,” which, however, he did not live to publish. Soon after 1775, he retired from public business, but kept up an intimacy with many of the most eminent scholars of the day, by whom he was highly respected. After experiencing, for some time, the infirmities of age, he departed this life at his house in Albemarle-street, November 25, 1785. Glover was twice married. His second wife is now [[1814]] living, and a daughter, married to Halsey, esq.

His character was drawn up by the late Dr. Brocklesby for the Gentleman’s Magazine, and as far as respects his amiable disposition, was confirmed to us by Dr. VVarton, who knew him well. “Through the whole of his life Mr. Glover was by all good men revered, by the wise esteemed, by the great sometimes caressed and even flattered, and now his death is sincerely lamented by all who had the happiness to contemplate the integrity of his character. Mr. Glover, for upwards of 50 years past through every vicissitude of fortune, exhibited the most exemplary simplicity of manners; having early attained that perfect equanimity, which philosophy often recommends in the closet, but which in experience is too seldom exercised by other men in the test of trial. In Mr. Glover were united a wide compass of accurate information in all mercantile concerns, with high intellectual powers of mind, joined to a copious flow of eloquence as an orator in the house of commons. Since Milton he was second to none of our English poets, in his discriminating judicious acquaintance with all ancient as well as modern literature witness his Leon i das, Medea, Boadicea, and London for, having formed his own character upon the best models of the Greek writers, he lived as if he had been bred a disciple of Socrates, or companion of Aristides. Hence his political turn of mind, hence his unwarped affection and active zeal for the rights and liberties of his country. Hence his heartfelt exultation whenever he had to paint the impious designs of tyrants in ancient times frustrated, or in modern defeated in their nefarious purposes to extirpate liberty, or to trample on the unalienable rights of man, however remote in time or space from his immediate presence. In a few words, for the extent of his various erudition, for his unalloyed patriotism, and for his daily exercise and constant practice of Xenophou’s philosophy, in his private as well as in public life, Mr. Glover has left none his equal in the city, and some time, it is feared, may elapse before such another citizen shall arise, with eloquence, with character, and with poetry, like his, to assert their rights, or to vindicate with equal powers the just claims of freeborn men. Suffice this testimony at present, as the wellearned meed of this truly virtuous man, whose conduct was carefully marked, and narrowly watched by the writer of the foregoing hasty sketch, for his extraordinary qualities during the long period in human life of upwards of 40 years and now it is spontaneously offered as a voluntary tribute, unsolicited and unpurchased but as it appears justly due to the memory of so excellent a poet, statesman, and true philosopher, in life and death the same.”

Glover’s “Leonidas” amply entitles him to a distinguished place among the poets of his country, but the public has not held it in uniform estimation. From the time of its first appearance in 1737, it went through six, if not seven editions; but for nearly forty years there has not been a demand for another, although that published in 1770 was highly improved and enlarged. Its history may probably account in part for this singular fate, and public taste must explain the rest. On its first publication, it was read and praised with the utmost avidity. Besides the encomiums it drew from Lyttelton and Pemberton, its fame reached Ireland, where it was reprinted, and became as much in fashion as it had been in England. “Pray who is that Mr. Giover,” says Swift to Pope, in one of his letters, *' who writ the epic poem called Leonidas, which is reprinting here, and hath great vogue“Unfortunately, however, the whole of this tribute of praise was not paid to the intrinsic merit of the poem. It became the adopted favourite of the party in opposition (to sir Robert Walpoie) who had long endeavoured to persuade the nation that public liberty was endangered by the measures of that minister, and that they formed the chosen band who occupied the straits of Thermopylae in defiance of the modern. Xerxes. Leonidas therefore was recommended, to rouse an oppressed and enslaved people to the vindication of their rights. That this should be attempted is less wonderful than that it should succeed. We find very few passages in this poem which will apply to the state of public affairs in. England at that time, if we except the common-place censure of courts and courtiers, and even that is appropriated with so strict historical fidelity to the court of Xerxes, that it does not seem easy to borrow it for any other purpose.” Nothing else,“however, Dr. Warton informs us,” was read or talked of at Leicester-house," the illustrious owner of which extended his patronage to all poets who fanned the sacred flame of patriotism. The consequence of all this was, that Leonidas, which might have laid claim to a considerable rank among English poems of the higher order, was pushed beyond it, and when the purposes for which it had been extolled were either answered, or no longer desirable, it fell lower than it deserved. This is the more justly to be regretted, as we have no reason to think the autlior solicited the injudicious praise of his friends and patrons, or had any hand in building the airyedifice of popular fame. He was, indeed, a lover of liberty, which has ever been the favourite theme of poets, but he did not write for a temporary purpose. Leonidas had been the fruit of very early ambition to be known to posterity, and when he had outlived the party who pressed his poem, into their service, he corrected and improved it for a generation that knew nothing of the partialities which first extended its fame. If his object, however, in this epopee, had been solely to inculcate a love of liberty, a love of our country, and a resolute determination to perish with its freedom, he could not have chosen a subject, at least from ancient times, so happily adapted to elevate the mind. The example was unparalleled in history, and therefore the more capable of admitting the embellishments and attractions that belong to the epic province. Nor does it appear that he undertook a task to which his powers were inadequate, when he endeavoured to interest his readers in the fate of his gallant hero and faithful associates. He is not deficient either in the sublime or the pathetic, although in these essentials he may not bear an uniform comparison with the great masters of the passions. The characters are varied with much knowledge of the human heart. Each has his distinctive properties, and no one is raised beyond the proportion of virtue or talent which may be supposed to correspond with the age he lived in, or the station he occupied.

His comparisons, as lord Lyttelton remarks, are original and striking, although sometimes not sufficiently dignified. His descriptions are minutely faithful, and his episodes are in general so interesting, that no critical exceptions would probably induce the reader to part with them, or to suppose that they are not indispensable to the main action. He has likewise this peculiar excellence, that neither his speeches or descriptions are extended to such lengths as, in some attempts of the epic kind, become tiresome, and are the strongest indication of want of judgment. He paints the rapid energies of a band of freemen, in a barbarous age, struggling for their country, strangers to the refined deliberation of later ages, and acquainted with that eloquence only which leads to prompt decision.

His “Athenaid” was published in 1787, exactly as it was found among his papers. It consists of the unusual number of thirty books, but evidently was left without the corrections which he would probably have bestowed had he revised it (or the press. It is intended as a continuation, or second part to “Leonidas,” in which the Greeks are conducted through the vicissitudes of the war with Xerxes to the final emancipation of their country from his invasions. As an epic it seems defective in many respects. Here is no hero in whose fate the mind is exclusively engaged, but a race of heroes who demand our admiration by turns; the events of history, too, are so closely followed, as to give the whole the air of a poetical chronicle. Of his smaller poems, that on sir Isaac Newton is certainly an extraordinary production from a youth of sixteen, but the theme was probably given to him. Such an acquaintance with the state of philosophy and the improvements of our immortal philosopher, could not have been acquired at his age. “Hosier’s Ghost” was long one of the most popular English ballads; but his “London,” if intended for popular influence, was probably read and understood by few. In poetical merit, however, it is not unworthy of the author of “Leonidas.” Fielding wrote a very long encomium on it in his “Champion,” and predicted rather too rashly, that it would ever continue to be the delight of all that can feel the exquisite touch of poetry, or be roused with the divine enthusiasm of public spirit.

Since the above sketch of Glover was abridged from a more full account drawn up for another work, the attention of the public has been recently called to his history by the publication of a diary, or part of a diary, written by him. This, which appeared in 1813, is entitled “Memoirs of a distinguished Literary and Political Character, from the resignation of sir Robert Walpole in 1742 to the establishment of lord Chatham’s second administration in 1757.” It was immediately followed by “An Inquiry concerning the Author of the Letters of Junius, with reference to the Memoirs of a celebrated literary and political character,” the object of which is to prove that Glover was the author pf these Letters; and although this is not the place to enter into this controversy, we are inclined to think with the author of this “Inquiry,” that no one yet named as the author of Junins, and whose claim has been at all supported by facts, has much chance to stand in competition with Glover.

, a herald and heraldic writer, was the son of Thomas Glover, of Ashford in Kent, the place of his nativity. He was first made Portcullis Poursuivant, and afterwards in 1571, Somerset herald. Queen Elizabeth permitted him to travel abroad for improvement. In 1582, he attended lord Willoughby with the order of the garter, to Frederick II. of Denmark. In 1584, he waited with Clarenceux on the earl of Derby, with that order to the king of France. No one was a greater ornament to the college than this gentleman; the suavity of his manners was equal to his integrity and skill: he was a most excellent, and very learned man, with a knowledge in his profession which has never been exceeded, perhaps been paralleled; to this, the best writers of his own and more recent time* bear testimony. He left two treatises, one “I)e Nobilitate politica vel civili” the other “A Catalogue of Honour” both of which were published by his nephew, Mr. Thomas Milles, the former in 1608, the latter in 1610, both folio, to “revive the name and learned memory of his deceased friend and uncle, whose private studies for the public good deserved a remembrance beyond forgetful time.” His answer to the bishop of Ross’s book, in which Mary queen of Scots’ claim to the crown was asserted, was never published. He made great collections of what had been written by preceding heralds, and left of his own labours relative to arms, visitations of twenty-four counties, and miscellaneous matters belonging to this science, all written by himself. He assisted Camden in his pedigrees for his Britannia; communicated to Dr. David Powell, a copy of the history of Cambria, translated by H. Lloyd; made a collection of the inscriptions upon the funeral monuments in Kent; and, in 1584, drew up a most curious survey of Herewood castle, in Yorkshire. Mr. Thoresby had his collection of the county of York taken in 1584, and his catalogue of northern gentry whose surnames ended in son. He died in London, says Stow, April 14, (Lant and others, 10), 1588, aged only forty-five years, and was buried in St. Giles’s church, Cripplegate. His loss was severely felt by all our lovers of English antiquities. His “Ordinary of Arms” was augmented and improved by Edmondson, who published it in the first volume of his Body of Heraldry.

, a musical composer of great originality, was born in the palatinate, on the frontiers of Bohemia, in 1712, or as Dr. Bumey says, in 1716. His father, a man in poor circumstances, removed, during the infancy of his son, into Bohemia, where he died, leaving fris offspring in early youth, without any provision, so that his education was totally neglected. He had, however, an instinctive love for music, which is taught to all children, with reading and writing, in the Bohemian schools. Having acquired this knowledge, he travelled about from town to town, supporting himself by his talents, till he had worked his way to Vienna, where he met with a nobleman who became his patron, took -him into his service, and carried him into Italy, where he procured him lessons in counterpoint, at Naples, by which he profited so well, that before he left Italy he composed several dramas for different theatres. These acquired him reputation sufficient to be recommended to lord Middlesex as a composer to the opera house in the Haymarket, then under his lordship’s direction. He arrived in England in 1745, and, in that year and the following, produced his operas of “Artamene” and “La Caduta de Giganti,” with indifferent success.

From London he returned to Italy, and composed several operas in the style of the times, and afterwards engaged with the Italian poet Calsabigi, with whom he joined in a conspiracy against the poetry and music of the melo-drama then in vogue in Italy and all over Europe. In 1764, when the late emperor Joseph was crowned king of the Romans, Gluck was the composer, and Guadagni the principal singer. It was in this year that a species of dramatic music, different from that which then reigned in Italy, was attempted by Gluck in his famous opera of “Orfeo,” which succeeded so well, that it was soon after performed in other parts of Europe, particularly at Parma and Paris, Bologna, Naples, and in 1770 at London. In 1769 he produced “Alceste,” a second opera on the reformed plan, which received even more applause than the first; and in 1771 “Paride ed Helena;” but in 1774, his arrival at Paris produced a remarkable era in the annals of French music, by his conforming to the genius of the French language, and flattering the ancient national taste. All his operas proved excellent preparations for a better style of composition than the French had been used to; as the recitative was more rapid, and the airs more marked, than in Lulli and llameau; there were likewise more energy, fire, and variety of movement, in his airs in general, and infinitely more force and effect in his expression of all the violent passions. His music was so truly dramatic, that the airs and scenes, which had the greatest effect on the stage, were cold, or rude, in a concert. The situation, context, and interest, gradually excited in the audience, gave them their force and energy. He seemed indeed so much the national musician of France, that since the best days of Rameau, no dramatic composer had excited so much enthusiasm, or had his pieces so frequently performed, each of them two or three hundred times. The French, who feel very enthusiastically whatever music they like, heard with great rapture the operas of Gluck, which even the enemies of his genre allowed to have great merit of a certain kind; but though there is much real genius and intrinsic worth in the dramatic compositions of this master, the congeniality of his style with that of their old national favourites, Lulli and Rameau, was no small merit with the friends of that music. The almost universal cry at Paris was now, that he had recovered the dramatic music of the ancient Greeks; that there was no other worth hearing; that he was the only musician in Europe who knew how to express the passions: these and other encomiums were uttered and published in the journals and newspapers of Paris, accompanied with constant and contemptuous censures of Italian music, when Piccini arrived, and all the friends of Italian music, of Rousseau’s doctrines, and of the plan, if not the language, of Metastasio’s dramas, enlisted in his service. A furious war broke out at Paris; and these disputes, says Dr. Burney, of musical critics, and rival artists throughout the kingdom, seem to us to have soured and diminished the pleasure arising from music in proportion as the art has advanced to perfection. When every phrase or passage in a musical composition is to be analysed and dissected during performance, all delight and enthusiasm vanish, and the whole becomes a piece of cold mechanism.

The chevalier Gluck, after returning to Vienna from Paris, and being rendered incapable of writing by a paralytic stroke in 1784, only lingered in a debilitated state till the autumn of 1787, when he died at the age of seventythree. Gluck had great merit as a bold, daring, nervous composer; and as such, in his French operas, he was unrivalled. But he was not so universal as to be exclusively admired and praised at the expence of all other composers ancient and modern. His style was peculiarly convenient to France, where there were no good singers, and where no good singing was expected or understood by the public in general; and where the poetry was set up against music, without allowing equality, or even an opportunity of manifesting her most captivating vocal powers.

, was one of the Byzantine historians, but biographers are not agreed as to the period when he lived. Some years ago, professor Walchius published in the Gottingen Transactions an inquiry into this subject, but was obliged to confess that he could arrive at no probable conclusion. Some place Glycas in the twelfth, and some in the fifteenth century. No ancient record or writer mentions even his name, and all that is known of him has been gleaned from his works. It appears that he was a native of Constantinople; but passed a great part of his life in Sicily. Some have thought he was a monk, but this is uncertain, nor do we know whether he lived in public life, or in retirement. His letters, however, show that he was a grammarian, and was acquainted with theology, history sacred and profane, and other branches of knowledge; and such was his reputation that he was frequently consulted by monks, bishops, and the most celebrated doctors of his time. His “Annals,” by which only he is now known, contain an account of the patriarchs, kings, and emperors, and, in a word, a sort of history of the world as far as the emperor Alexis Comnenus, who died in 1118, including many remarks on divinity, philosophy, physic, astronomy, &c. Leunclavius first translated this work into Latin, and the whole was published by father Labbe, Paris, 1660, fol. Some of his letters have been published in the “Deliciae eruditorum,” Florence, 1736, and other collections.

, a physician and eminent botanist, was born at Tubingen August 12, 1709. He was distinguished by his diligence and early attainments at the school and university of Tubingen, and in 1727, took the degree of doctor of physic, and went to Petersburgh, where, in 1729, he was elected one of the members of the academy, and in 1731 was appointed professor of chemistry and natural history. In 1733 he was selected for the department of natural history, in a commission formed by the Russian government, for the purpose of exploring the boundaries of Siberia; and set out on the 19th of August, with G. F. Muller, and Louis de l'Isle de la Croyere, and a party of twenty-eight persons, consisting of draughtsmen, miners, hunters, land surveyors, and twelve soldiers, with a serjeant and drummer. On his return to Petersburgh in 1743, he resumed the offices which he had before filled. In the year 1749 he entered upon a new professorship, to which he had been appointed, while on a visit to Tubingen, but died of a fever in May, 1755. He published, “Flora Siberica, seu Historia Plantarum Siberise,” Petersburgh, 1747, 1749, in four parts, 4to, with plates: and, in German, “Travels through Siberia between the years 1733 and 1743,” Gottingen, 1751, 1752, in four parts, 8vo, with plates.

, nephew to the preceding, was born at Tubingen in 1743; where he was educated, and took his medical degree in 1763. He gave early proofs of genius, and during his travels in France and Holland distinguished himself so much by his knowledge of natural history, that he was appointed professor in the academy of sciences at Petersburgh. Like his uncle, he spent several years in travelling through the distant provinces of the Russian empire, for the purposes of scientific investigation, but ultimately with a less fortunate result. He commenced his travels in June 1763, and having traversed the provinces of Moscow, Voronetz, New Russia, Azof, Casan, and Astracan, he visited, in 1770 and 1771, the different harbours of the Caspian and examined with peculiar attention those parts of the Persian provinces which border upon that sea, of which he has given a circumstantial account in his travels. Actuated by a zeal for extend*­ing his observations, he attempted to pass through the western provinces of Persia, which were in a state of perpetual warfare, and infested by numerous banditti. Upon this expedition he quitted, in -April 1772, Einzillee, a small trading place in Ghilan, upon the southern shore of the Caspian; and, on account of many difficulties and dangers, did not, until Dec. 2, 1773, reach Sallian, a town situated upon the mouth of the river Koor. Thence he proceeded to Baku and Cuba, in the province of Shirvan, where he met with a friendly reception from Ah Feth Khan, the sovereign of that district. After he had been joined by twenty Uralian Cossacs, and when he was only four days journey from the Russian fortress Kislar, he and his companions were, on Feb. 5, 1774, arrested by order of Usmei Khan, a petty Tartar prince, through whose territories he was obliged to pass. Usmei urged as a pretence for this arrest, that, thirty years before, several families had escaped from his dominions, and had found an asylum in the Russian territories; adding, that 'Gmelin should not be released until these families were restored. As all arguing was in vain with this savage, Gmelin was removed from prison to prison, and at length, wearied out with confinement and harsh usage, expired July 27, at Achmet-Kent, a village of Mount Caucasus. Some of his papers had been sent to Kislar during his confinement, and the others were not without great difficulty rescued from the hands of the barbarians. The empress Catherine, would have rescued him by force, but this was rendered impossible at that time, by the rebellion of Pugatchef. She, however, expressed her regret and esteem for Gmelin by giving a gratification to his widow, of one year’s pay of the salary she had assigned to her husband during his travels, amounting to 1600 rubles.

His works are 1. “Historia Fucorum,” Petersburg!), in 1768, 4to. a subject to which botanists had paid little attention before him. 2. “Travels through Russia, for the purpose of exploring the three kingdoms of nature,” three parts of which were published in his life-time. A fourth was edited after the author’s death, by professor Pallas 3. “Journey from Astracan to Czarizyn” and also a “Second Persian Journey,” 1772 74; ibid. 1786. Pallas prefixed Gmelin’s Life to the fourth part of his travels.

, of the same family, although what relation to the preceding is not mentioned, was oorn at Tubingen in 1748. He was the author of several performances on vegetable physiology, and the classification of plants; and likewise published numerous works on the materia medica, and chemistry, mineralogy, and every part of natural history. One of the most celebrated is his edition of the “System of Nature of Linnæus.” He, however, is said to have introduced great disorder into the science, by multiplying the species. He was also the author of a “History of Chemistry,” forming a part of the history of arts and sciences undertaken by the professors of Gottingen. The world is indebted to him for the discovery of several excellent dyes, extracted from vegetable and mineral substances. He died in 1805.

