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

, a very ingenious English painter, was descended from a good family in Salisbury, where he was born. He was the most successful of all the disciples of sir Peter Lely, who is said to have considered him so much as a rival, that he never suffered him to see him paint. Greenhill, however, prevailed with sir Peter to draw his wife’s picture, and took the opportunity of observing how he managed his pencil; which was the great point aimed at. He is said to have been equally qualified by nature for the sister-arts of painting and poetry; but his loose and unguarded manner of living was probably the occasion of his early death; and only suffered him just to leave enough of his hand, to make us wish he had been more careful of a life so likely to do honour to his country. Mrs. Behn, with whom he was a great favourite, endeavoured to perpetuate his memory by an elegy, to be found among her works. He painted a portrait of bishop Ward, which is now in the town-hall of Salisbury. He died May 19, 1676.

, a gallant naval officer, was the son of sir Roger, of an ancient family, in the west of England, and was born about 1540. At the age of sixteen, by the permission of queen Elizabeth, he served in the imperial army in Hungary, against the Turks. Upon his return, he engaged with the troops employed for the reduction of Ireland, and obtained so much reputation as to be appointed sheriff of the city of Cork, and in 1571, he represented the county of Cornwall in parliament. He was afterwards high sheriff of the county, and received the honour of knighthood; but the bias of his mind was chiefly fixed upon plans of foreign discovery and settlement, proposed by his relation sir Walter Raleigh, and when the patents were made out, he obtained the command of a squadron fitted out for the purpose, consisting of seven small vessels. With these he sailed in the spring of 1585, and reaching the coast of Florida in June, he left there a colony of one hundred men, and then sailed homewards. He made other voyages, and on occasion of the Spanish invasion, was appointed one of a council of war, to concert means of defence, and received the queen’s commands not to quit the county of Cornwall. In 1591 he was appointed vice-admiral of a squadron, fitted out for the purpose of intercepting a rich Spanish fleet from the West Indies. This fleet, when it appeared, was convoyed by a very superior force, and Greenville was urged to tack about; but he preferred, and no doubt his sailors agreed with him, taking chance of breaking through the enemy’s fleet, which almost immediately surrounded him. The Spanish admiral, with four other ships, began a clos? attack at three in the afternoon the engagement lasted till break of day next morning, during which the Spaniards, notwithstanding their vast superiority, were driven off fifteen times. At length the greater part of the English crew being either killed or wounded, and the ship reduced to a wreck, no hope of escape remained. The brave commander had been wounded at the beginning of the action, but he caused his wounds to be dressed on deck, and refused to go down into the hold, and in that state he was shot through the body. He was now taken to the cabin, and while in the act of being dressed, the surgeon was killed by his side. The admiral still determined to hold out, wishing rather to sink the ship than surrender, but the offers of quarter from the Spaniards induced the men to yield. Sir Richard was taken on board the Spanish ship, and honourably treated, but died of his wounds in about three days. He has sometimes been blamed for rashness, but of this his censurers appear to be very imperfect judges.

, a brave and loyal officer, grandson of the preceding, was born in 1596. He was educated at Exeter college, Oxford, where his accomplishments were acknowledged, and his principles of loyalty and religion indelibly fixed, under the care of Dr. Prideaux. After taking possession of his estate he sat in parliament; and in 1638 attended the king with a troop of horse, raised at his own expence, in an expedition to Scotland, on which occasion he received the honour of knighthood. Abhorring the principles which then broke out in open rebellion, he joined the royal army, and had a command at the battle of Stratton, in 1643, when the parliamentary forces were defeated, and greatly distinguished himself in other engagements, particularly that at Lansdown, near Bath, fought successfully against sir William Waller, July 5, 1643, but received a fatal blow with a pole-axe. Many of his brother officers fell with him, and their bodies were found surrounding his. Lord Clarendon says, “That which would have clouded any victory, was the death of sir Bevil Greenville. He was, indeed, an excellent person, whose activity, interest, and reputation was the foundation of what had been done in Cornwall, and his temper and affection so public, that no accident which happened could make any impression on him; and his example kept others from taking any thing ill, or at least seeming to do so; in ft word, a brighter courage and gentler disposition were never married together, to make the most cheerful and innocent conversation.” His descendant, lord Lansdowne, erected a monument on the spot where he was killed.