, an eminent classical teacher, the son of John Goad, of Bishopsgate- street, was born there Feb. 15, 1615. He was educated at Merchant Taylors’ school, and elected thence a scholar of St. John’s college, Oxford, in 1632. He afterwards received his master’s degree, became fellow of his college, and took orders. In 1643 he was made vicar of St. Giles’s, Oxford, and continued to perform his parochial duties, although at the risk of his life, during the siege of the city by the parliamentary forces. In June 1646 he was presented by the university to the vicarage of Yarnton, and the year following was created B. D. When the loyalists were turned out by the parliamentary commissioners, Mr. Goad shared their fate; and although Dr. Cheyuel, who was one of the parliamentary visitors, gave him an invitation to return to his college, he refused it upon the terms offered. Yet he appears to have been so far connived at, as to be able to keep his living at Yarnton until the restoration. He also taught at Tunbridge school until July 1661, when he was made head master of Merchant Taylors’ school. Over this seminary he presided for nearly twenty years, with great success and approbation, and trained for the college many youths who did honour to their teacher and to their country; but in 1681 a suspicion was entertained that he inclined towards popery; and it was said that the comment whicli he made on the Church Catechism savoured strongly of popish tenets. Some particular passages having been selected from it, and laid before the grand jury of London, they on March 4 of the above year, presented a complaint to the Merchant Taylors’ company, respecting the catechism taught in their school. After he had been heard in his own defence, it was decided that he was “popishly and erroneously affected,” and immediately was discharged from his office; but such was their sense of his past services, that they voted him a gratuity of 70l. It soon appeared that the court of the company had not been deceived in their opinion of his principles. After being dismissed, he taught a school in Piccadilly, and in 1686, the reign of James II. openly professed himself a Roman catholic which, Wood says, he had long been covertly. He died Oct. 28, 1689, and was buried in the church of Great St. Helen’s, Bishopsgate-street, his memory being honoured by various elegies. He published, besides some single sermons, 1. “Genealogicon Latin um,” a small dictionary for the use of Merchant Taylors’ school, 8vo, 1676, second edit. 2. “Declamation, whether Monarchy be the best form of government” printed at the end of Richards’s “English Orator,” 1680, 8vo. 3. “Astro-Meteorologica, or aphorisms and discourses of the Bodies Celestial, their natures and influences, &c.” 1686, fol. This gained him great reputation. The subject of it is a kind of astrology, founded, for the most part, on reason and experiment, as will appear by comparing it with Boyle’s “History of the Air,” and Dr. Mead’s book * c De Imperio Solis etJLuna.“4.” Autodidactica, or a practical vocabulary, &c.“1690, 8vo. After his death was published” Astro-meteorologia sana, &c." 1690, 4to.

, a learned French Dominican, was born at Paris, of a reputable family, in 1601, and after a classical education, took the habit of his order in 1619. He then employed six years in the study of philosophy and theology, after which he was sent to Toul to instruct the young men of his order in these sciences. In the mean time his extreme partiality to the Greek, and his extensive reading in Greek literature, inspired him with a great desire to visit the country of the modern Greeks, and inquire into their sentiments and customs; and having obtained leave of his superiors, he set out in 1631, as an apostolic missionary, and was for the sake of local convenience, made prior of the convent of St. Sebastian, in the island of Chios. Here he resided eight years, conversing with the ablest of the natives, and inquiring into their history, religion, and manners. Before returning to France he went to Rome in 1640, where he was appointed prior of the convent of St. Sixtus, and being arrived at Paris, was made master of the novices, and began to employ his time in preparing his works for the press. This was an object so much at heart, that when elected in 1652 vicar-general of his order, he accepted it with great reluctance, as likely ta interrupt his labours. It is supposed, indeed, that his intense application, and the various duties of this office, impaired his health, and brought on a slow fever, which proved fatal Sept. 23, 1653. His principal work was his collection of Greek liturgies, published under the title of “Euchologion, sive rituale Grcecorum,” Paris, 1647, fol. a very curious and rare work. There is, however, a second edition printed at Venice in 1730. Goar also translated some of the Byzantine historians for the collection printed at the Louvre.

, a learned Jesuit, and secretary to the Chinese missionaries, was born at St. Malo in 1653, and having been educated in the academies belonging to his order, was made professor of philosophy and classics, which he taught for eight years with reputation. He then came to Paris, where he was appointed secretary and procurator to the Chinese missionaries. He died May 1708. He wrote many tracts on the progress of religion in China, and entered warmly into the disputes between the missionaries on the worship of Confucius. The best known of his works are, his “Lettres sur les Progres de la Religion a la Chine,” 1697, 8vo; his “Hist, de PEditde P empereur de la Chine en faveur de la religion Chretienne,” 1698, 12mo, which makes the third volume of le Comte’s Memoirs of China; his “Hist, des Isles Mariannes,” 1700, 12mo and eight parts or volumes of the “Lettres edifiantes et curieuses,” written by the Chinese missionaries. Of these letters there was afterwards a collection made, extending to 34 vols. 12mo; and in 1780, the abbe de Querbeuf published a new edition in 26 vols. They are still consulted as affording information respecting the natural history, geography, and politics of the countries which the Jesuits had explored, although they are not unfrequently mixed with improbable tales.

, a learned philologist, was born in 1485, in Westphalia. He acquired a high reputation for learning, and taught for a considerable time at the college of Bois-le-Duc in Louvain, where he died Jan. 25, 1539. Erasmus, who was his intimate friend, highly valued his character, and respected his erudition. He wrote notes on Cicero’s Offices, edited a new edition of Lucan, and published a Latin translation of Lucian’s “Hermotinus,” a dialogue on the sects of philosophers.

, an English physician and chemist, and promoter of the royal society, was the son of a rich ship-builder at Deptford, and born at Greenwich about 16 17. Being industrious and of good parts, he made a quick progress in grammar-learning, and was entered a commoner at Magdalen-hall, Oxford, in 1632. He staid at the university about four years, applying himself to physic; and then left it, without taking a degree, to travel abroad, as was at that time the custom, for farther improvement in his faculty. At his return, not being qualified, according to the statutes, to proceed in physic at Oxford, he went to Cambridge, and took the degree of bachelor in the faculty, as a member of Christ college, in 1638; after which, intending to settle in London, without waiting for another degree, he engaged in a formal promise to obey the laws and statutes of the college of physicians there, Nov. 1640. Having by this means obtained a proper permission, he entered into practice; but being still sensible of the advantage of election into the college, he took the first opportunity of applying for his doctor’s degree at Cambridge, which he obtained, as a member of Catherine-hall, in 1643; and was chosen fellow of the college of physicians in 1646. In the mean time, he had the preceding year engaged in another society, for improving and cultivating experimental philosophy. This society usually met at or near his lodgings in Wood-street, for the convenience of making experiments; in which he was very assiduous, as the reformation and improvement of physic was one principal branch of this design. In 1647, he was appointed lecturer in anatomy at the college; and it was from these lectures that his reputation took its rise. As he, with the rest of the assembly which met at his lodgings, had all along sided with the parliament, he was made head-physician in the army, and was taken, in that station, by Cromwell, first to Ireland in 1649, and then to Scotland the following year; and returned thence with his master; who, after the battle of Worcester, rode into London in triumph, Sept. 12, 1651. He was appointed warden of Merton-college, Oxon, Dec. 9th following, and was incorporated M. D. of the university, Jan. 14th the same year. Cromwell was the chancellor; and returning to Scotland, in order to incorporate that kingdom into one commonwealth with England, he appointed our warden, together with Dr. Wilkins, warden of Wadham, Dr. Goodwin, president of Magdalen, Dr. Owen, dean of Christ Church, and Cromwell’s brother-in-law, Peter French, a canon of Christ Church, to act as his delegates in all matters relating to grants or dispensations that required his assent. This instrument bore date Oct. 16, 1652. His powerful patron dissolving the long parliament, called a new one, named the Little Parliament, in 1653, in which the warden of Merton sat sole representative of the university, and was appointed one of the council of state the same year.

A series of honours and favours bestowed by the usurper, whose interest he constantly promoted, naturally incurred the displeasure of Charles II. who removed him from his wardenship, by a letter dated July 3, 1660; and claiming the right of nomination, during the vacancy of the see of Canterbury, appointed another warden in a manner the most mortifying to our author. The new warden was Dr. Edw. Reynolds, then king’s chaplain, and soon after bishop of Norwich, who was appointed successor to sir Nathaniel Brent, without the least notice being taken of Dr. Goddard. He then removed to Gresham college, where he had been chosen professor of physic on Nov. 7, 1655, and continued to frequent those meetings which gave birth to the royal society; and, upon their establishment by charter in 1663, was nominated one of the first council. This honour they were induced to confer upon him, both in regard to his merit in general as a scholar, and to his particular zeal and abilities in promoting the design of their institution, of which there is full proof in the “Memoirs” of that society by Dr. Birch, where there is scarcely a meeting mentioned, in which his name does not occur for some experiment or observation made by him. At the same time he carried on his business as a physician, being continued a fellow of the college by their new charter in 1663. Upon the conflagration in 1666, which consumed the old Exchange, our professor, with the rest of his brethren, removed from Gresham, to make room for the merchants to carry on the public affairs of the city; which, however, did not hinder him from going on with pursuits in natural philosophy and physic. In this last he was not only an able but a conscientious practitioner; for which reason he continued still to prepare his own medicines. He was so fully persuaded that this, no less than prescribing them, was the physician’s duty, that in 1668, whatever offence it might give the apothecaries, he was not afraid to publish a treatise, recommending it to general use. This treatise was received with applause; but as he found the proposal in it attended with such difficulties and discouragements as were likely to defeat it, he pursued that subject the follow, ing year, in “A Discourse, setting forth the unhappy condition of the practice of Physic in London,” 1669, 4to. But this availed nothing, and when an attempt was made by the college of physicians, with the same view, thirty years afterwards, it met with no better success. In 1671 he returned to his lodgings at Gresham college, where he continued prosecuting improvements in philosophy till his death, which was very sudden. He used to meet a select number of friends at the Crown-tavern in Bloomsbury, where they discoursed on philosophical subjects, and in his return thence in the evening of March 24, 1674, he was seized with an apoplectic fit in Cheapside, and dropped down dead.

His memory was long preserved by certain drops, which were his invention, and bore his name; but which, like all such nostrums, are now forgotten. His receipts “Arcana Goddardiana,” were published at the end of the “Pharmacopoeia Bateana,” 1691. He had several learned treatises dedicated to him as a patron of learning, made by persons well acquainted with him, such as Dr. Edmund Dickinson and Dr. Wallis, who highly praise his extensive learning, his skill in his profession, knowledge of public affairs, and generous disposition, his candour, affability, and benevolence to all good and learned men. Of this last there is one instance worth preserving; and that is, his taking into his apartment, at Gresham, Dr. Worthington, who lodged with him for the conveniency of preparing for the press the works of Mr. Joseph Mede, which he finished and published in 1664. According to Dr. Seth Ward, bishop of Salisbury, he was the first Englishman who made that noble astronomical instrument the telescope.

, a learned French bishop and writer, was descended from a good family at Dreux, and born in 1605. Being inclined to poetry from his youth, he applied himself to it, and so cultivated his genius, that he made his fortune by it. His first essay was a paraphrase in verse of the Benedicite, which was much commended. He was but twenty -four when he became a member of that society which met at the house of Mr. Conrart, to confer upon subjects of polite learning, and to communicate their performances. From this society cardinal Richlieu took the hint, and formed the resolution, of establishing the French academy for belles lettres; and our author in a few years obtained the patronage of that powerful ecclesiastic. The bishopric of Grasse becoming vacant in 1636, cardinal Richelieu recommended him to the king, who immediately conferred it upon him; and as soon as the ceremony of consecration was over, he repaired to his diocese, and applied himself to the functions of his office. He held several synods, composed a great number of pastoral instructions for the use of his clergy, and restored ecclesiastical discipline, which had been almost entirely neglected. He obtained from pope Innocent X. a bull for uniting the bishopric of Vence to that of Grasse, as his predecessor William le Blore had before obtained from Clement VIII. This arrangement, considering the propinquity of the two dioceses, and the small income of both together (about 450l.) was not unreasonable; but when Godeau found the people and clergy averse to it, he gave up his pretensions, and contented himself with the bishopric of Vence only. He assisted in several general assemblies of the clergy, held in 1645 and 1655; in which he vigorously maintained the dignity of the episcopal order, and the system of pure morality, against those who opposed both. One of his best pieces upon this subject, was published in 1709, with the title of “Christian Morals for the Instruction of the Clergy of the Diocese of Vence” and was afterwards translated into English, by Basil Kennet. These necessary absences excepted, he constantly resided upon his diocese, where he was perpetually employed in visitations, preaching, reading, writing, or attending upon the ecclesiastical or temporal affairs of his bishopric, till Easter-day, April 17, 1671; when he was seized with a fit of an apoplexy, of which he died the 21st.

He was a very voluminous author, both in prose and verse. Moreri, after giving a list of fifty works, adds many fugitive pieces of devotional poetry. One of his principal works is his “Ecclesiastical History,” intended to be comprized in 3 vols fol. The first appeared in 1653, containing the “History of the first eight centuries;” but as he did not finish the other two, they remained in manuscript. He was, however, the first person who gave a “Church History” in the French language. He was the author also of a “Translation of the Psalms into French verse,” which were so well approved, that those of the reformed religion have not scrupled to use them at home in their families, instead of the version of Marot, which is adapted and consecrated to the public service. Of this work Basil Kennet has given a criticism in the preface to “An Essay towards a Paraphrase on the Psalms,” 1709, 8vo. The Jesuit, Vavassor, wrote a piece on purpose to prove that our author had no true taste for poetry; and Boileau remarks several defects in his poetical performances.

, an eminent lawyer, and one of the most learned men of his age, was born October 17, 1549, at Paris. He was the son of Leon Godefroi, counsellor to the Chatelet. He had acquired a great reputation in the parliament, but embracing the reformed religion, was obliged to retire to Geneva, and taught law both there and in some German universities. In 1618 he was sent by the elector palatine to Louis XIII. who, among other marks of favour, presented him with his picture, and a gold medal. But being again obliged to quit the palatinate, during war, he went to Strasburgh, where he died September 7, 1622, leaving a great number of valuable works; the principal of which are, 1. “Notae in quatuor Libros institutionum.” 2. “Opuscula varia juris.” 3. “Corpus juris civilis, cum notis.” These notes are excellent: the best editions are those by Vitré, 1628, and by Elzevir, 1683, 2 vols. fol. 4. “Praxis civilis, ex antiquis et recentioribus scriptoribus.” 5. “Index Chronologicus legum et novellarum a Justiniano imperatore compositarum.” 6. “Consuetudines Civitatum et Provinciarum Galliae, cum notis,” fol. 7. “Quaestiones politico ex jure communi in Historia desumptae.” 8. “Dissertatio de nobilitate.” 9. “Statuta regni Gallise cum jure communi collata,” fol. 10. “Synopsis statutorum municipalium,” an edition, Greek and Latin, of the “Promptuarium juris” of Harmenopules. “Conjectures,” and several “Lectures upon Seneca,” with a defence of these Conjectures, which had been attacked by Gruter. “A Collection of the ancient Latin Grammarians,” &c. The following works are also ascribed to Denis Godefroi “Avis pour reduire les Monnoies a leur juste Prix et Valeur,” 8vo. “Maintenue et Defense des Empereurs, Rois, Princes, Etats, et Republiques; centre les Censures Monitoires, et Excommunications des Papes,” 4to. “Fragmenta duodecim Tabularum suis nunc primum Tabulis restituta,” 1616, 4to. His “Opuscula” have been collected and printed in Holland, fol.

, eldest son of the preceding, was born July 17, 1580, at Geneva, and went to Paris in 1602, where he turned Catholic, was appointed counsellor of state 1643, and died Octobers, 1643, at Munster, in which city he then resided as counsellor and secretary to the French embassy for the general peace. He left many excellent works on law, history, the titles of the kingdom, &c. the principal of which are, I. “Le Ceremonial de France,” 4to, a work much valued reprinted in 2 vols. fol. by his son Denys Godefroi but this is unfinished and the 4to edition must be referred to for the funeral ceremonies. 2. “Genealogie des Rois de Portugal issus en Ligne directe masculine de la Maison de France qui regne aujourd'huis,” 4to. 3. “Mem. concernant la Preseance des Rois de France sur les Rois d'Espagne, 4to. 4.” Entreveue de Charles IV. Empereur, et Charles V, Roi de France; plus PEntreveue de Charles VII. Roi de France, et de Ferdinand, Roi de Arragon.“&c. 4to. 5.” Hist, de Charles VI. par Jean Juvenal des Ursins; de Louis XII. par Seyssell, et par d'Auton, &c. de Cha. VIII. par Saligny, et autres du Chevalier Bayard, avec le Supplement, par Expilly,“1651, 8vo. 6.” De Jean le Meinore, dit Boucicaut, Marechal de France,“4to. 7.” D'Artus III. Due de Bretagne,“4to. 8.” De Guillaume Marescot,“4to. 9.” De la veritable Origine de la Maison d'Autriche,“4to. 10.” Genealogie des Dues de Lorrain,“4to. 11.” L‘Ordre et les Ceremonies observers aux Manages de France et d’Espagne,“4to. 12.” Genealogie des Comptes et Dues de Bar,“<Ko. 13.” Traite touchant les Droits du Roi tres Chretien, sur plusieurs Etats et Seigneuries, possedes par plusieurs Princes Voisins," fol. under the name of Pierre Dupuy.

, younger brother of the preceding, born in I 587, at Geneva, was also a very learned lawyer, and rose to the highest posts in that republic. He was five times syndic, and died there 1652. He left several works much esteemed; the following are the principal ones: I. “Opuscula varia, juridica, politica, historica, critica,” 4to. 2. “Fontes Juris civilis; de diversis Regulis Juris,” 1653, 4to. 3. “De famosis latronibus investigandis de jure praecedentiae de Salario animadversiones Juris civilis. De suburbicariis Regionibus de statu Paganorum sub Imperatoribus Christianis. Fragmenta Legum Juliae et Papioe collecta, et notis illustrata. Codex Theodosianus,” 1665, 4 vols.- fol. 4. “Veteris orbis descriptio Gracci Scriptoris, sub Constantio et Constante Imperantibus, Gr. et Lat. cum notis,” 4to. 5. “De Cenotaphio; de Dominio seu imperio marls et jure naufragii colligendi.” 6. Commentaries and Notes on several Orations of Libanius. 7. “L'Hist. Ecclesiastique de Philostorge, avec un Appendix.” 8. “Les Mercure Jesuite, ou Recueil des pieces concernant les Jesuites,” 1631, 2 vols. 8vo.

, son of Theodore, was born August 24, 1615, at Paris. He made use of his father’s Memoirs, and like him studied the History of France. Louis XIV. appointed him keeper and director of the chamber of accounts at Lisle, in which city he died June 9, 1681. He published “Le Ceremonial de France,” written by his father and the History of Charles VI. and Charles VII. printed at the Louvre, each in 1 vol. folio that of the Crown Officers, from the time at which that of John le Feron ends; “Memoires et Instructions pour servir dans les Negociations et les Affaires concernant les Droits du Roi,” 1665, fol. which had been attributed to chancellor Seguier, &c. 2 He left several children who were eminent among them.

, the third of that name, honorary auditor and keeper of the books in the chambre des comptes at Paris, died 1719, and left Remarks on the Addition to the History of Louis XI. by Naude* an edition of the “Satire Menipee,” 1709, 3 vols. 8vo and other works.

, director of the chambre des comptes at Lisle, was another son of the second Denys, who published in 1706 an elegant edition of the “Memoires de Philippe de Commines;” and in 1711 a new edition of the “Satyre Menipee.” He also left the “Journal de Henri III.” with notes, and some new pieces, 2 vols. 8vo; a very curious book against that by Pere Guyard, a Jacobin, entitled “La Fatalite” de St. Cloud;“' Mem. de la Reine Marguerite,” 8vo, &c. No author has given so clear an account of the league, nor published so many curious pieces respecting the parties engaged in it. He died in February, 1732.

, the author of an ancient chronicle, is supposed to have been born in the twelfth century, at Viterbo, in Italy, and educated in his youth, at least, at Bamberg. He was afterwards chaplain and secretary to king Conrad III. the emperor Frederick, and his son Henry VI. He informs us that he spent forty years in searching among the manuscripts of the Greeks, Latins, Jews, Chaldeans, and barbarians, for materials proper for his Chronicle, had made himself acquainted with all these languages, and performed many voyages and travels in the same pursuit. This Chronicle, which does not, however, gratify all the expectations that might be formed from such learning and industry, begins with the creation of the world, and ends with 1186. It is written in Latin prose and verse, and entitled “Pantheon.” It was first printed at Basil, by Basilius John Herold, 1559, reprinted at Francfort in 1584, and at Hanover in 1613, in Pistorius’s collection of German writers; and Muratori has inserted in his great collection, that part which respects Italy. Lambecius speaks of another work by Godfrey, which exists in ms. in the imperial library at Vienna, entitled “Speculum regium, sive de genealogia regum et imperatorum a diluvii tempore ad Henricum VI. imperatorem.” Godfrey appears to have been a man of learning and observation, and is thought to deserve credit as to his relation of the events which occurred in his own time, and with which his situation at court enabled him to be acquainted.

, an eminent civilian, the third son of John Godolphin, esq. was descended from an ancient family of his name in Cornwall, and born Nov. 29, 1617, at Godolphin, in the island of Scilly. He was sent to Oxford, and entered a commoner of Gloucester-hall, in 1632; and having laid a good foundation of logic and philosophy, he applied himself particularly to the study of the civil law, which he chose for his profession; and accordingly took his degrees in that faculty, that of bachelor in 1636, and of doctor in 1642-3. He has usually been ranked among puritans for having written two treatises published by him in 1650 and jL 1651, entitled, 1. “The Holy Limbec, or an extraction of the spirit from the Letter of certain eminent places in the Holy Scripture.” Other copies were printed with this title, “The Holy Limbec, or a Semicentury of Spiritual Extractions,” &c. 2. “The Holy Harbour, containing the whole body of divinity, or the sum and substance of the Christian Religion.” But whatever may be the principles maintained in these works, which we have not seen, it is certain that when he went to London afterwards, he sided with the anti-monarchical party; and, taking the oath called the Engagement, was by an act passed in Cromwell’s convention, or short parliament, July 153, constituted judge of the admiralty jointly with William Clarke, LL. D. and Charles George Cock, esq. In July 1659, upon the death of Clarke, he and Cock received a new commission to the same place, to continue in force no longer than December following.

Notwithstanding these compliances with the powers then in being, he was much esteemed for his knowledge in the civil law, which obtained him the post of king’s advocate at the restoration: after which, he published several books in his own faculty then in good esteem, as “A View of the Admiral’s Jurisdiction,” 1661, 8vo, in which is printed a translation by him, of Grasias, or Ferrand’s “Extract of the ancient Laws of Oleron;” “The Orphan’s Legacy, &c. treating of last wills and testaments,” 1674, 4to. And “Repertorium Canonicurn,” &c. 1678, 4to. In this last piece he strenuously and learnedly asserts the king’s supremacy, as a power vested in the crown, before the Pope invaded the right and authority, or jurisdiction. He died April 4, 1678, and was interred in St. James’s church, Clerkenwell.

, earl of Godolphin, and lord high treasurer of England, descended from a very ancient family in Cornwall, was the third son of Francis Godolphin, K. B. by Dorothy, second daughter of sir Henry Berkley, of Yarlington in Somersetshire. He had great natural abilities, was liberally educated, and inheriting the unshaken loyalty of his family, entered early into the service of Charles II. who after his restoration made him one of the grooms of his bed-chamber. In 1663, when attending his majesty to the university of Oxford, he had the degree of M. A. conferred upon him. In 1678, he was twice sent envoy to Holland, upon affairs of the greatest importance; and the next year was made one of the commissioners of the treasury, which trust he discharged with integrity, and being considered as a man of great abilities, was sworn of the privy council. In 1680 he openly declared for the bill of exclusion of the duke of York; and in the debate in council, whether the duke should return to Scotland before the parliament met, he joined in the advice for his going away; and though the rest of the council were of the contrary opinion, yet the king acquiesced in his and lord Sunderland’s reasons. In April 1664 he was appointed one of the secretaries of state, which he soon resigned for the office of first commissioner of the treasury, and was created baron Godolphin of Rialton in Cornwall. He had hitherto sat in the house of commons as representative for Helston and for St. Mawe’s.

On the accession of James II. he was appointed lord chamberlain to the queen, and on the removal of the earl of Rochester, was again made one of the commissioners of the treasury. On the landing of the prince of Orange, he was one of the commissioners sent by king James to treat with that prince, which employment he discharged with great address and prudence. In the debate concerning the vacancy of the throne, after the abdication of king James, his lordship, out of a regard to the succession, voted for a regency; yet when king William was advanced to the throne, his majesty appointed him one of the lords commissioners of the treasury, and a privy-councillor, and in 1690 he was appointed first lord of the treasury. In 1695, he was one of the seven lords justices for the administration of the government, during the king’s absence, as he was likewise the year following, and again in 1701, when he was restored to the place of first commissioner of the treasury, from which he had been removed in 1697. On the accession of queen Anne, he was constituted lord high treasurer, which post he had long refused to accept, till the earl of Marlboro ugh pressed him in so positive a manner, that he declared, he could not go to the continent to command the armies, unless the treasury was put into his hands; for then he was sure that remittances would be punctually made to him. Under his lordship’s administration of this high office, the public credit was raised, the war carried on with success, and the nation satisfied with his prudent management. He omitted nothing that could engage theteubject to bear the burthen of the war with chearfulness; and it was owing to his advice, that the queen contributed one hundred thousand pounds out of her civil list towards it. He was also one of those faithful and able counsellors, who advised her majesty to declare in council against the selling of offices and places in her household and family, as highly dishonourable to herself, prejudicial to her service, and a discouragement to virtue and true merit, which alone ought and should recommend persons to her royal approbation. And so true a friend was his lordship to the established church, that considering how meanly great numbers of the clergy were provided for, he prevailed upon her majesty to settle her revenue of the first-fruits and tenths for the augmentation of the small vicarages. In July 1704 he was made knight of the garter; and in December 1706, advanced to the dignity of earl of Godolphin and viscount Rialton. But notwithstanding all his great services to the public, on the 8th of August 1710, he was removed from his post of lord high treasurer.

He died at St. Alban’s of the stone, on the 15th of September 1712, and was interred in Westminster-abbey. By his lady, Margaret, daughter of Thomas Blague, esq. he had issue Francis, second earl of Godolphin, on whose death the title became extinct.

Bishop Burnet says, “that he was the silentest and mojdestest man, who was perhaps ever bred in a court. He had a clear apprehension, and dispatched business with great method, and with so much temper, that he had no personal enemies. But his silence begot a jealousy, which hung long upon him. His notions were for the court; but his incorrupt and sincere way of managing the concerns of the treasury created in all people a very high esteem for him. He had true principles of religion and virtue, and never heaped up wealth. So that, all things being laid together, he was one of the worthiest and wisest men, who was employed in that age.” In another place the same historian observes, “that he was a man of the clearest head, the calmest temper, and the most incorrupt of all the ministers he had ever known; and that after having been thirty years in the treasury, and during nine of those lord treasurer, as he was never once suspected of corruption, ur of suffering his servants to grow rich under Jiim, so in all that time his estate was not increased by him to the value of four thousand pounds.” It is also said, that he had a penetrating contemplative genius, a slow, but unerring apprehension, and an exquisite judgment, with few words, though always to the purpose. He was temperate in his diet. His superior wisdom and spirit made han despise the low arts of vain-glorious courtiers; for he never kept suitors unprofitably in suspense, nor promised any thing, that he was not resolved to perform; but as he accounted dissimulation the worst of lying, so on the other hand his denials were softened by frankness and condescension to those whom he could not gratify. His great abilities and consummate experience qualified him for a prime minister; and his exact knowledge of all the branches of the revenue particularly fitted him for the management of the treasury. He was thrifty without the least tincture of avarice, being. as good an ceconomist of the public wealth, as he was of his private fortune. He had a clear conception of the whole government, both in church and state; and perfectly knew the temper, genius, and disposition of the English nation. And though his stern gravity appeared a little ungracious, yet his steady and impartial justice recommended him to the esteem of almost every person; so that no man, in so many different public stations, and so great a variety of business, ever had more friends, or fewer enemies. Dean Swift’s character of him is not so favourable, and in our references may be found many other opposite opinions of his merit and abilities. He had a brother of some poetical talent, noticed by Mr. Ellis.

, better known by the name of Woollstonecraft, a lady of very extraordinary genius, but whose history and opinions are unhappily calculated to excite a mixture of admiration, pity, and scorn, was born in or near London, April 27, 1759, of poor parents, who then resided at Epping, but afterwards removed to a farm near Beverley in Yorkshire, where this daughter frequented a day-school in the neighbourhood. From this place her father again removed to Hoxton near London, and afterwards to Walworth. During all this time, and until Miss Woollstonecraft arrived at her twenty-fourth year, there appears little that is interesting, or extraordinary in her history, unless it may be considered as such that she early affected an original way of thinking, accompanied with correspondent actions, and entertained a high and romantic sense of friendship, which seems greatly to have prevailed over filial affection. In her twenty-fourth year, she formed the plan of conducting a school at Islington, in conjunction with her sisters, which in the course of a few months she removed to Newington-green, where she was honoured by the friendship of Dr. Price. Of her opinions on religious subjects at this time, we have the following singular account from her biographer: “Her religion was, in reality, little allied to any system of forms, and was rather founded in taste, than in the niceties of polemical discussion. Her mind constitutionally attached itself to the sublime and amiable. She found an inexpressible delight in the beauties of nature, and in the splendid reveries of the imagination. But nature itself, she thought, would be no better than a vast blank, if the mind of the observer did not supply it with an animating soul. When she walked amidst the wonders of nature, she was accustomed to converse with her God. To her mind he was pictured as not less amiable, generous, and kind, than great, wise, and exalted. In fact she had received few lessons of religion in her youth, and her religion was almost entirely of her own creation. But she was not on that account the less attached to it, or the less scrupulous in discharging what she considered as its duties. She could not recollect the time when she had believed the doctrine of future punishments,” &c.

In 1785, a Mrs. Skeggs, with whom she had contracted an ardent friendship, and who resided at Lisbon, being pregnant, Miss Woollstonecraft, shocked with the idea hat she might die in childbed at a distance from her fri( ds, passed over to Lisbon to attend her, leaving the school under the management of her sisters; an exertion of friendship the more entitled to praise that it proved hurtful to her school, which oon after her return she was compelled to abandon. Perhaps, however, this was not wholly a matter of compulsion, for we are told that “she had a rooted aversion to that sort of cohabitation with her sisters, which the project of the school imposed.” She now appears to have meditated literary employment as a source of profit, and exhibited a specimen of her talents in a l'2mo pamphlet, entitled “Thoughts on the Education of Daughters,” for the copy-right of which she obtained the sum of ten guineas from the late Mr. Johnson, bookseller, of St. Paul’s church-yard, who afterwards proved one of her most liberal patrons. After this she was employed for some months, as a governess, in the family o an Irish nobleman, at the end of which she returned again to literary pursuits, and from 1787, when she came to reside in London, produced “Mary, a Fiction,” “Original Stories from real life,” made some translations from the French, and compiled “The Female Reader,” on the model of Dr. Enfield’s “Speaker.” She wrote also some articles in the “Analytical Review,” which was established by her publisher, in 1788.

In the French revolution which took place in the following year, and which let loose all kinds of principles and opinions except what had stood the test of experience, Miss Woollstonecraft found much that was congenial with her own ways of thinking, and much which it will appear soon she determined to introduce in her conduct. She was therefore among the first who attempted to answer Mr. Burke’s celebrated “Reflections on the French Revolution,” and displayed a share of ability which made her reputation more general than it had yet been. This was followed by her “Vindication of the Rights of Woman,” in which she unfolded many a wild theory on the duties and character of her sex. How well she was qualified to guide them appeared now in the practical use of her own precepts, of which the first specimen was the formation of a violent attachment for a very eminent artist, which is thus embellished by her biographer “She saw Mr. Fuseli frequently; he amused, delighted, and instructed her. As a painter, it was impossible she should not wish to see his works, and consequently to frequent his house. She visited him; her visits were returned. Notwithstanding the inequality of their years, Mary was not of a temper to live upon terms of so much intimacy with a man of merit and genius, without loving him. The delight she enjoyed in his society, she transferred by association to his person. What she experienced in this respect, was no doubt heightened, by the state of celibacy and restraint in which she had hitherto lived, and to which the rules of polished society condemn an unmarried woman. She conceived a personal and ardent affection for him. Mr. Fuseli was a married man, and his wife the acquaintance of Mary. She readily perceived the restrictions which this circumstance seemed to impose upon her, but she made light of any difficulty that might arise out of them.” Notwithstanding this contempt for difficulties, Mr. Fuseli was not to be won, and in order to get rid of a passion which he would not indulge, she went ever to France in 1792. Here within a few months she found a cure in that “species of connection,” says her biographer, “for which her heart secretly panted, and which had the effect of diffusing an immediate tranquillity and cheerfulness over her manners.” This was an illicit connection with a Mr. Imlay, an American, and we are gravely told, that “she was now arrived at the situation, which, for two or three preceding years, her reason had pointed out to her as affording the most substantial prospect of happiness.” Her reason, however, unfortunately pointed wrong in this instance, as she was afterwards most basely and cruelly abandoned by the object of her affections, whose conduct cannot be mentioned in terms of indignation too strong. She now made two attempts at suicide, on which we shall only remark that they were totally inconsistent with the character given of her by her biographer, as possessing “a firmness of mind, an unconquerable greatness of soul, by which, after a short internal struggle-, she was accustomed to rise above difficulties and suffering.” Having overcome two ardent passions, she formed a third, of which her biographer, Mr. William Godwin, was the object. A period only of six months intervened in this case; but, says Mr. Godwin, with a curious felicity of calculation, although “it was only six months since she had resolutely banished every thought of Mr. Imlay (the former lover), it was at least eighteen that he ought to have been banished, and would have been banished, had it not been for her scrupulous pertinacity in determining to leave no measure untried to regain him.” This connection, likewise, was begun without the nuptial ceremonies; but, after some months, the marriage took place; the principal reason was that she was pregnant, and “unwilling to incur that seclusion from the society of many valuable and excellent individuals, which custom awards in cases of this sort.” But it did not produce the desired effect. Some who visited her, or were visited by her, and who regarded her as the injured object of Mr. Imlay' s indifference, were not pleased to bestow their countenance on one who was so eager to run into the arms of another man, and alike informally. Mr. Godwin takes this opportunity of censuring the prudery of these nice people in terms of severity with what justice our readers may determine. The happiness of this connection, however, was transient. In August 1797, she was delivered of a daughter, and died Sept. 10, of the same year. From the account given of her, by her biographer, in which we must condemn the laboured vindication of principles inconsistent with the delicacy of the female sex, and the welfare of society, Mrs. Godwin appears to have been a woman of strong intellect, which might have elevated her to the highest rank of English female writers, had not her genius run wild for want of cultivation. Her passions were consequently ungovernable, and she accustomed herself to yield to them without scruple, treating female honour and delicacy as vulgar prejudices. She was therefore a voluptuary and sensualist, without that refinement for which she seemed to contend on other subjects. Her history indeed forms entirely a warning, and in no part an example. Singular she was, it must be allowed, for it is not easily to be conceived that such another heroine will ever appear, unless in a novel, where a latitude is given to that extravagance of character which she attempted to bring into real life.

Besides the works already noticed, she published “A moral and historical view of the French Revolution,” of which one volume only was published, and “Letters from Norway.” The latter contains much elegant description and just remark. The former could be noticed only at the time of its publication. The gay illusions of the French revolution soon disappeared. After her death some miscellanies, letters, and an unfinished novel, were published by her husband, in 4 vols. 12mo, with a Life of the authoress. Much of both had better been suppressed, as ill calculated to excite sympathy for one who seems to have rioted in sentiments alike repugnant to religion, sense, and decency.

, an English prelate, was born in 1517 at Oakingham in Berkshire; and being put to the grammar-school there, quickly made such a progress as discovered him to be endowed with excellent parts. But his parents being low in circumstances, he must have lost the advantage of improving them by a suitable education, had they not been noticed by Dr. Richard Layton, archdeacon of Bucks, a zealous promoter of the reformation, who, taking him into his house, and instructinghim in classical learning, sent him to Oxford, where he was entered of Magdalen college about 1538. Not long after, he lost his worthy patron; but his merit, now become conspicuous in the university, had procured him other friends; so that he was enabled to take the degree of B. A. July 12, 1543. The same merit released his friends from any farther expence, by obtaining him, the year ensuing, a fellowship of his college; and he proceeded M. A. in 1547. But he did not long enjoy the fruits of his merit in a college life; his patron, the archdeacon, had taken care to breed up Godwin in the principles of the reformation, and this irritating some popish members of the college, they made his situation so uneasy, that, the free-school at Brackley in Northamptonshire becoming vacant in 1549, and being in the gift of the college, he resigned his fellowship, and accepted it. In this station, he married the daughter of Nicholas Purefoy, of Shalston, in the county of Bucks, and lived without any new disturbance as long as Edward VI. was at the helm: but, upon the accession of Mary, his religion exposed him to a fresh persecution, and he was obliged to quit his school. In this exigence, although the church was his original intention, and he had read much with that view, yet now it became more safe to apply to the study of physic; and being admitted to his bachelor’s degree in that faculty, at Oxford, July 1555, he practised in it for a support till Elizabeth succeeded to the throne, when he resolved to enter into the church. In this he was encouraged by Bullingham, bishop of Lincoln, who gave him orders, and made him his chaplain; his lordship also introduced him to the queen, and obtained him the favour of preaching before her majesty; who was so much pleased with the propriety of his manner, and the grave turn of his oratory, that she appointed him one of her Lentpreachers. He had discharged this duty by an annual appointment, with much satisfaction to her majesty, for a series of eighteen years. In 1565, on the deprivation of Sampson, he was made dean of Christ church, Oxford, and had also the prebend of Milton-ecclesia in the church of Lincoln conferred on him by his patron bishop Bullingham. This year also he took his degrees of B. and D. D. at Oxford. In 1566, he was promoted to' the deanery of Canterbury, being the second dean of that church: and queen Elizabeth making a visit to Oxford the same year, he attended her majesty, and among others kept an exercise in divinity against Dr. Lawrence Humphries, the professor; in which the famous Dr. Jewel, bishop of Salisbury, was moderator. In June following he was appointed by archbishop Parker, one of his commissioners to visit the diocese of Norwich; and that primate having established a benefaction for a sermon on Rogation Sunday at Thetford in Norfolk and other places, the dean, while engaged in this commission, preached the first sermon of that foundation, on Sunday morning July 20, 1567, in the Green-yard adjoining to the bishop’s palace at Norwich. In 1573 he quitted his prebend of Milton-ecclesia, on being presented by Cooper, then bishop of Lincoln, to that of Leighton-Bosard, the endowment of which is considered the best in the church of Lincoln. In 1576 he was one of the ecclesiastical commissioners, empowered by the queen to take cognizance of all offences against the peace and good order of the church, and to frame such statutes as might conduce to its prosperity.

The see of Bath and Wells had in 1584 been vacant since the death of Dr. Gilbert Berkley in Nov. 1581. To this bishopric the queen now nominated dean Godwin, who accordingly was consecrated Sept. 13, 1584. He immediately resigned the deanery of Canterbury; and as he arrived at the episcopal dignity “as well qualified,” says his contemporary, sir John Harrington, “for a bishop as might be, umeproveable, without simony, given to good hospitality, quiet, kind, and affable,” it is to be lamented that he was unjustly opposed in the enjoyment of what he deserved. At the time of his promotion there prevailed among the courtiers no small dislike to the bishops; prompted by a desire to spoil them of their revenues. To cover their unjust proceedings, they did not want plausible pretences, the effects of which Godwin too severely experienced. He was a widower, drawing towards seventy, and much enfeebled by the gout, when he came to the see; but in order to the management of his family, and that he might devote his whole time to the discharge of his high office, he married a second wife, a widow, of years suitable to his own. An illiberal misrepresentation, however, of this affair was but too readily believed by the queen, who had a rooted aversion to the marriages of the clergy, and the crafty slanderers gratified their aim in the disgrace of the aged prelate, and in obtaining part of his property. This unfortunate affair, which affected his public character as well as his private happiness, contributed not a little to increase his infirmities. He continued, however, attentive to the duties of his function, and frequently gave proof that neither his diligence nor his observation were inconsiderable. During the two last years of his life, his health more rapidly declined, and he was also attacked with a quartan ague. He was now recommended by his physicians to try the benefit of his native air. Accordingly he came to Oakingham with this intention, but breathed his last there, Nov. 19, 1590. He was buried in the chancel of Oakingham church, where is a modest inscription to his memory, written by his son, the subject of the next article.

The memory of bishop Godwin will ever be respected. His own merit brought him into public notice, and when he rose in the church he adorned it by his amiable qualities. Though he was a distinguished scholar, yet he did not publish any of his labours. Among the Parker Mss. in Bene't college, Cambridge, is a sermon which he preached before the queen at Greenwich in 1566, concerning the authority of the councils and fathers.

, son of the preceding, was born at Havington in Northamptonshire, 1561; and, after a good foundation of grammar-learning, was sent to Christ Church college, Oxford, where he was elected a student in 1678, while his father was dean. He proceeded B. A. in 1580, and M. A. in 1583; about which time he wrote an entertaining piece upon a philosophical subject, where imagination, judgment, and knowledge, keep an equal pace; but this, as it contradicted certain received notions of his times, he never published. It came out about five years after his death, under the title of “The Man in the Moon; or, a discourse of a voyage thither;” by Domingo Gonsales, 1638, 8vo. It has been several times printed, and shews that he had a creative genius. Domingo Gonsales, a little Spaniard, is supposed to be shipwrecked on an uninhabited island, where he taught several ganzas, or wild geese, to fly with a light machine, and to fetch and carry things for his conveniency. He, after some time, ventured to put himself into the machine, and they carried him with great ease. He happened to be in this aerial chariot at the time of the year when these ganzas, which were birds of passage, took their flight to the moon, and was directly carried to that planet. He has given a very ingenious description of what occurred to him on his way, and the wonderful things which he saw there. Dr. Swift seems to have borrowed several hints from this novel, in his Voyage to Laputa; but it is more to Dr. Godwin’s praise that he appears to have been well acquainted with the Copernican system. He suppressed also another of his inventions at that time, which he called “Nuncius inanimatus,” or the “Inanimate Messenger.” The design was to communicate various methods of conveying intelligence secretly, speedily, and safely; but although he asserts that by an agreement settled between two parties, a message may be conveyed from the one to the other, at the distance of many miles, with an incredible swiftness, yet he does not reveal the secret. It appears, however, to have given rise to bishop Wilkins’s “Mercury, or secret and swift Messenger.” It is said that he afterwards communicated the secret to his majesty, but why it was not acted upon is not mentioned by his biographers. The pamphlet was published in 1629, and afterwards, in 1657, was translated by the learned Dr. Thomas Smith, and published with “The Man in the Moon.”

He had probably been sometime master of arts, when he entered into orders, and became in a short time rector of Satnrbrd Orcais, in Somersetshire, a prebendary in the church of Wilts, canon residentiary there, and vicar of Weston in Zoyland, in the same county; he was also collated to the sub-deanery of Exeter, in 1587. In the mean time, turning his studies to the subject of the antiquities of his own country, he became acquainted with Camden; and accompanied him in his travels to Wales, in 1590, in the search of curiosities. He took great delight in these inquiries, in which he spent his leisure hours for several years; but at length he confined himself to ecclesiastical antiquities and history. After some time, finding, with regard to these, that he could add little or nothing to Fox’s work on that subject, he restrained his inquiries to persons; and here he spared no pains, so that he had enough to make a considerable volume in 1594.

He became B. D. in 1593, and D. D. in 1595; in which year, resigning the vicarage of Weston, he was appointed rector of Bishop’s Liddiard, in the, same county. He still continued assiduous in pursuing ecclesiastical biography; and, having made an handsome addition to his former collections, published the whole in 1601, 4to, tinder the title, “A Catalogue of the Bishops of England, since the first planting of the Christian religion in this island; together with a brief history of their lives and memorable actions, so near as can be gathered of antiquity.” It appears, by the dedication to lord Buckhurst, that our author was at this time chaplain to this nobleman, who, being in high credit with queen Elizabeth, immediately procured him the bishopric of Llandaff. This was said to be a royal reward for his Catalogue, and this success of it encouraged him to proceed. The design was so much approved, that afterwards he found a patron in James I.; and sir John Harrington, a favourite of prince Henry, wrote a treatise by way of supplement to it, for that prince’s use. This was drawn purely for that purpose, without any intention to publish it; but it appeared afterwards with the title of “A brief view of the state of the Church of England.” It is carried on only to the year 1608 (when it was written) from the close of our author’s works. Our author therefore devoted all the time he could spare from the duties of his function towards completing and perfecting this Catalogue; and published another edition in 1615, with great additions and alterations. But, this being very erroneously printed, by reason of his distance from the press, he resolved to turn that misfortune into an advantage and accordingly sent it abroad the year after, in a new elegant Latin dress partly for the use of foreigners, but more perhaps to please the king, to whom it was dedicated, and who in return gave him the bishopric of Hereford, to which he was translated in 1617. His work has since been reprinted, with a continuation to the time of publication, 1743, by Dr. Richardson, in an elegant folio volume, with a fine portrait of Godwin, and other embellishments.

In 1616 he published in Latin, “Rerum Anglicarum Henrico VIII. &c.” which was translated and published by his son, Morgan Godwin, under the title of “Annales of England, containing the reigns of Henry VIII. Edward VI. and queen Mary,” fol. These, as well as his lives of the bishops, are written in elegant Latin, and with much impartiality. In 1630, he published a small treatise, entitled “A computation of the value of the Roman Sesterce and Attic Talent.” After this he fell into a low and languishing disorder, and died in April 1633. He married, when a young man, the daughter of Wollton, bishop of Exeter, by whom he had many children. He appears to have been a man of great learning and personal worth, and a zealous champion for the church of England. His son, Dr. Morgan Godwin, was archdeacon of Shropshire, and translated, as we have noticed, his father’s “Annales.” He was ejected by the parliamentary commissioners, and his family reduced to distress: he died in 1645, leaving a son of his own names, who was educated at Oxford, and afterwards became a minister in Virginia, under the government of sir William Berkeley, but was at last beneficed near London. When he died is not mentioned. He wrote some pamphlets, while in Virginia, on the state of religion there, and the education of the negroes. The late rev. Charles Godwin, an antiquary, and benefactor to Baliol college, Oxford, who died in 1770, appears to have been a son of Charles Godwin, of Mon mouth, another son of bishop Francis Godwin.

, a learned English writer, and an excellent schoolmaster, was born in Somersetshire, in 1587; and, after a suitable education in grammar-learning, was sent to Oxford. He was entered of Magdalenhall in 1602; and took the two degrees in arts 1606 and 1609. This last year he removed to Abingdon in Berkshire, having obtained the place of chief master of the freeschool there; and in this employ distinguished himself by his industry and abilities so much, that he brought the school into a very flourishing condition; and bred up many youths who proved ornaments to their country, both in church and state. To attain this commendable end he wrote his “Roman Historiae Anthologia,” an English exposition of the Roman antiquities, &c. and printed it at Oxford in 1613, 4to. The second edition was published in 1623, with considerable additions. He also printed for the use of his school, a “Florilegium Phrastcon, or a survey of the Latin Tongue.” However, his inclinations leading him to divinity, he entered into orders, and became chaplain to Montague bishop of Bath and Wells. He proceeded B. D. in 1616, in which year he published at Oxford, “Synopsis Antiquitatum Hebraicarum, &c.” a collection of Hebrew antiquities, in three books, 4to. Thi he dedicated to his patron; and, obtaining some time after from him the rectory of Brightwell in Berkshire, he resigned his school, the fatigue of which had long been too great for him. Amidst his parochial duties, he prosecuted the subject of the Jewish antiquities; and, in 1625, printed in 4to, “Moses and Aaron, &c.” which was long esteemed an useful book for explaining the civil and ecclesiastical rites of the Hebrews. He took his degree of D. D. in 1637, but did not enjoy that honour many years; dying upon his parsonage in 1642-3, and leaving a wife, whom he had married while he taught school at Abingdon.

, an eminent and learned bookseller, was born Dec. 11, 1635, at Middleburg. Losing Jhis father early in life, he was so unfortunate as to have a harsh father-in-law, who, being no scholar himself, would not permit the young man to devote his time to study, but forced him to choose some business. Goere'e fixed on that of a bookseller, as one which would not wholly exclude him from the conversation of the learned, nor from the pursuit of his studies; and he accordingly found time enough, notwithstanding his necessary occupations, to cultivate his genius, and even to write several valuable books, in Flemish, on architecture, sculpture, painting, engraving, botany, physic, and antiquities. He died May 3, 1711, at Amsterdam. His principal works are, “Jewish Antiquities,” 2 vols. fol. “History of the Jewish Church, taken from the Writings of Moses,” 4 vols. fol. “Sacred and Prophane History,” 4to “Introduction to the practice of universal Painting,” 8yo “Of the Knowledge of Man with respect to his Nature, and Painting,” 8vo “Universal Architecture,” &c.

, a learned and zealous Lutheran, was born at Leipsic in 1668, studied at Wirtemberg and Jena, and exercised his functions as a minister in various parts of Germany. He was the author of many very singular works in Latin and German, of which Moreri gives a list of 152, but the greater part of these are dissertations, or theses, on various subjects of divinity, sacred criticism, and ecclesiastical history. He was lastly superintendant of the churches at Lubec, and died in that city, March 25, 1729. The most distinguished among hU Latin works are, “Selecta ex Historia Litteraria,” Lubecce, 1709, 4to; “Meletemata Annebergensia,” Lubecae, 1709, 3 vols. 12mo, containing several dissertations, which have appeared separately.

, a Portuguese writer of the sixteenth century, was born at Alanquar near Lisbon, of a noble family, in 1501, and brought upas a domestic in, the court of king Emanuel, where he was considered both as a man of letters and of business. Having a strong passion for travelling, he contrived to get a public commission; and travelled through almost all the countries of Europe, contracting as he went an acquaintance with all the learned. At Dantzic he became intimate with the brothers John and Olaus Magnus; and he spent five months at Friburg with Erasmus. He afterwards went to Padua, in 1534, where he resided four years, studying under Lazarus Bonamicus; not, however, without making frequent excursions into different parts of Italy. Here he obtained the esteem of Peter, afterwards cardinal Bembus, of Christopher Maclrucius, cardinal of Trent, and of James Sadolet. On his return to Lou vain in 1538, he had recourse to Conrad Goclenius and Peter Nannius, whose instructions were of great use to him, and applied himself to music and poetry; in the former of which he made so happy a progress, that he was qualified to compose for the churches. He married at Louvain, and his design was to settle in this city, in order to enjoy a little repose after fourteen years travelling; but a war breaking out between Charles V. and Henry II. of France, Louvain was besieged in 1542, and Goez, who has written the history of this siege, put himself at the head of the soldiers, and contributed much to the defence of the town against the French, when the other officers had abandoned it. When he was old, John III. of Portugal, recalled him into his country, in order to write the history of it; but as it became first necessary to arrange the archives of the kingdom, which he found in the greatest confusion, he had little leisure to accomplish his work. The favours also which the king bestowed upon him created him so much envy, that his tranquillity was at an end, and he came to be accused; and, though he cleared himself from all imputations, was confined to the town of Lisbon. Here, it is said that he was one day found dead in his own house; and in such a manner as to make it doubted whether he was strangled by his enemies, or died of an apoplexy; but other accounts inform us, with more probability, that he fell into the fire in a fit, and was dead before the accident was discovered. This happened in 1560, and he was interred in the cburck of Notre Dame, at Alanquar. Rewrote “Fides, Religio, Moresque Æthiopum” “De Imperio et Rebus Lusitanorum” “Hispania;” “Urbis OlissiponensisDescriptio;” “Chronica do Rey Dom Emanuel” “Historia do Principe Dom Juao” and other works, which have been often printed, and are much esteemed. Antonio says, that, though he is an exact writer, yet he has not written the Portuguese language in its purity; which, however, is not to be wondered at, considering how much time he spent out of his own country.

, a divine and dramatic writer, was born in Essex, about 1592, and was educated at Westminster-school, from which, at the age of eighteen, he entered as a student of Christ Church college, Oxford. Here he completed his studies, and, by dint of application and industry, became a very able scholar, obtained the character of a good poet, and, being endowed with the powers of oratory, was, after his taking orders, esteemed an excellent preacher. He had the degree of B. D. conferred on him before he quitted the university, and, in 1623, was preferred to the living of East Clandon, in Surrey. Here, notwithstanding that he had long been a professed enemy to the female sex, and even by some esteemed a woman-hater, he unfortunately tied himself to a wife, the widow of his predecessor, who was aXantippe, and he being naturally of a mild disposition, became at last unable to cope with so turbulent a spirit, backed as she. was by the children she had by her former husband. It was believed by many, that the uneasiness he met with in domestic life shortened his days. He died in July 1629, being then only thirty -five years of age, and was buried on the 27th of the same month *at his own parish church. He wrote several pieces on different subjects, among which are five tragedies; none of which were published till some years after his death. Philips and Winstanley have ascribed a comedy to this author, called “Cupid’s Whirligig;” but with no appearance of probability; since the gravity of his temper was such, that he does not seem to have been capable of a performance so ludicrous. In the latter part of his life he forsook the stage for the pulpit, and wrote sermons, some of which appeared the year he died. With the quaintness common to the sermons of James Ist’s time, they have a portion of fancy and vivacity peculiar to himself. To these works may be added, his “Latin Oration at the Funeral of sir Henry Savile,” spoken and printed at Oxford in 1622; another in Christ Church cathedral, at the funeral of Dr. Godwin, canon of that church, printed in London, 1627.

, an ingenious French writer, was born at Paris in 1716, where his father was an advocate, and himself became a counsellor to the parliament. By close study, and by great assiduity in his pursuits, he produced in 1758 a work that obtained a temporary reputation, and was translated into English, entitled c< Origine des Loix, des Arts, des Sciences, et de leur Progres chez les anciens Peuples," 3 vols. 4to; reprinted in 1778, in six volumes 12mo. This work treats of the origin and progress of human knowledge, from the creation to the age of Cyrus, but displays more genius than erudition, and is rather an agreeable than a profound work. He died of the small-pox, May 2, 1758, immediately after the publication of his work; leaving his Mss. and library to his friend, Alexander Conrad Fugere, who died only three days after him, in consequence of being deeply affected by the death of Goguet, who was a man of much personal worth. Goguet had begun another work on the origin and progress of the laws, arts, sciences, &c. in France, from the commencement of the monarchy, the loss of which the admirers of his first production much regretted.

, a laborious writer in civil law and history, was born at Bischoffsel in Switzerland, in 1576, and was a protestant of the confes-^ sion of Geneva. He studied the civil law at Altorf under Conrade Rittershusius, with whom he boarded; and returned in 1598 to Bischoffsel, where for some time he had no other subsistence but what he acquired by writing books, of which, at the time of publication he used to send copies to the magistrates and people of rank, from whom he received something more than the real value; and some of his friends imagined they did him service in promoting this miserable traffic. In 1599 he lived at St. Gal, in the house of a Mr. Schobinger, who declared himself his patron; but the same year he went to Geneva, and lived at the house of professor Lectius, with the sons of Vassan, whose preceptor he was. In 1602 he went to Lausanne, from a notion that he could live cheaper there than at Geneva. His patron Schobinger, while he advised him to this step, cautioned him at the same time from such frequent removals as made him suspected of an unsettled temper. But, notwithstanding Schobinger’s caution, he returned soon after to Geneva; and, upon the recommendation of Lectius, was appointed secretary to the duke of Bouillon, which place he quitted with his usual precipitation, and was at Francfort in 1603, and had a settlement at Forsteg in 1604. In 1605 he lived at Bischoffsel; where he complained of not being safe on the score of his religion, which rendered him odious even to his relations. He was at Francfort in 1606, where he married, and continued till 1610, in very bad circumstances. Little more is known of his history, unless that he lost his wife in 1630, and died himself Aug. 11, 1635. He appears to have been a man of capricious temper, and some have attributed to him a want of integrity. The greatest part of the writings published by Goldast are compilations arranged in form, or published from Mss. in libraries; and by their number he may be pronounced a man of indefatigable labour. Conringius says he has deserved so well of his country by publishing the ancient monuments of Germany, that undoubtedly the Athenians would have maintained him in the Prytaneum, if he had lived in those times; and adds, that he neither had, nor perhaps ever will have, an equal in illustrating the affairs of Germany, and the public law of the empire. The following are the most considerable among his various works: A collection of different tracts on civil and ecclesiastical jurisdiction, entitled “Monarcbia Sancti Romani Imperii*” &c. 1611, 1613, and 1614, 3 vols. fol. “Alamaniae Scriptores,” 1730, 5 vols. fol.; “Scriptores aliquot rerum Suevlearum,” 1605, 4to; “Commentarius de Bohemise regno,” 4to “Informatio de statu Bohemia3 quoad jus,” 4to “Sybilla Francica,” 4to which is a collection of pieces relating to the Maid of Orleans “Paraeneticorum veterum pars prima,” 1604, 4to. A curious collection of letters was published in 1688, under the title “Virorum clarissimorum ad Melchior Goldastum Epistolae,” 4to, Francfort.

, a man of some poetical turn, but principally known as a translator, in the sixteenth century, was a native of London. In 1563 we find him living with secretary Cecil at his house in the Strand, and in 1577 in the parish of Allhallows, London Wall. Amongst his patrons, as we may collect from his dedications, were, sir Walter Mildmay, William lord Cobham, Henry earl of Huntingdon, lord Leicester, sir Christopher Hatton, lord Oxford, and Robert earl of Essex. He was connected with sir Philip Sydney, for he finished an English translation of Philip Mornay’s treatise in French, on the “Truth of Christianity,” which had been begun by Sydney, and was published in 1587. His religious turn appears also from his translating many of the works of the early reformers and protestant writers, particularly Calvin, Chytraeus, Beza, Marlorat, Hemingius, &c. He also enlarged our treasures of antiquity, by publishing translations of Justin in 1564; and of Csesar in 1565. Of this last, a translation as far as the middle of the fifth book by John Brend, had been put into his hands, and he therefore began at that place, but afterwards, for uniformity, re-translated the whole himself. He also published translations of Seneca’s Benefits, in 1577; of the Geography of Pomponius Mela the Poly history of Solinus, 1587, and of many modern Latin writers, which were then useful, and suited to the wants of the times. Warton thinks his only original work is a “Discourse of the Earthquake that happened in England and other places in 1580,” 12mo; and of his original poetry, nothing more appears than an encomiastic copy of verses prefixed to Baret’s “Alvearie” in 1580. His chief poetical translation is of “Ovid’s Metamorphoses,” the first four books of which he published in 1565, and the whole in 1567. Pope, who read much in old English translations, used to say “it was a pretty good one considering the time when it was written.” The style is certainly poetical and spirited, and his versification clear; hi manner ornamental and diffuse; yet with a sufficient observance of the original. He has obtained a niche in the “Biographia Dramatica” for having translated a drama of Beza’s, called “Abraham’s Sacrifice,” 1577, 18mo.

, a mathematician, was born at Breslaw, in Silesia, in 1623, and died at Leyden in 1665. The works by which he is generally known are “Elementa Architecture Militaris,” 1643, 8vo “De Usu Proportionarii Circuli” “De Stylometricis,” 1662 and another treatise “On Architecture,” published in 1696, by Christopher Sturm, with numerous engravings, and the life of the author. He had also improved the description of Solomon’s Temple by Villapandus, but this was never published.

, an eminent modern Italian dramatist, was born at Venice in 1707. In his infancy the drama was his darling amusement, and all his time was devoted to the perusing comic writers, among whom was Cicognini, a Florentine, little known in the dramatic commonwealth. After having well studied these, he ventured to sketch out the plan of a comedy, even before he went to school. When he had finished his grammatical studies at Venice, and his rhetorical studies at the Jesuits’ college in Perugia, he was sent to a boarding-school at Rimini, to study philosophy, but he paid far more attention to the theatres, entered into a familiar acquaintance with the actors, and when they were to remove to Chiozza, made his escape in their company. This was the first fault he committed, which, according to his own confession, drew a great many others after it. His father had intended him to be a physician, like himself: the young man, however, was wholly averse to the study. He proposed afterwards to make him an advocate, and sent him to be a practitioner in Modena; but a horrid ceremony of ecclesiastical jurisdiction, at which he was present, inspired him with a melancholy turn, and he determined to become a Capuchin. Of this, however, he was cured by a visit to Venice, where he indulged in all the fashionable dissipation of the place. He was afterwards prevailed upon by his mother, after the death of his father, to exercise the profession of a lawyer in Venice, but by a sudden reverse of fortune he was compelled to quit at once both the bar and Venice. He then went to Milan, where he was employed by the resident of Venice in the capacity of secretary, and becoming acquainted with the manager of the theatre, he wrote a farce entitled “II Gondoliere Veneziano,” the Venetian Gondolier; which was the first comic production of his that was performed and printed. Some time after, Goldoni quitted the Venetian resident, and removed to Verona, where he got introduced to the manager of the theatre, for which he composed several pieces. Having removed along with the players to Genoa, he was for the first time seized with an ardent passion for a lady, who soon afterwards became his wife. He then returned with the company to Venice, where he displayed, for the first time, the powers of his genius, and executed his plan of reforming the Italian stage. He wrote the “Momolo,” “Courtisan,” the “Squanderer,” and other pieces, which obtained universal admiration. Feeling a strong inclination to reside some time in Tuscany, he repaired to Florence and Pisa, where he wrote “The Footman of two Masters,” and “The Son of Harlequin lost and found again.” He returned to Venice, and set about executing more and more his favourite scheme of reform. He was now attached to the theatre of S. Angelo, and employed himself in writing both for the company, and for his own purposes. The constant toils he underwent in these engagements impaired his health. He wrote, in the course of twelve months, sixteen new comedies, besides forty-two pieces for the theatre; among these many are considered as the best of his productions. The first edition of his works was published in 1753, in 10 vols. 8vo. As he wrote afterwards a great number of new pieces for the theatre of S. Luca, a separate edition of these was published, under the title of “The New Comic Theatre:” among these was the “Terence,” called by the author his favourite, and judged to be the master-piece of his works. He made another journey to Parma, on the invitation of duke Philip, and from thence he passed t Rome. He had composed 59 other pieces so late as 1761, five of which were designed for the particular use of Marque Albergati Capacelli, and consequently adapted to the theatre of a private company. Here ends the literary life of Goldoni in Italy, after which he accepted of an engagement of two years in Paris, where he found a select and numerous company of excellent performers in the Italian theatre. They were, however, chargeable with the same faults which he had corrected in Italy; and the French supported, and even applauded in the Italians, what they would have reprobated on their own stage. Goldoni wished to extend, even to that country, his plan of reformation, without considering the extreme difficulty of the undertaking. His first attempt was the piece called “The Father for Love;” and its bad success was a sufficient warning to him to desist from his undertaking. He continued, during the remainder of his engagement, to produce pieces agreeable to the general taste, and published twenty-four comedies; among which “The Love of Zelinda and Lindor” is reputed the best. The term of two years being expired, Goldoni was preparing to return to Italy, when a lady, reader to the dauphiness, mother to the late king, introduced him at court, in the capacity of Italian master to the princesses, aunts to the king. He did not live in the court, but resorted there, at each summons, in a post-chaise, sent to him for the purpose. These journeys were the cause of a disorder in the eyes, which afflicted him the rest of his life; for being accustomed to read while in the chaise, he lost his sight on a sudden, and in spite of the most potent remedies, could never afterwards recover it entirely. For about six months lodgings were provided him in the chateau of Versailles. The death, however, of the dauphin, changed the face of affairs. Goldoni lost his lodgings, and only, at the end of three years, received a bounty of 100 Louis in a gold box, and the grant of a pension of four thousand livres a year. This settlement would not have been sufficient for him, if he had not gained, by other means, farther sums. He wrote now and then comedies for the theatres of Italy and Portugal; and, during these occupations, was desirous to shew to the French that he merited a high rank among their dramatic writers. For this purpose, he neglected nothing which could be of use to render himself master of the French language. He heard, spoke, and conversed so much in it, that, in his 62d year, he ventured to write a comedy in French, and to have it. represented in the court theatre, on the occasion of the marriage of the king. This piece was the “Bourru Bienfaisant;” and it met with so great success, that the author received a bounty 'of 150 Louis from the king, another gratification from the performers, and considerable sums from the booksellers who published it. He published soon after, another comedy in French, called “L'Avare Fastueux.” After the death of Lewis XV. Goldoni was appointed Italian teacher to the princess Clotilde, and after her marriage, he attended the late unfortunate princess Elizabeth in the same capacity. His last work was the “Volponi,” written after he had retired from court. It was nis misfortune to live to see his pension taken away by the revolution, and, like thousands in a similar situation, he was obliged to pass his old age in poverty and distress. He died in the beginning of 1793. As a comic poet, Goldoni is reckoned among the best of the age in which he flourished. His works were printed at Leghorn in 1788—91, in 31 vols. 8vo. He has been reckoned the Moliere of Italy, and he is styled by Voltaire “The Painter of Nature.” Dr. Burney says that he is, perhaps, the only author of comic operas in Italy who has given them a little common sense, by a natural plot, and natural characters; and his celebrated comic opera of the “Buona Figliuola,” set by Piccini, and first performed in London Dec. 9th, 1766, rendered both the poet and composer, whose names had scarcely penetrated into this country before, dear to every lover of the Italian language and music, in the nation.

, an eminent poet and miscellaneous writer, was born on Nov. 29, 1728, at a place called Pallas, in the parish of Forney and county of Longford in Ireland. His father, the rev. Charles Goldsmith, a native of the county of Roscommon, was a clergyman of the established church, and had been educated at Dublin college. He afterwards held the living of Kilkenny West in the county of Westmeath. By his wife, Anne, the daughter of the rev. Oliver Jones, master of the diocesan school of Elphin, he had five sons, and two daughters. His eldest son, Henry, went into the church, and is the gentleman to whom our poet dedicated his “Traveller.” Oliver was the second son, and is supposed to have faithfully represented his father in the character of the Village Preacher in the “Deserted Village.” Oliver was originally intended for some mercantile employment, as his father found his income too scanty for the expences of the literary education which he had bestowed on his eldest son. With this view he was instructed in reading, writing, and arithmetic, at a common school, the master of which was an old soldier, of a romantic turn, who entertained his pupil with marvellous stories of his travels and feats, and is supposed to have imparted somewhat of that wandering and unsettled turn which so much appeared in his pupil’s future life. It is certain that Oliver had not been long at this humble school before he proved that he was “no vulgar boy.” He made some attempts in poetry when he was scarcely eight years old, and by the inequalities of his temper and conduct, betrayed a disposition more favourable io the flights of genius than the regularity of business. This after some time became so obvious, that his frfends, who had at first pleaded for his being sent to the university, now determined to contribute towards the expence, and by their assistance, he was placed at a school of reputation, where he might be qualified to enter the college with the advantages of preparatory learning.

In June 1744, when in his fifteenth year, he was sent to Dublin college, and entered as a sizer, under the rev. Mr. Wilder, one of the fellows, but a man of harsh temper and violent passions, and consequently extremely unfit to win the affections and guide the disposition of a youth simple, ingenuous, thoughtless, and unguarded. His pupil, however, made some progress, although slow, in academical studies. In 1747, he was elected one of the exhibitioners on the foundation of Erasmus Smyth; and in 1749, two years after the regular time, he was admitted to the degree of bachelor of arts. His indolence and irregularities may in part account for this tardy advancement to the reputation of a scholar, but much may likewise be attributed to the unfeeling neglect of his tutor, who contended only for the preservation of certain rules of discipline, while he gave himself little trouble with the cultivation of the mind. On one occasion he thought proper to chastise Oliver before a party of young friends of both sexes, whom, with his usual imprudence, he was entertaining with a supper and dance in his rooms. Oliver immediately disposed of his books and cloaths, left college, and commenced a wanderer, without any prospect, without friends, and without money. At length, after suffering such extremity of hunger, that a handtul of grey peas which a girl gave him at a wake, appeared a luxurious meal, he contrived to acquaint his brother with his situation, who immediately clothed him, and carried him back to college, effecting at the same time a reconciliation between him and his tutor, which, it may be supposed, was more convenient than cordial on either side.

Soon after this event, his father died, and his friends wished him to prepare for holy orders; but to this he declared his dislike; and finding himself equally uncomfortable as tutor in a private family, to which he had been recommended, he again left the country with about thirty pounds in his pocket. After an absence of six weeks, he returned to his mother’s house, without a penny, having expended the whole in a series of whimsical adventures, of which the reader will find a very entertaining account in the Life prefixed to his Works. His mother and friends being reconciled to him, his uncle the rev. Thomas Contarine, resolved to send him to the Temple to study law; but in his way to London, he met at Dublin with a sharper who tempted him to play, and stript him of fifty pounds, with which he had been furnished for his voyage and journey. His youth must furnish the only apology that can be made for this insensibility to the kindness of his friends, who could ill afford the money thus wantonly lost. Again, however, they received him into favour, and it being now decided that he should study physic, he was sent to Edinburgh, lor that purpose, about 1752 or 1753, but still his thoughtless and eccentric disposition betrayed him into many ludicrous situations. He formally, indeed, attended the lectures of the medical professors, but his studies were neither regular nor profound. There was always something he liked better than stated application. Among his fellow-students, he wished to recommend himself, and he was not unsuccessful, by his stories and songs, as a social companion, and a man of humour; and this ambition to shine in company by such means, never wholly left him when he came to associate with men who are not charmed by noisy vivacity. After he had gone through the usual course of lectures, his uncle, who appears to have borne the principal expences of his education, equipped him for the medical school of Leyden, at which, however, he did not arrive without meeting with some of those incidents which have given an air of romance to his history. At Leyden he studied chemistry and anatomy for about a year; but a taste tor gaming, which he appears to have caught very early, frequently plunged him into difficulties, without any of the benefits of experience. Even the money which he was compelled to borrow, in order to enable him to leave Holland, was expended on some costly flowers which he bought of a Dutch florist, as a present to his uncle; and when he set out on his travels, he “had only one clean shirt, and no money in his pocket.” In such a plight any other man would have laid his account with starving; but Goldsmith had “a knack at hoping,” and however miserably provided, determined to make the tour of Europe on foot. In what manner he performed this singular undertaking, he is supposed to have informed us in “The History of a Philosophic Vagabond,” in chap, xx. of the “Vicar of Wakefield.” He had some knowledge of music, and charmed the peasants so much as to procure a lodging and a subsistence. He also entered the foreign universities and convents, where, upon certain days, theses are maintained against any adventitious disputant, for which, if the champion opposes with some dexterity, he may claim a gratuity in money, a dinner, and a bed for the night. At one time, he is said to have accompanied a young Englishman as a tutor; but his biographer doubts whether this part of the Philosophic Vagabond’s story was not a fiction. It is certain, however, that in the manner above related, and with some assistance from his uncle, he contrived to travel through Flanders, and part of France, Germany, Switzerland, and Italy. It was probably at Padua that he took a medical degree, as he remained here about six months, but one of his earliest biographers thinks he took the degree of bachelor of medicine at Louvaine. His generous uncle dying while he was in Italy, he was obliged to travel through France to England on foot, and landed at Dover in 1756.

He arrived in London in the extremity of distress, and first tried to be admitted as an usher in a school or academy, and having with some difficulty obtained that situation, he remained for some time in it, submitting to mortifications., of which he has given, probably, an exaggerated account in the story of the philosophic vagabond. He next procured a situation in the shop of a chemist, and while here, was found out by Dr. Sleigh, one of his fellow-students at Edinburgh, who liberally shared his purse with him, and encouraged him to commence practitioner. With this view, he settled, if any measure of our poet deserves that epithet, in Bankside, Southwark; and afterwards removed to the Temple or its neighbourhood. In either place his success as a physician is not much known; his ovyn account was, that he had plenty of patients, but got no fees.

About this time, however, he appears to have had recourse to his pen. His first attempt was a tragedy, which he probably never finished. In 1758 he obtained, by means of Dr. Milner, a dissenting minister, who kept a school at Peckham, which our author superintended during the doctor’s illness, the appointment to be physician to one of our factories in India. In order to procure the necessary expences for the voyage, he issued proposals for printing by subscription “The present state of Polite Literature in Europe,” with what success we are not told, nor why he gave up his appointment in India. In the same year, however, he wrote what he very properly calls a catch-penny “Life of Voltaire,” and engaged with Mr. Griffiths as a critic in the Monthly Review. The terms of this engagement were his board, lodging, and a handsome salary, all secured by a written agreement. Goldsmith declared he usually wrote for his employer every day from nine o'clock till two. But at the end of seven or eight months it was dissolved by mutual consent, and our poet took lodgings in Green Arbour court, in the Old Bailey, amidst the dwellings of indigence, where he completed his “Present State of Polite Literature,” printed for Dodsley, 1759, 12mo.

He afterwards removed to more decent lodgings in Wine Office-court, Fleet-street, where he wrote his admirable novel, “The Vicar of Wakefield,” attended with the affecting circumstance of his being under arrest. When the knowledge of his situation was communicated to Dr. Johnson, he disposed of his manuscript for sixty pounds, to Mr. Newbery, and procured his enlargement. Although the money was then paid, the book was not published until some time after, when his excellent poem “The Traveller” had established his fame. His connection with Mr. Newbery was a source of regular supply, as he employed him in compiling or revising many of his publications, particularly, “The Art of Poetry,” 2 vols. 12mo; a “Life of Beau Nash,” and “Letters on the History of England,” 2 vols. 12mo, which have been attributed to lord Lyttelton, the earl of Orrery, and other noblemen, but were really written by Dr. Goldsmith. He had before this been employed by Wilkie, the bookseller, in conducting a “Lady’s Magazine,” and published with him, a volume of essays, entiled “The Bee.” To the Public Ledger, a newspaper, of which Kelly was at that time the editor, he contributed those letters which have since been published under the title of “The Citizen of the World.”

In 1765 he published “The Traveller,” which at once established his fame. The outline of this he formed when in Switzerland, but polished it with great care, before he submitted it to the public. It soon made him known and admired, but his roving disposition had not yet left him. He had for some time been musing on a design of penetrating into the interior parts of Asia, and investigating the remains of ancient grandeur, learning, and manners. When he was told of lord Bute’s liberality to men of genius, he applied to that nobleman for a salary to enable him to execute his favourite plan, but his application was unnoticed, as his name had not then been made known by his Traveller. This poem, however, having procured him the unsolicited friendship of lord Nugent, afterwards earl of Clare, he obtained an introduction to the earl of Northumberland, then lord Lieutenant of Ireland, who invited our poet to an interview. Goldsmith prepared a complimentary address for his excellency, which, by mistake, he delivered to the groom of the chambers, and when the lord lieutenant appeared, was so confused that he came awa.y without being able to explain the object of his wishes. Sir John Hawkins relates, that when the lord lieutenant said he should be glad to do him any kindness, Goldsmith answered, that “he had a brother in Ireland, a clergyman, that stood in need of help as for himself, he had no dependence on the promises of great men he looked to the booksellers they were his best friends, and he was not inclined to forsake them for others.” This was very characteristic of Goldsmith, who, as sir John Hawkins adds, was “an ideot in the affairs of the world,” but yet his affectionate remembrance of his brother on such an occasion merits a less harsh epithet. Goldsmith was grateful for the kindness he had received from this brother, and nothing probably would have given him greater pleasure than if he had succeeded in transferring the earl’s patronage tp him. From this time, however, although he sometimes talked about it, he appears to have relinquished the project of going to Asia. “Of all men,” said Dr. Johnson, “Goldsmith is the most unfit to go out upon such an inquiry for he is utterly ignorant of such arts as we already possess, and consequently could not know what would be accessions to our present stock of mechanical knowledge. He would bring home a grinding barrow, and think that he had furnished a wonderful improvement.”

In 1764, Goldsmith fixed his abode in the Temple, and resided, first in the library staircase, afterwards in the KingVbench walk, and ultimately at No. 2, in Brickcourt, where he had chambers tin the first floor elegantly furnished; and where he was visited by literary friends of the most distinguished merit. When Dr. Johnson’s Literary club was founded, he was one of the first members, and his associates were those whose conversations have given such interest to Boswell’s Life of Johnson.

Having now acquired considerable fame as a critic, a novelist, and a descriptive poet, he was induced to court the dramatic Muse. His first attempt was the comedy of the “Good-natured Man,” which Garrick, after much delay, declined, and it was produced at jCovent-garden theatre, in 1768, and kept possession of the stage for nine nights, but did not obtain the applause which his friends thought it merited. Between this period and the appearance of his next celebrated poem, he compiled “The Roman History,” in 2 vols. 8vo, and afterwards an abridgement of it, and “The History of England,” in 4 vols. 8vo, both elegantly written, and hi My calculated to attract and interest young readers, although it must be owned, he is frequently superficial and inaccurate. His pen was also occasionally employed on introductions and prefaces to books compiled by other persons; as “Guthrie’s History of the World,” and Dr. Brooks’s “System of Natural History.” In this last preface, he so far excelled his author in the graces of a captivating style, that the booksellers engaged him to write a “History of the Earth and Animated Nature,” which he executed with much elegance, but with no very deep knowledge of the subject He also drew up a “Life of Dr. Parnell,” prefixed to an edition of his poems, which afforded Dr. Johnson an opportunity of paying an affectionate tribute to his memory, when he came to write the life of Parnell for the English Poets. He wrote also a “Life of Bolingbroke,” originally prefixed to the “Dissertation on Parties,” and afterwards to Bolingbroke’s works. In one of his compilations he was peculiarly unfortunate. Being desired by Griffin, the bookseller, to make a selection of elegant poems from our best English classics, for the use of boarding-schools, he carelessly marked for the printer one of the most indecent tales of Prior. His biographer adds “without reading it,” but this was not the case, as he introduces it with a criticism. These various publications have not been noticed in their regular order, but their dates are not connected with any particulars in our author’s history.

In 1769 he produced his admirable poem “The Deserted Village,” which he touched and re-touched with the greatest care before publication. How much it added to his reputation, it is unnecessary to mention. No poem since the days of Pope has been so repeatedly read, admired, and quoted.

At the establishment of the royal academy of painting in 1770, his friend sir Joshua Reynolds procured for him the appointment of professor of ancient history, a complimentary distinction attended neither with emolument nor trouble, but which entitled him to a seat at some of the meetings of the society. His situation in life was now comfortable, at least; and might have been independent, had he mixed a little prudence with his general conduct; but although this was not always the case, it is much to his honour that his errors were generally on the right side. He was kind and benevolent, wherever he had it in his power, and although frequently duped by artful men, his heart was never hardened against the applications of the unhappy. And such was the celebrity of his writings, that he was even looked up to, as a patron and promoter of schemes of public utility. His biographer has published a very curious letter from the notorious Thomas Paine, in which he solicits Goldsmith’s interest in procuring an addition to the pay of excisemen.

In the month of March 1773, his second comedy, “She Stoops to Conquer,” was performed at Covent-garden, and received with the highest applause, contrary to the opinion of the manager, Mr. Colman. It is founded upon an incident which, his biographer informs us, happened to the author in his younger clays, when he mistook a gentleman’s house for an inn. In the same year he appeared before the public in a different character. A scurrilous letter, probably written by Kenrick, was inserted in the London Packet, a paper then published by the late Mr. Thomas Evans, bookseller in Paternoster-row. Goldsmith resented no part of the abase in this letter but that which reflected on a young lady of his acquaintance. Accompanied by one of his countrymen, he waited on Mr. Evans, and stated the nature of his complaint. Mr. Evans, who had no concern in the paper, but as publisher, went to examine the file, and while stooping for it, Goldsmith was advised by his friend, to take that opportunity of caning him, which he immediately began to do; but Evans, a stout and high-blooded Welchman, returned the blows with so much advantage, that Goldsmith’s friend fled, and left him in a shocking plight. Dr. Kenrick, who was then in the house, came forward, and affecting great compassion for Goldsmith, conducted him home in a coach. This foolish quarrel afforded considerable sport for the newspapers before it was finally made up.

One of his last publications was the “History of the Earth and Animated Nature” before mentioned, in 8 vols. 8vo, for which he received the sum of 850l. and during the time he was engaged in this undertaking, he had received the copy-money for his comedy, and the profits of his third nights; but, his biographer informs us, “he was so liberal in his donations, and profuse in his disbursements; he was unfortunately so attached to the pernicious practice of gaming; and from his unsettled habits of life, his supplies being precarious and uncertain, he had been so little accustomed to regulate his expences by any system of ceconomy, that his debts far exceeded his resources; and he was obliged to take up money in advance from the managers of the two theatres, for comedies, which he engaged to furnish to each; and from the booksellers, for publications which he was to finish for the press. All these engagements he fully intended, and doubtless would have been able, to fulfil with the strictest honour, as he had done on former occasions in similar exigencies; but his premature death unhappily prevented the execution of his plans, and gave occasion to malignity to impute those failures to deliberate intention, which were merely the result of inevitable mortality.”

Some time before his death, although they were not printed until after that event, he wrote his poems “The Haunch of Venison,” “Retaliation,” and some other of his smaller pieces. But the chief project he had at heart was, an “Universal Dictionary of Arts and Sciences,” in the execution of which it is said he had engaged all his literary friends and the members of the Literary Club; but this was prevented by his death, which is thus related by his biographer:

"He was subject to severe fits of the strangury, owing probably to the intemperate manner in which he confined himself to the desk, when he was employed in his compilations, often indeed for several weeks successively, without taking exercise. On such occasions he usually hired lodgings in some farm-house a few miles from London, and wrote without cessation till he had finished his task. H then carried his copy to the bookseller, received his compensation, and gave himself up, perhaps for months without interruption, to the gaieties, amusements, and societies of London. And here it may be observed once for all, that his elegant and enchanting style in prose flowed from him with such facility, that in whole quires of his histories, * Animated Nature,' &c. he had seldom occasion to correct or alter a single word; but in his verses, especially his two great ethic poems, nothing could exceed the patient and incessant revisal which he bestowed upon them. To save himself the trouble of transcription, he wrote the lines in his first copy very wide, and would so fill up the intermediate space with reiterated corrections, that scarcely a word of his first effusions was left unaltered.

“In the spring of 1774, being embarrassed in his circumstances, and attacked with his usual malady, his indisposition, aggravated too by mental distress, terminated in a fever, which on the 25th of March had become exceedingly violent, when he called in medical assistance. Although he had then taken ipecacuanha to promote a vomit, he would proceed to the use of James’s fever-powder, contrary to the advice of the medical gentlemen who attended him. From the application of these powders he had received the greatest benefit in a similar attack nearly two years before, but then they had been administered by Dr. James himself in person. This happened in September 1772. But now the progress of the disease was as unfavourable as possible; for, from the time above-mentioned, every symptom became more and more alarming till Monday April 4th, when he died, aged forty-five.”

His remains were privately interred in the Temple burial-ground, on Saturday April 9; but afterwards, by a subscription raised among his friends, and chiefly by his brethren of the club, a marble monument was erected to his memory in Westminster-abbey, with an inscription by Dr. Johnson, the history of which the reader may find in Boswell’s Life, where are likewise many curious traits of our poet’s variegated character.

“He was,” adds his biographer, “generous in the extreme, and so strongly affected by compassion, that he has been known at midnight to abandon his rest in order to procure relief and an asylum for a poor dying object who was left destitute in the streets. Nor was there ever a mind whose general feelings were more benevolent and friendly. He is, however, supposed to have been often soured by jealousy or envy, and many little instances are mentioned of this tendency in his character; but whatever appeared of this kind was a mere momentary sensation, which he knew not how like other men to conceal. It was never the result of principle, or the suggestion of reflection; it never embittered his heart, nor influenced his conduct. Nothingcould be more amiable than the general features of his mind; those of his person were not perhaps so engaging. His stature was under the middle size, his body strongly built, and his limbs more sturdy than elegant; his complexion was pale, his forehead low, his face almost round, and pitted with the small-pox; but marked with strong lines of thinking. His first appearance was not captivating; but when he grew easy and cheerful in company, he relaxed into.such a display of good-humour, as soon removed every unfavourable impression. Yet it must be acknowledged that in company he did not appear to so much advantage as might have been expected from his genius and talents. He was too apt to speak without reflection, and without a sufficient knowledge of the subject; which made Johnson observe of him, * No man was more foolish when he had not a pen in his hand, or more wise when he had.' Indeed, with all his defects (to conclude nearly in the words of that great critic), as a writer he was of the most distinguished abilities. Whatever he composed he did it better than any other man could. And whether we consider him as a poet, as a comic writer, or as an historian (so far as regards his powers of composition) he was one of the first writers of his time, and will ever stand in the foremost class.”

Although this character may be thought in some respects exaggerated, it cannot be denied that the indelible stamp of genius rests on his “Vicar of Wakefield;” and on his poems, “The Traveller,” “Deserted Village,” and “Edwin and Angelina.” In description, pathos, and even sublimity, he has not been exceeded by any of the poets of his age, except that in the latter quality he must yield to Gray.

, professor of Arabic at Leyden, descended from a considerable family in that city, was born at the Hague, in 1596. At Leyden he made himself master of all the learned languages, and proceeded to physic, divinity, and the mathematics. His education being finished, he took a journey to France with the duchess de la Tremouille; and was invited to teach the Greek language at Rochelle, which he continued to do, until that city was in the following year reduced again to the dominion of the French king, after which he resolved to return to Holland. He had early taken a liking to Erpenius, the Arabic professor at Leyden; by the help of whose lectures he made a great progress in the Arabic tongue, and having in 1622 an opportunity of attending the Dutch ambassador to the court of Morocco, he consulted with Erpenius, who directed him to observe carefully every production, either of nature, art, or custom, which were unknown in Europe; and to describe them, setting down the proper name of each, and the derivation of it, if known. He also gave him a letter directed to that prince, together with a present of a grand atlas, and a New Testament in Arabic. These procured him a very gracious reception from Muley Zidan, then king of Morocco, who expressed great satisfaction in the present, and afterwards read them frequently. In the mean time Golius made so good use of Erpenius’ s advice, that tie attained a perfect skill in the Arabic tongue; and in indulging his curiosity respecting the customs and learning of that country, contrived to make himself very agreeable to the doctors and courtiers. By this means he became particularly serviceable to the ambassador, who growing uneasy because his affairs were not dispatched, was advised to present to his majesty a petition written by Golius in the Arabic character and language, and in the Christian style, both circumstances rather novel in that country. The king was astonished at the beauty of the petition, both as to writing and style; and having learned from the ambassador that it was done by Golius, desired to see him. At the audience, the king spoke to him in Arabic, and Golius said in Spanish, that he understood his majesty very well, but could not keep up a conversation in Arabic, by reason of its guttural pronunciation, to'which his throat was not sufficiently inured. This excuse was accepted by the king, who granted the ambassador’s request, and dispatched him immediately. Before his departure, Golius had an opportunity of examining the curiosities of Fez, and took a plan of the royal palace, which was afterwards communicated to Mr. Windus, and inserted in his “Journey to Mequinez,” 1721, 8vo. Go* lius brought with him to Holland several books unknown in Europe; and among others, “The Annals of the Ancient Kingdom of Fez and Morocco,” which he resolved to translate. He communicated every thing to Erpenius, who well knew the value of them, but did not live long enough to enjoy the treasure; that professor dying in Nov. 1624, after recommending this his best beloved scholar to the curators of the university for his successor. The request was complied with, and Golius saw himself immediately in the Arabic chair, which he filled so ably as to lessen their sense of the loss of Erpenius. Being, however, still desirous of cultivating oriental languages and antiquities, he applied to his superiors for leave to take a journey to the Levant; and obtained letters patent from the prince of Orange, dated Nov. 25, 1625. He set out immediately for Aleppo, where he continued fifteen months; after which, making excursions into Arabia, towards Mesopotamia, he went by land to Constantinople, in company with Cornelius Hago, ambassador from Holland to the Porte. Here the governor of the coast of Propontis gave him the use of his pleasant gardens and curious library in which retirement he applied himself wholly to the reading of the Arabic historians and geographers, whose writings were till then either unknown to, or had not been perused by him. Upon his return to the city, discovering occasionally in conversation with the great men there a prodigious memory of what he had read, he excited such admiration, that a principal officer of the empire made him an offer of a commission from the grand signor to take a survey of the whole empire, in order to describe the situation of places with more exactness than was done in such maps as they then had; but he pretended that this would interfere with the oath which he had taken to the States, although his real fear arose from the danger of such an undertaking. In this place also he found his skill in physic of infinite service in procuring him the favour and respect of the grandees; from whom, as he would take no fees, he received many valuable and rich presents, and every liberal offer to induce him to settle among them. But after a residence of four years, having in a great measure satisfied his thirst of eastern learning, and made himself master of the Turkish, Persian, and Arabic tongues, he returned in 1629, laden with curious Mss. which have ever since been valued among the richest treasures of the university library at Leyden. As soon as he was settled at home, he began to think of making the best use of some of these manuscripts by communicating them to the public; but first printed an “Arabic Lexicon,” 1653, folio; and a new edition of “Erpenius’s Grammar, enlarged with notes and additions;” to which also he subjoined several pieces of poetry, extracted from the Arabian writers, particularly Tograi and Ababella. One purpose on which he employed his knowledge and influence cannot be too highly commended. He had been an eye-witness of the wretched state of Christianity in the Mahometan countries, and with the compassion of a Christian, resolved, therefore, to make his tfkill in their language serviceable to them. With this laudable view he procured an edition of the “New Testament” in the original language, with a translation into the vulgar Greek by an Archimandrite, which he prevailed with the States to present to the Greek church, groaning under the Mahometan tyranny; and, as some of these Christians use the Arabic tongm? in divine service, he took care to have dispersed among them an Arabic translation of the confession of the reformed protestants, together with the catechism and liturgy .

Intent as he was in promoting religion and learning abroad, he did not neglect his duty at home, which was now increased by the curators during his absence conferring upon him, in addition to the former, the professorship of mathematics, to which he was chosen in 1626. He discharged, however, the functions of both with the highest reputation for forty years. He was also appointed interpreter in ordinary to the States, for the Arabic, Turkish, Persian, and other eastern languages; for which he had an annual pension, and a present of a chain of gold with a very beautiful medal, which he wore as a badge of his office. He went through the fatigue of all these duties with the less difficulty, as he always enjoyed a good state of health, which he carefully preserved by strict temperance; and his constitution was so firm, that in 1666, at the age of seventy, he travelled on foot from the Meuse to the Waal, a journey of fourteen hours. He died Sept. 28, 1667, a 1 much respected for his virtue and piety, as for his talents and learning.

Although entitled to the character of an universal scholar, his chief excellence lay in philology and the languages; in which his application and skill were such, that though he did not begin seriously to study the Persian language till he was fifty-four, he made himself so much a master, as to write a large dictionary of it, which was printed at London, in Castell’s “Lexicon Heptaglotton.” He was not less acquainted with the Turkish language; and made such a progress in the Chinese, that he was able to read and understand their books; though he began late in life to this study. Besides the books which he finished and printed, he left several Mss. of others, which would have been no ways inferior to them, had he lived to complete them. He had begun a Geographical and Historical Dictionary for the Eastern countries wherein the names of men and places throughout the east were explained. He had long given expectations of a new edition of the “Koran,” with a translation and confutation of it.

Amidst all this profound literature, his religion is said to have been plain and practical. He lamented and abhorred the factions and disputes, especially about indifferent matters, which disgraced Christianity, and therefore had no inclination to enter into the controversies of his time. He married a lady of a very good family, and well allied, with whom he lived twenty-four years, and who survived him, together with two sons, who studied the civil law at Leyden, and became considerable men in Holland.

His publications, besides those already noticed, were, 1. “The History of the Saracens, by Elmacin.” Erpenius began the version, which Golius completed, and it was translated into English by Simon Ockley, Arabic professor at Cambridge. 2. “The Life of Tamerlane,” written in Arabic by an author of great reputation, Leyden, 1636. He had proposed a second edition of this some time before his death, and to print the text with vowels, with a translation and commentary. 3. “Alfragan’s Elements of Astronomy,” with a new version, and learned commentaries upon the first nine chapters, but he did not live to carry these farther, and what we have was published after his death, in 1669, 4to.

, brother to the preceding, excelled likewise in the knowledge of the Arabic language, and taught it in the seminary belonging to the Carmelites at Rome, into which order, much against his brother’s will, he entered very early, and now was of great service to those monks who were intended to be sent on missions into the east. Being himself appointed to this service, he visited every part of Syria and Palestine, and founded a monastery of his order on mount Libanus, over which he presided till he was recalled to Rome. While abroad he wrote a letter to his brother, informing him that instead of the opposition and persecution which he expected, he had met with nothing but civilities and caresses from persons of distinction, when they found that he was the brother of James Golius, whom they still remembered with the highest regard. At Rome he was employed as one of the principal assistants of Sergius Risius, archbishop of Damascus, in preparing his edition of the Arabic Bible, which was published in 1671 by the direction of the college “De Propaganda.” After it was completed, Colitis was appointed visitor of the missions of the East Indies, and died at Surat about 1673. He was author of translations into Arabic of Thomas a Kempis’ Imitation of Jesus Christ; of sermons on the Evangelists; an “Historic Discourse of St. Gregory of Decapolis;” several small devotional pieces, and a translation from Arabic into Latin, of a “Collection of Parables and Proverbs.”

, a celebrated engraver and painter, was born in 1658, at Mulbrec, in the duchy of Juliers; and learned his art at Haerlem, where he married. An asthmatic disorder afterwards inclining him to travel in Italy, his friends remonstrated against this, but he answered, that “he had rather die learning something, than live in such a languishing state.” Accordingly, he passed through most of the chief cities of Germany, where he visited the painters, and the curious; and went to Rome and Naples, where he studied the works of the best masters, and designed a great number of pieces after them. To prevent his being known, he passed for his man’s servant, pretending that he was maintained and kept by him for his skill in painting; and by this stratagem he came to hear what was said of his works, without being known, which afforded him no small amusement as well as instruction. His disguise, his diversion, the exercise of travelling, and the different air of the countries through which he travelled, had such an effect upon his constitution, that he recovered his former health and vigour. He relapsed, however, some time after, and died at Haerlem in 1617. Mr. Evelyn has given the following testimony of his merit as a graver: “Henry Goltzius,” says he, “was a HoU lander, and wanted only a good and judicious choice, to 'have rendered him comparable to the profoundest masters that ever handled the burin for never did any exceed this rare workman witness those things of his after Gasporo Celio, &c. and in particular his incomparable imitations after Lucas Van Leyden, in The Passion, the Christus Mortuus, or Pieta; and those other six pieces, in each of which. he so accurately pursues Durer, Lucas, and some others of the old masters, as makes it almost impossible to discern the ingenious fraud.” As a painter he drew his resources from the study of the antique, of Raphael, Polidoro, and Michael Angelo; the last of whom appears to have been his" favourite, but whose faults he exaggerated in an outrageous manner, seldom attaining any of his beauties. Hence his style of design is inflated and caricature and his expressions participate of the same taste but his sense of hue in colour is rich, vigorous, and transparent. 7t is as an engraver, however, that he deserves the highest commendation, having never been surpassed, and seldom equalled in the command of the graver, and in freedom of execution.

, a German antiquary, was born at Venloo, in the duchy of Gueldres, in 1526. His father was a painter, and he was himself bred up in this art, learning the principles of it from Lambert Lombard; but he seems to have quitted the pencil early in life, having a particular turn to antiquity, and especially to the study of medals, to which he entirely devoted himself. He considered medals as the very foundation of true history; and travelled through France, Germany, and Italy, in order to make collections, and to“draw from them what lights he could. His reputation was so high in this respect, that the cabinets of the curious were every where open to him; and on the same account he was honoured with the freedom of the city of Rome in Io67. He was the author of several excellent works, in all which he applies medals to the illustration of ancient history, and for the greater accuracy, had them printed in his own house, and corrected them himself. He also engraved the plates for the medals with his own hands. Accordingly, his books were admired all over Europe, and thought an ornament to any library; and succeeding antiquaries have bestowed the highest praises upon them. Lipsius, speaking of the” Fasti Consulares,“says, that” he knows not which to admire most, his diligence in seeking so many coins, his happiness in finding, or his skill in engraving them." Some, however, have said that although his works abound with erudition, they must be read with some caution. The fact seems to be, that all his works have many coins not yet found in cabinets, because his own collection was unfortunately lost, yet the medals which he describes, and which were once looked upon as fictitious, are yearly found really existent, and of undoubted antiquity. A French writer compares him to Pliny the natural historian, who was thought to deal much in falsehood, till time drew the truth out of the well; so that as knowledge advances, most of his wonders acquire gradual confirmation. Yet it is certain that he was often imposed upon, and the caution above given is not unnecessary. His coins of the Roman tyrants, for instance, are clearly false; for they bear Pren. and Cog. on the exergue, which marks never occur on the real coins. It has been also said that many errors of this nature must be committed by a man, whose love and veneration for Roman antiquities was such, that he gave to all his children Roman names, such as Julius, Marcellus, &c. so that he might easily receive for antiques what were not so, out of pure fondness for any thing of that kind. Upon this principle, it is probable, that he took, for his second wife, the widow of the antiquary Martini us Smetius; whom he married more for the sake of Smetius 1 s medals and inscriptions than for any thing belonging to herself. She was his second wife, and a shrew, who made his latter days unhappy. He died at Bruges March 14, 1583.

His works are, 1. “Imperatorum fere omnium Vita?, ac viva3 Imagines, a C. Julio Csesare ad Carolum V. ex veteribus numismatibus,” Antwerp, 1557, fol. afterwards translated into French, Italian, and Spanish. 2. “Fasti magistratuum et Triumphorum Romanorum, ab urbe condita usque ad Augusti obitum,” Bruges, 1566 and 1571, folio. 3. “De origine et statu populi Romani,” &c. Bruges, 1566, fol. Antwerp, 1618. 4. “Thesaurus rei Antiquarii,” Ant. 1579 and 1618, 4to. 5. “Vita et res gesta^ C. Julii Caesaris.” 6. “Vita et res gestae Augusti Cassaris,” Bruges, 1580, fol. and Antwerp, 1617. 7. “Historia Sicilian et Magnae Graeciae ex antiquis numismatibus,” Antwerp, 1 644, fol. which Mr. Pinkerton recommends as an introduction to the study of the Greek coins. His whole works were republished at Antwerp in 1644 and 1645, in 5 vols. fol. by Balthasar Moretus, whose predecessors, the Plan tins, bad purchased Goltzius’s printing-materials and plates.

, one of the great opponents of Arminius, and from whom the Calvinists were at one time called Gomarists, was born at Bruges, Jan. 30, 1S63. His father and mother, Avho were protestants, retired into the palatinate in 1578, and sent him to Strasburgh to study under the celebrated John Stimulus. Three years after he went to prosecute his studies at Newstad, where the professors of Heidelberg found a refuge when Lewis, the elector palatine, had banished them because they were not Lutherans. In 1582 he came to England, and heard at Oxford the divinity lectures of Dr. John Rainolds, and at Cambridge those of Dr. William Whitaker, and at this latter university he was admitted to the degree of bachelor of divinity, June, 1584. The elector Lewis dying in 1583, prince Casimir, his brother, restored the professors of Heidelberg, to which place Gomar returned from Cambridge, and spent two years. In 1587 he accepted an invitation from the Flemish church at Francfort to be their minister, and exercised the functions of that office until 1593, when his flock were dispersed by persecution. The following year he was appointed professor of divinity at Leyden, but before entering upon the office, he took his degree of doctor at Heidelberg. Here he remained quietly until 1603, when his colleague Arminius began to place himself at the head of a party, known by his name ever since, and Gomarus resisted him with a zeal which his enemies have construed into bigotry and intolerance. The truth seems to have been that Arminius and his followers, while they disputed with equal warmth, chose to represent the subjects of their disputes as matters of indifference which need not interrupt church-fellowship, while Gomarus considered them as essentials. Vorstius having succeeded Arminius, Gomarus foresaw only a renewal of the controversy under such a colleague, and retired to Middleburgh in 1611, where he preached and read lectures until 1614. He was then invited by the university of Saumur to be professor of divinity, and four years after he exchanged this for the professorship of divinity and Hebrew at Groningen, where he remained during the rest of his life. The only times when he was absent were, once when he attended the synod of Dort, where the errors of Arminius were condemned; and again when he went to Leyden in 1633 to revise the translation of the Old Testament. He died Jan. 11, 1641. His various works, most of which had been published separately, were printed together at Amsterdam in 1644, fol. He was a man of acknowledged abilities, especially in the Oriental languages.

, a French poet, was born in 1567, at St. Just de Lussac, near Brouage in Saintongue. He was a gentleman by birth, and his breeding was suitable to it. Alter a foundation of grammarlearning, he finished his studies at Bourdeaux; and having gone through most of the liberal sciences, under the best masters of his time, he betook himself to Paris, in the view of making the most of his parts; for, being the cadet of a fourth marriage by his father, his patrimonial finances were a little short. At Paris, he soon introduced himself to the knowledge of the polite world, by sonnets, epigrams, and other small poetical pieces, which were generally applauded: but, reaping little other benefit, he was obliged to use the strictest oeconomy, to support a tolerable figure at court, till the assassination of the king by Ravillac, in 1610, provoked every muse in France. The subject was to the last degree interesting, and our poet exerted his talent to the utmost in some verses which pleased the queen- regent, Mary de Medicis, so highly, that she rewarded him with a pension of 1200 crowns nor was there a man of his condition, that had more free access to her, or was more kindly received by her. He was also in the same favour with the succeeding regent, Anne of Austria, during the minority of Lewis XIV.

In the mean time, he was constantly seen at those meetings of all the persons of quality and merit, which were kept at the house of Mad. Rambouillet. This was like a small choice court, less numerous indeed than that of the Louvre, but, had charms which entirely engaged the heart of Gombauld; and he frequented it with great pleasure, as well as with more assiduity than any other, the Louvre not excepted. Thus he passed his time in a way the most agreeable to a poet, and at length devoted himself entirely to the belles lettres. He published several things, of which the most admired was his “Endymion,” a romance in prose. It was printed in 1624. 2. “Amarantha, a Pastoral.” 3. A volume of “Poems.” 4. A volume of “Letters,” all published before 1652. He was now accounted one of those choice spirits, who make up the ministry in the republic of letters, and form the schemes of its advancement. In this employ we find him among those few men of wit, whose meetings in 1626 gave rise to the Academy of Belles Lettres, founded by cardinal Richelieu; and, accordingly, he became a member of that society at its first institution. He was one of the three who was appointed to examine the statutes of the new academy in 1643, and he afterwards finished memoirs for completing them. On March 12, 1635, he read a discourse before the academy upon “Je ne scai quoi,” which was the sixth of those that for some years were pronounced at their meetings the first day of every week.

He lived many years in the enjoyment of these honours, and had his fortune increased by an additional pension from M. Seguier, chancellor of France. These marks of esteem do honour to his patrons, for he openly professed the reformed religion, although in such a manner as to avoid giving offence, or shocking the prejudices of those with whom he associated. He had always enjoyed very good health; but, as he was one day walking in his room, which was customary with him, his foot slipped; and, falling down, he hurt himself so, that he was obliged almost constantly to keep his bed to the end of his life, which lasted near a century. However, in 1657, when at the age of 90, he published a large collection of epigrams; and, many years after, a tragedy called “Dana'ides.” This was some time before his death; which did not hap*­pen till 1666. In manners he was modest and regular, sincere in his piety, and proof against all temptations. He was of a hot and hasty temper, much inclined to anger, though he had a grave and reserved countenance. He was also a man of wit, and not always very guarded in the use of it. Having shown one of his performances to cardinal Richelieu, he said “Here are some things 1 do not understand.” “That is not my fault,” answered Gombauld, and the cardinal wisely affected not to hear him. His posthumous works were printed in Holland in 1678, with this title, “. Traites & Lettres de Monsieur Gombauld sur la Religion.” They contain religious discourses, and were most esteemed of all his works by himself: he composed them from a principle of charity, with a design to convert the catholics, and confirm the protestants in their faith.

, Sieurde, an ingenious French writer, was born at Chevreuse, in the diocese of Paris, or as some say in Paris itself, in 1599. He was early distinguished by some successful publications which had given him a literary reputation, and made him be enrolled among the number assembled by cardinal Richelieu for the purpose of founding the French academy in 1635. His first publications were romances and works of a light nature, but at the age of forty-five he formed the resolution of consecrating his pen to religion, and adopted a penitentiary course of life, which some think was more strict at the commencement than at the termination of it. He died June 14, 1674. One of the most curious of his works, “La doctrine des Mceurs, tiree de la philosophic des Stoiques, representee en cent tableaux,” 1646, fol. is perhaps now more admired for the plates than for the letterpress. They are engraved by Peter Daret from designs by Otho V emius. In this work Gornberville assumes the disguised name of Thalassius Basilides (Marin le Roi) His romances were il Cariti'e,“” Polexandre,“” Cytherea,“and” La jeune Alcidiane,“published in 1733 by madame Gomez, who says that Gomberville left merely an outline of it. His other works were, 1.” Relation de la riviere des Amazones,“1632, 2 vols. 12mo. 2.” Memoires de Louis de Gonzague, due de Nevers,“1665, 2 vols. fol. 3.” Discours des vertus et des vices de Phistoire," 1620, 4to, and various pieces of sacred poetry, &c.

, a divine and poet of the seventeenth century, was born at London in 1600, whence, he was sent by his father in 1614 to Christ church, Oxford, where, soon after his being entered, he was elected a student on the royal foundation. At about seven years standing, he here took his degrees of bachelor and master of arts, and before he left the university, which was in 1627, he had the degree of bachelor of divinity conferred on him. Being now in orders, he distinguished himself as a, preacher at the university. For some time, during the plague at Oxford, he resided at Flower in Northamptonshire, and was afterwards vicar of Thorncornbe in Devonshire, where it is probable that he resided till his death, which was in 1646. He was accounted a good preacher, and printed a volume of “Sermons,” Lond. 1634, which were well esteemed. As a devotee to the Muses, be published several poems; particularly a sort of heroic attempt, called the “Levite’s Revenge,” being meditations, in verse, on the 19th and 20th chapters of Judges, and a tragedy called “Lodowick Sforza, duke of Milan,” 1632, 12mo. "Both were reprinted with a few occasional verses in 1633, 12mo, reprinted in 1638.

, a Spanish Latin poet, was born in 1488 at Guadalaxara in Spain, and was page of honour to archduke Charles, afterwards emperor. He possessed a great facility in writing Latin verse, which is seen by his “Thalia Christiana,” or the triumph of Jesus Christ, in twenty-five books: 4< Musa Paulina,“or the epistles of St. Paul, in elegiac verse the Proverbs of Solomon, and other works of a similar kind but his poem on the order of the golden fleece, published in 1540, 8vo, entitled” De Principis Burgundi Militia quam Velleris aurei vocant," is perhaps the only one now read, and more suitable to his talents than the preceding, in which he introduced a tasteless mixture of pagan and Christian personages. He died July 14, 1538.

, was born at St Eulalia, near Toledo, in 1515, and was educated at Alcala, where he obtained a high character for diligence and learning. He was patronized by Philip II. who engaged him to prepare an edition of the works of Isidore, which death prevented him from completing. It was afterwards finished and published by John Grialus. He was author of many works; but the most esteemed is a “Life of Cardinal Ximenes,” 1569, folio, and afterwards inserted in a collection of the writers on Spanish history. Gomez died in 1580.

, a French lady, whose romances and tales are known in this country by translations, was the daughter of Paul Poisson, a player, and was born at Paris in 1684. She was courted by M. de Gomez, a Spanish gentleman of small fortune, who, knowing her talents, foresaw many advantages from an union with her, while she, in accepting him, appears to have been deceived concerning his circumstances. Her works, however, procured some pensions, by which she was enabled to live at St. Germain-en-L.aye till 1770, in which year she died, respected by all who knew her. This lady left some tragedies, which may be found in her “Miscellaneous Works,” 12mo, but were all unsuccessful, and a great number of romances. “Les Journees Amusantes,” 8 vols. “Crementine,” 2 vols. “Anecdots Persanes,” 2 vols. “Hist, du Comte d'Oxford,” one vol. “La Jeune Alcidiane,” 3 vols. (see Gomberville) “Les CentNouvelles Nouvelles,” 36 parts comprised in 8 vols. These are all well written, and with great delicacy, and were at one time very popular in France.

, a learned Dominican, was born at Beziers in 1616. After having gone into the church, and been admitted to the degree of doctor of divinity by the university of Bourdeaux in 1640, he held the professorship of theology in that university till 1671, when he was appointed provincial among the Dominican friars. He died at Beziers in 1681. He was author of a system of divinity, entitled “Clypaeus Theologiae Thomisficae, contra novos ejus impugriatores,” Bourdeaux, 1666, in eighteen volumes, 12mo, afterwards enlarged in five volumes, folio. He was likewise author of a “Manuale Thomistarum, sea brevis Theologiae Cursus,” which has passed through different editions, of which the best was published at Lyons in 1681; and “Dissertatio Theologica de Probabilitate.”

, a Spanish poet, was born at Cordova, in 1562, of a very distinguished family. He studied at Salamanca, and was known to have a talent for poetry, though he never could be prevailed on to publish any thing. Going into orders, he was made chaplain to the king, and prebendary of the church of Cordova, in which station he died, in 1627. His works are all posthumous, and consist of sonnets, elegies, heroic verses, a comedy, a tragedy, &c. and have been published several times under the title of “Obras de Dom. Louis de Gongora-y- Argore,” 4to. The best edition is that with notes by D. Garcia de Salcedo Coronel, Madrid, 1636—1648, 3 vols. 4to. The Spaniards have so high an idea of this poet, as to entitle him prince of the poets of their nation, and notes and commentaries have been written on his works but he is not free from affectation in theuse of figures, a false sublime, and an obscure and embarrassed diction.

, a lady of the sixteenth century, remarkable for her wit and high birth, is chiefly known, and that very imperfectly, from a collection of her letters, printed at Venice in 1552. By these she appears to have been learned, and somewhat of a criticin Aristotle and yEschylus. All the wits of her time are full of their encomiums on her: and Hortensio Landi, besides singing her praises most zealously, dedicated to her a piece, “Upon moderating the passions of the soul,” written in Italian. If, however, it be true that this Horatio Landi wrote the whole of the letters attributed to Lucretia, it is difficult to know what to believe of the history of the latter. Her marriage at the age of fourteen with John Paul Manfroni was unhappy, He engaged in a conspiracy against the duke of Ferrara; was detected and imprisoned by him; but, though condemned, not put to death. Lucretia, in this emergency, applied to all the powers in Europe to intercede for him; and even solicited the grand signior to make himself master of the castle, where her husband was kept. During this time, although she was not permitted to visit him, they could write to each other. But all her endeavours were vain; for he died in prison in 1552, having shewn such an impatience under his misfortunes as made it imagined he lost his senses. She never would listen afterwards to any proposals of marriage, though several were made her. Of four children, which she had, there were but two daughters left, whom she placed in nunneries. All that came from her pen was so much esteemed, that a collection was made e^-en of the notes she wrote to her servants: several of which are to be met witli in the above-mentioned edition of her letters. She died at Mantua in 1576.

, a Scotch antiquary, the eldest son of John Goodal, a farmer in Banfshire, Scotland, was born about 1706. In 1723 he entered himself a student in King’s college, Old Aberdeen, but did not continue there long enough to take a degree. In 1730 he obtained employment in the Advocates’ library, Edinburgh, of whicli he was formally appointed librarian in 1735. He now assisted the celebrated Thomas lluddiman in compiling the catalogue of that library, upon the plan of the “Bibliotheca Cardinalis Imperialis,” and it was published in folio in 1742. About the same time he projected a life of Mary queen of Scots, to whose cause he was inflexibly devoted; but this design appears to have been relinquished for his publication, entitled “An Examination of the Letters said to be written by Mary to James earl of Both well,” 1754, 2 vols. 8vo, in which he endeavoured to prove these letters to be forgeries. In this work it is said that he had done more, had he had less prejudice, and greater coolness. He certainly had diligence of research, sagacity of investigation, and keenness of remark; but his zeal sometimes carried him out of his course, his prejudice often blunted his acuteness, and his desire of recrimination never failed to enfeeble the strength of his criticism. In 1754 he published an edition, with emendatory notes, of sir John Scot’s “Staggering state of Scots Statesmen,” and wrote a preface and life to sir James Balfour’s “Practicks.” He contributed also to Keith’s “New Catalogue of Scotch Bishops,” and published an edition of Fordun’s “Scotichronicon,” which was not executed with judgment. His introduction to it was afterwards translated into English, and published at London in 1769. He died July 28, 1766, in very poor circumstances, owing to a habit of intemperance.

, a noted puritan, who has been sometimes classed among the reformers of religion in Scotland, was born at Chester about 1520, and in 1536 entered a student of Brazemiose college, Oxford, where he took both degrees in arts. In 1547 he was constituted one of the senior students of Christ church, of the foundation of Henry VIII. About the end of the reign of king Edward VI. he was admitted to the reading of the sentences, and chosen divinity lecturer of the university. On the accession of queen Mary he was obliged to quit the kingdom, with many other protestants, and retire to Francfort. Here he became involved in the disputes which arose among the English exiles respecting forms of divine worship, some adhering to the model of the church of England, as far as appeared in the Book of Common Prayer, and others, among whom was Goodman, contending for a more simple form. After these disputes had occasioned a separation among men whose common sufferings might have made them overlook lesser matters, Goodman went to Geneva, where he and the celebrated John Knox were chosen pastors of the English church, and remained there until the death of queen Mary. While there he assisted Knox in compiling “The Book of Common Order,” which was used as a directory of worship in their congregations, and he is said to have taken a part in the Geneva translation of the Bible. On the accession of queen Elizabeth, he went into Scotland, where, in 1560, he was appointed minister at St. Andrew’s, and in other respects by his public services assisted in establishing the reformation in that nation. About 1565 he removed to England, and accompanied sir Henry Sidney in his expedition against the rebels in Ireland, in the character of chaplain. In 1571 he was cited before archbishop Parker, for having published, during his exile, a book answering the question “How far superior powers ought to be obeyed of their subjects, and wherein they may be lawfully, by God’s word, obeyed and resisted” This had been written against the tyrannical proceedings of queen Mary but, as his positions were of a kind too general not to be applicable to sovereigns of another description, and become an apology for rebellion, he consented to a recantation, and an avowal of his loyalty to queen Elizabeth. He lived many years after this, and was preacher at Chester, where he died in 1601, or 1602. Besides the above mentioned, he wrote “A Commentary on Amos,” but not, as Wood says, “The first blast of the Trumpet against the monstrous regiment of Women,” which was written by Knox.

, an English prelate, and the only one who forsook the church of England for that of Rome since the reformation, was born at Ruthvyn in Denbighshire, 1583. He was educated at Westminster school, whence, in 1600, he went to Trinity college, Cambridge. After taking orders, he got the living of Stapleford Abbots in Essex in 1607. Becoming acknowledged at court as a celebrated preacher, he obtained in 1617, a canonry of Windsor; in 1620, the deanery of Rochester, and in 1625 was consecrated bishop of Gloucester. In 1639, he refused to sign the seventeen canons of doctrine and discipline drawn up in a synod, and enjoined by archbishop Laud, who, after admonishing him three times, procured him to be suspended, and it appeared soon after that he was in all principles a Roman catholic. After this, and during the rebellion, he lived privately in Westminster, employing much of his time in researches in the Cottonian library. He died, in the open profession of popery, Jan. 19, 1655. He wrote, 1. “The Fall of Man, and Corruption of Nature, proved by reason,” 1616, 1624, 4to. 2. “Arguments and Animadversions on Dr. George Hackwil’s Apology for Divine Providence.” 3. “The two mysteries of Christian Religion, viz. the Trinity and Incarnation, explicated,” 1653, 4to. 4. “An Account of his Sufferings,” 1650. 5. “The Court of King James by Sir Anthony Weldon reviewed,” a ms. in the Bodleian.

, an eminent English prelate, was the second son of Edward Goodrich of East Kirby in Lincolnshire. He was admitted pensioner of Bene‘t college, Cambridge, soon after 1500, became fellow of Jesus college in 1510, commenced M. A. in 1514, and the following year was proctor of the university. Being of a studious turn, he made great proficiency in several branches of learning, particularly in the civil and canon laws. In 1529, he was appointed one of the syndics to return an answer from the university of Cambridge, concerning the lawfulness of king Henry VIII.’s marriage with queen Catherine: and from his readiness to oblige the king in that business, was recommended to his royal favour. He was presented to the rectory of St. Peter’s Cheap in London, by cardinal Wolsey, at that time commendatory of the monastery of St. Alban’s; and soon after was made canon of St. Stephen’s, Westminster, and chaplain to the king. On the death of Dr. West, bishop of Ely, his nephew and godson Dr. Nicholas Hawkins, archdeacon of Ely, at that time the king’s ambassador in foreign parts, was designed to succeed him; but he dying before his consecration could be effected, the king granted his licence to the prior and convent, dated March 6, 1534, to choose themselves a bishop; who immediately elected in their chapter-house the 17th of the same month, Thomas Goodrich, S.T.P. which was confirmed by the archbishop April 13th following, in the parish church of Croydon.

Being a zealous promoter of the reformation, soon after his arrival he visited the prior and convent of Ely; and next year sent a mandate to all the clergy of his diocese, dated at Somersham June 27, 1535, with orders to erase the name of the pope out of all their books, and to publish in their churches that the pope had no further authority in this kingdom. This mandate is printed in Bentham’s “History of Ely Cathedral,” together with his injunctions, dated from Ely, Oct. 21, 1541, to the clergy,“to see that all images, relics, table-monuments of miracles, shrines, &c. be so totally demolished and obliterated, with all speed and diligence, that no remains or memory might be found of them for the future.” These injunctions were so completely executed in his cathedral, and other churches in the diocese of Ely, that no traces remain of many famous shrines and altars, which formerly were the objects of frequent resort, nor any signs at all that they had ever existed.

In 1540 he was appointed by the convocation to be one of the revisers of the translation of the New Testament, and St. John’s gospel was allotted to his share. He was also named one of the commissioners for reforming the ecclesiastical laws, both by Henry VIII. and Edward VI. as well as by the university of Cambridge; and had a hand in compiling the “Common Prayer Book” of the church of England, 1548 and likewise “The Institution of a Christian Man,” which was called the Bishops’ Book, as being composed by archbishop Cranmer, and the bishops Stokesly, Gardiner, Sampson, Repps, Goodrich, Latimer, Shaxton, Fox, Barlow, &c. Besides this, he was of the privy council to king Henry VIII. and Edward VI. and employed by them in several embassies, and other business of the state. In 1551, he was made lord chancellor of England, in the room of lord Rich, which office he discharged with singular reputation of integrity, though in matters of religion he was suspected by some, of too much disposition to temporize in favour of popery, upon the accession of queen Mary; and Dodd, though somewhat faintly, claims him as a popish bishop. It is certain he was suffered to retain his bishopric to his death, although the seals were taken from him. He was esteemed a patron of learned men; and expended large sums in building and embellishing his palaces, particularly at Ely, where the long gallery carries tokens of his munificence. He died at Somersham May 10, 1554; and was buried in the middle of the presbytery of his cathedral church, under a marble, with his effigies in brass, mitred, in his pontifical habit, and the great seal, as lord chancellor, in one of his hands, and an inscription round it.

, one of the most violent of the republican sectaries in the time of Charles I. but whom no sect seems to own, was born in 1593, and educated at Queen’s college, Cambridge. In 1633 he was presented to the living of St. Stephen’s, Coleman-street, from which he was turned out by what was called the “committee for plundered ministers,” because he refused to baptise the children of his parish promiscuously, and refused to administer the sacrament to his whole parish. He was an independent, and carried on many warm disputes with the presbyterian party. What was more singular in these days, was his embracing the Arminian doctrines, which he defended with great vigour both by the pulpit and press; and such was the general turbulence of his temper, and conceit in his own opinions, that he is said to have been against every man, and every man against him. Being a decided republican, he peculiarly gratified the savage spirit of the times by promoting the condemnation of the king, which he afterwards endeavoured to justify in a pamphlet called “The Obstructors of Justice,” the wickedness, absurdity, and impiety of which Mr. Neal has very candidly exposed. At the restoration it was thought he would have been excepted from the act of indemnity, but, although he afterwards was permitted to live, a proclamation was issued in 1660 against the above pamphlet, and in that he is stated to have been “late of Coleman-street, clerk,” and-to have fled. His pamphlet was burnt by the hands of the hangman. Returning afterwards, he kept a private conventicle in Coleman-street, where he died in 1665. His works, now in very little repute, are chiefly theological, among which the following may be mentioned: 11 Redemption Redeemed,“in folio.” The divine Authority of the Scriptures,“4to;” An Exposition of the Ninth Chapter of the Epistle of St. Paul to the Romans," 4to.

, a famous nonconformist of the independent class, was born in 1600 at Rolesby in Norfolk, and was sent, when he was thirteen years old, to Christ Church college, Cambridge, where he took his bachelor’s degree in 1617, and applied himself with so much diligence to his studies, as to attract much notice in the university. In 1619 he was removed to Catherine-hall, of which he became a fellow. Having taken orders, he was elected lecturer of Trinity church, in Cambridge, in 1628; in 1630 he took his degree of B.D. and in 1632 he was presented by the king to the vicarage of the same church. In these employments he was greatly admired and followed by the puritans, who began to look up to him as a leader, but becoming dissatisfied with the terms of conformity, he relinquished his preferments, and quitted the university in 1634, and to avoid the consequences of his nonconformity, went afterwards to Holland, where he was chosen pastor to an independent congregation at Arnheim. When the parliament had usurped all church authority, he returned to London, and became a member of the assembly of divines, with whom, however, he did not always agree. But his attachment to the independent party contributed to render him a favourite with Cromwell, through whose influence he was, in 1649, made one of the commissioner* for the approbation of public preachers, and also appointed president of Magdalen college, Oxford. Here he formed a meeting upon the independent plan, or rather converted the college into a meeting of that description, but was not inattentive to the interests of learning. His intimacy and favour with Cromwell seems to have been fatal to his good sense, and probably the usurper’s hypocrisy deceived him. When he attended Cromwell upon his death-bed, he was overheard to express himself with presumptuous confidence on the protector’s recovery; and when the event proved him mistaken, he exclaimed in a subsequent prayer to God, “thou hast deceived us, and we are deceived.” But he was not the only one of the nonconformists of that age who fancied themselves endued with extraprdinary powers. After the restoration he was ejected from Oxford, and retired to London, where he was permitted to continue in the exercise of the ministry till his death in 1679. He was buried in Bunhill-fields, where a monument was erected to his memory, with a long Latin inscription. He was certainly a considerable scholar, and a learned and eminent divine. In the register at Oxford he is described “in scriptis in re theologica quamplurimis Orbi notus.” He-was a high Calvinist; but, while he zealously enforced what he conceived to be the doctrines of Christianity, he did not forget to enforce by every incitement in his power the necessity of pure moral conduct. He was author of numerous pious and controversial pieces, sermons, expositions, &c. some of which were printed during his life-time, and inserted, after his death, in a collection of his works published in five volumes folio.

was a celebrated poet and translator, who lived in the sixteenth century, but of whom little is known, unless that he was educated at Christ’s College, Cambridge, whence he removed to Staples Inn. Mr. Ellis conjectures that he might have been born about 1538. We have no doubt that he was the same Barnaby Googe who was a relation and retainer to sir William Cecil, queen Elizabeth’s minister, and who was gentleman-pensioner t6 the queen. Mr. Churton thinks, with great probability, that he was the father of Barnaby Googe, master of Magdalen college, Cambridge, who was incorporated at Oxford in August 1605, when king James was there. In 1563 he published a very elegant little volume, now of the greatest rarity, entitled “Eglogs, Epitaphs, and Sonnetes.” One of the sonnets, superior, as the rest are, in point of harmony, to most of the productions of those days, is addressed to Alexander No well, afterwards the celebrated dean of St. Paul’s, and reprinted in Mr. Churton’s elaborate life of that divine. It is said there are only two copies of this volume in existence, one in the possession of Mr. Heber, who purchased it at George Steevens’s sale, and the other in the library of Trinity college, Cambridge Googe’s principal translation was the “Zodiake of Life,” from Marcellus Palingenius Stellatus, a very moral, but tiresome satire, perfectly unconnected with astronomy, the author merely distinguishing each of the twelve books of his poem by the name of a celestial sign. The first three books appeared in 1560, and the first six in 1561; the whole was printed complete in 1565, 12mo. In 1570 he translated from Naogeorgus, a poem on Antichrist; in 1577, Herebach’s ceconomical treatise on agriculture; and in 1579, Lopes de Mendoza’s Spanish proverbs, and afterwards Aristotle’s “Table of the Ten Categories.” The few specins published from these very rare works are highly favourable to the author’s talents and principles.

, a native of Scotland, was an excellent draughtsman, and a good Grecian, who resided many years in Italy, visited most parts of that country, and had also travelled into France, Germany, &c. In 1736 he was appointed secretary to the society for the encouragement of learning, with an annual salary of 50l. which he resigned in 1739. In the same year (1736) he succeeded Dr. Stukeley as secretary to the society of antiquaries, which office he resigned in 1741 to Mr. Joseph Ames, and was for a short time secretary to the Egyptian club, composed of gentlemen who had visited Egypt, viz. lord Sandwich, Dr. Shaw, Dr. Pococke, &c. In 1741 he went to Carolina with governor Glen, where, besides a grant of land, he had several offices, such as register of the province, &c. and died about 1750, a justice of the peace, leaving a handsome estate to his family. He published, 1. “Itinerarium Septentrionale, or a Journey through most parts of the counties of Scotland, in two parts, with 66 copper-plates, 1726,” folio. 2. “Additions and Corrections, by way of supplement, to the Itinerarium Septentrionale; containing several dissertations on, and descriptions of, Roman antiquities, discovered in Scotland since publishing the said Itinerary. Together with observations on other ancient monuments found in the North of England, never before published, 1732,” folio. A Latin edition of the “Itinerarium,” including the Supplement, was printed in Holland, in 1731. 3. “The Lives of pope Alexander VI. and his son Caesar Borgia, comprehending the wars in the reign of Charles VIII. and Lewis XII. kings of France; and the chief transactions and revolutions in Italy, from 1492 to 1516. With an appendix of original pieces referred to in the work, 1729,” folio. 4. “A complete History of the ancient Amphitheatres, more particularly regarding the Architecture of these buildings, and in particular that of Verona, by the marquis Scipio Maffei; translated from the Italian, 1730,” 8vo, afterwards enlarged in a second edition. 5. “An Essay towards explaining the Hieroglyphical Figures on the Coffin of the ancient Mummy belonging to capt. William Lethieullier, 1737,” folio, with cuts. 6. “Twenty-five plates of all the Egyptian Mummies, and other Egyptian Antiquities in England,” about 1739, folio.

, a French physician of the thirteenth century, is said to have conferred honour on the medical faculty of Montpellier, where he began to teach and to practise in 1285. As was the custom of the time, he took his surname from the place of his birth (Gordon, in Rouvergne), and called himself Bernardus de Gordonio, and not Gordonus, as it is commonly written. According to the accounts of some writers, who place the death of this physician in 1305, he taught at Montpellier only twenty years; but others say that he was living in 1318. He left a considerable number of treatises, which were published together at Eerrara in 1487, at Venice in 1494, at Paris in 1542, and at Lyons in 1550.

, a Scotch Jesuit, of the noble family of Gordon, was born in 1543, and educated at Rome, where he became a Jesuit, Sept. 20, 1563, and was created D.D. in 1569. He was professor of Hebrew and divinity for nearly fifty years in several parts of Europe, Rome, Paris, Bourdeaux, Pont a Mousson, &c. and acquired great reputation for learning and acuteness. He was employed as a missionary in England and Scotland, and was twice imprisoned for his zeal in making converts. He was also frequently employed by the general of his order in negociating their affairs, for which he had every requisite talent. Alegambe describes him as a saint, without a particle of human frailty, but Dodd allows that he lived very much in a state of dissipation, yet was regular in all the austerities of his profession. He died at Paris, April 16, 1620. His only writings are “Controversiarum Fidei Epitome,” in three parts or volumes, 8vo, the first printed at Limoges, 1612, the second at Paris, and the third at Cologn in 1620. There was another James Gordon, of the family of Lesmore, also a Scotch Jesuit, who was born at or near Aberdeen in 1553, and died at Paris, Nov. 17, 1641. He wrote a commentary on the Bible, “Biblia Sacra, cum Commentariis, &c.” Paris, 3 vols. fol. 1632, which Dupin seems to think an useful and judicious work. He wrote also some historical and chronological works, enumerated by Alegambe, and a system of moral theology, &c.

, a native of Scotland, and onc distinguished by his party writings on political and religious subjects, was born at Kircudbright in Galloway, about th fend of the seventeenth century. He had an university education, and went through the common course of aca* demical studies; but whether at Aberdeen or St. Andrew’s is uncertain. When a young man he came to London, and at first supported himself by teaching the languages, but afterwards commenced party writer, and was employed by the earl of Oxford in queen Anne’s time; but we know not in what capacity. He first distinguished himself in the Bangorian controversy by two pamphlets in defence of Hoadly, which recommended him to Mr. Tjrenchard, an author of the same stamp, who took him into his house, at first as his amanuensis, and afterwards into partnership, as an author. In 1720, they began to publish, in conjunction, a series of letters, under the name of “Cato,” upon various and important subjects relating to the public. About the same time they published another periodical paper, under the title of “The Independent Whig,” which was continued some years after Trenchard’s death by Gordon alone. The same spirit which appears, with more decent language, in Cato’s letters against the administration in the state, shews itself in this work in much more glaring colours against the hierarchy in the church. It is, in truth, a gross and indecent libel on the established religion, which, however, Gordon was admirably qualified to write, as he had no religion of his own to check his intemperate sallies. After Trenchard’s death, the minister, sir Robert Walpole, knowing his popular talents, took him into pay to defend his measures, for which end he wrote several pamphlets. At the time of his death, July 28, 1750, he was first commissioner of the wine-licences, an office which he had enjoyed many years, and which diminished his patriotism surprisingly. He was twice married. His second wife was the widow of his friend Trenchard by whom he had children, and who survived him. Two collections of his tracts have been preserved the first entitled, “A Cordial for Low-spirits,” in three volumes; and the second, “The Pillars of Priestcraft and Orthodoxy shaken,” in two volumes. But these, like many other posthumous pieces, had better have been suppressed. His translations of Sallust and Tacitus, now, perhaps, contribute more to preserve his name, although without conferring much reputation on it. His Tacitus appeared in 2 vols. fol. in 1728, with discourses taken from foreign commentators and translators of that historian. Sir Robert Walpole patronised a subscription for the work, which was very successful; but no classic was perhaps ever so miserably mangled. His style is extremely vulgar, yet affected, and abounds with abrupt and inharmonious periods, totally destitute of any resemblance to the original, while the translator fancied he was giving a correct imitation.

, an Anglo-American divine and historian, and minister at Roxburg in Massachusetts, was born at Hitchin, in Hertfordshire, in 1729, and educated at a dissenting academy in or near London. He was afterwards pastor of an independent congregation at Ipswich, where he officiated for several years. In 1772 he went to America, and settled at Roxburg. When the revolution commenced in America, he took a very active part against his native country, and was appointed chaplain to the provincial congress of Massachusetts. In 1776 he appears first to have conceived the design of writing the history of the revolution and war, and began to collect materials on the spot, in which he was assisted by the communication of state papers, and the correspondence of Washington and the other generals who had made a distinguished figure in the field. In 1786 became to England, and in 1788 published, in 4 vols. 8vo, “The History of the rise, progress, and establishment of the Independence of the United States of America.” This, however, is rajther a collection of facts, than a regular history, for the writing of which, indeed, the author had no talent; his style is vulgar and confused, and his reflections common-place. The best parts of it occur where he made most use of Dodsley’s Annual Register. The colouring he attempts to give, as may be expected, is entirely unfavourable to the English, nor does he endeavour to disguise his partialities. He is said to have published also some sermons; a pamphlet recommending a society for the benefit of widows, another against the doctrine of universal redemption, and an abridgment of Edwards, “on religious affections.” He appears not to have returned to America after the publication of his history, but to have resided partly at St. Neots, and partly at Ipswich, at which last he died in 1807.

, a heraldic writer, was born of an ancient family at Alderton, in Wiltshire, in 1631, and was educated at Magdalen college, Oxford. Thence he went to Lincoln’s-inn, but probably with no serious purpose to study the law, as he retired afterwards to his patrimony at Alderton. Here his property entitled him to the honour of being appointed high sheriff of Wiltshire in 1680, at which time some unjust aspersions on his character induced him to write a defence entitled “Loyalty displayed, and falsehood unmasked,” &c. Lond. 1681, 4to. He died March 31, 1684, at Alderton, leaving a variety of curious Mss. and printed collections on his favourite study of heraldry. His publications were, 1. “A Table shewing how to blazon a coat ten several ways,” 1655, a single sheet copied from Feme. 2. “Series Alphabetica, LatinoAnglica, Nomina Gentilitiorum, sive cognominum plurimarum familiarum, quse multos per annos in Anglia floruere,” Oxon. 1667, 8vo. A copy of this rare book is in the British Museum. 3. “Catalogus in certa capita, seu Classes, alphabetico ordine concinnatusj, plerorumque omnium Authorum (tarn antiquorum quam recentiorum) qui de re Heraldica, Latine, Gallice, Ital. Hisp. &c. scripserunt,” Ox. 1C68, reprinted with enlargements, 1674. 4. “Nomenclator geographicus,” &c. Ox. 1667, 8vo.

or Gregorio, the son of Raynier, of the family of Sinigardi, of Arezzo, in Italy, lived in the fourteenth century, and was notary of Arezzo, an office of considerable rank. In his fiftieth year he formed the design of writing the history of his country in Italian verse, and unfortunately took Dante for his model, whom he was unable to follow. The events he relates concern the period from 1310 to 1384, and may be consulted with advantage by those who will overlook the badness of the poetry. When he died is not known. Muratori has inserted his history in his collection of Italian historians.

, a native of Leontium, in Sicity, who flourished in the fifth century B. C. was a celebrated orator of the school of Empedocles. He was deputed in the year 427, by his fellow-citizens, to request succour of the Athenians against the people of Syracuse, whom he so charmed with his eloquence that he easily obtained what he required. He also made a display of his eloquence at the Olympic and Pythian games, and with so much success, that a statue of gold was erected to him at Delphi, and money was coined with his name upon it. In the latter part of his life he established himself at Athens, and lived till he had attained the age of one hundred and five years. He is reputed, according to Quintilian, to be the author and inventor of extemporaneous speaking, in which art he exercised his disciples. Hermogenes has preserved a fragment of his, from which we may infer that his manner was quaint and artificial, full of antithesis and pointed expression.

, a learned antiquary of Florence, was born in 1691, and died Jan. 21, 17,57, in that city. He was the author of an account of the grand duke’s cabinet, entitled “Museum Florentinum,” Florent. 1731, continued to 11 vols. fol. “Musaeum Etruscum,” 1737, 3 vols, fol. “Musceum Cortonense,” Roma;, 1750, fol. He also published the ancient Inscriptions which are found in the cities of Tuscany; Florence, 1727, 3 vols. fol. and other books on Tuscan antiquities. His “Musaeum Florentinum” contains in vol. I. “Gemma?,' 7 dedicated to Gaston, 100 plates; vol. II. 1732,” Gemmae,“100 plates; vol. III. 1734,” Statuce,“dedicated to Gaston, 100 plates; vols. IV. V. and VI. 1740,” Numismata," dedicated to Francis III. 115 plates. It is divided into three parts one consisting of figures, two of dissertations; sometimes bound in 2 vols. and sometimes in three. In 1748, 50 portraits of the eminent professors of painting were engraved, with no farther explanation than their names, the year in which they were born and died; but this part is frequently wanting, because these portraits may be found in the History of the Painters, 4 vols. with their lives, by Francis Moucke. Vol. VII. is the first volume of the painters, 1752, 55 portraits. Vol. VIII. the second volume of the painters, 1754, 55 portraits. Vol. IX. the third volume of the painters, 1756, 55 portraits. Vol. X. the fourth volume of the painters, 1762, 55 portraits. Vol. XI. contains 100 portraits of painters, which may be found in the abbe Pozzi, and their lives by the abbe Orazis Marrini, Florence, 1764, 2 torn, each, divided into two parts; the whole bound in 1 vol.