, a younger son of the preceding, and brother to sir John Greenville first eari of Bath, of his name, was born in Cornwall, admitted gentleman commoner of Exeter college, Sept. 22, 1657, actually created in convocation master of arts Sept. 28, 1660. About this time he married Anne, the daughter of Dr. Cosin, bishop of Durham, who conferred several preferments on him, as the rectories of Easington and Elwick in. the county palatine of Durham; the archdeaconry of Durham, to which he was collated on the death of Dr. Gabriel Clarke, Sept. 16, 1662, and to the first stall of prebendaries of the church of Durham, Sept. 24, 1662, from whence he was removed to the second, April 16, 1668. On December 20, 1670, he was created doctor of divinity, being then one of the chaplains in ordinary to Charles II.; and on the 14th of December, 1684, he was installed dean of Durham in the place of Dr. John Sudbury deceased. In the register of Eton college we find that immediately after the restoration, Dr. Greenville was recommended in very strong terms to the master and fellows for a fellowship, by three several letters from the king, but for what reason this recommendation did not take effect, does not appear; probably he might wave his interest on account of other preferment which was more acceptable to him. On the 1st of February 1690, he was deprived of all his >referments upon his refusal to comply with the new oaths >f allegiance and supremacy to the prince of Orange then in possession of the throne, a change which he utterly abhorred, always considering the revolution as a rebellion and usurpation. Soon after the prince of Orange’s landing, he left Durham in order to retire into France; and sometimes lived at Corbeil (from whence it is supposed his family originally sprung), but more frequently at Paris and St. Germain’s, where he was very civilly treated and much countenanced by the queen-mother, as we find in several of his own letters, notwithstanding what has been falsely asserted by Mackay in an account of the court of St. Germain’s. He owns he _was sometimes attacked by the priests, but with much good manners and civility. Mr* Wood says, that during his retirement, he was, on the death of Dr. Lamplugh, nominated to the see of York, by king James II. though never consecrated; but this seems rery doubtful. In April 1695 he came incognito into EngJand; but soon returned. For some time before his death he enjoyed but a very indifferent state of health, having been much troubled with a sciatica, and other infirmities. He died at Paris, after a series of many sufferings, on April 7, 1703, N. S. and was buried at the lower end of the Holy Innocents’ church in that city. Lord Lansdowne in a letter to a nephew of his, who was going to enter into holy orders, says of him, “You had an uncle whose mejnory I shall ever revere: make him your example. Sanctity sate so easy, so unaffected, and so graceful upon him, that in him we beheld the very beauty of holiness. He was as cheerful, as familiar, as condescending in his conversation, as he was strict, regular, and exemplary in his piety; as well bred and accomplished as a courtier, and as reverend and venerable as an apostle. He was indeed apostolical in every thing, for he abandoned all to follow his Lord and Master.” There seems little reason to doubt this character, as far as it respects Dr. Greenville’s private character, but in bigotry for restoration of James II. he probably excelled all his contemporaries, and from some correspondence lately published in the Life of Dr. Comber, his successor in the deanery of Durham, there is reason tp doubt whether in his latter days his mind was not unsound. He published, 1. “The Complete Conformist, or seasonable advice concerning strict conformity and frequent celebration of the Holy Communion,” preached on the 7th of January, being the first Sunday after the Epiphany, 1682, in the cathedral church of Durham, on John i. 29, Loud. 1684, 4to. To which is added “Advice or a letter written to the clergy of the archdeaconry of Durham,” to the same purpose. 2. “A Sermon preached in the cathedral church of Durham, upon the revival of the ancient and laudable practice of that and some other cathedrals, in having sermons on Wednesdays and Fridays during Advent and Lent,” on Rom. xiii. 11, Loud. 1686, 4to. 3. “Counsels and Directions divine and moral: in plain and familiar letters of advice to a young gentleman his nephew, soon after his admission into a college in Oxford,” Lond. 1685, 8vo. Besides these pieces which we have just mentioned, our author, immediately after his retiring into France, published some small tracts at Rouen, which are very scarce, and not very correctly printed; and perhaps it is remarkable that such an unusual favour should be permitted in a popish country to a dignified clergyman of the church of England. The titles of the pieces printed at Rouen are, viz. 4. “The resigned and resolved Christian and faithfull and undaunted loyalist: in two plaine farewell sermons, and a loyal farewell visitation speech. Both delivered amidst the lamentable confusions occasioned by the late foreign invasion and home-defection of his majestie’s subjects in England. By Denis Granville, D. D. deane and archdeacon of Durham, now in exile, chaplaine in ordinary to his majestic. .Whereunto are added certaine Letters to his relations and friends in England, shewing the reasons and manner of his withdrawing out of the kingdom.” “A Letter to his brother the earl of Bathe.” “A Letter to his bishop the bishop of Durham.” “A Letter to his brethren the prebendaries” “A Letter to the clergy of his archdeaconry.” “A Letter to his curates, at Easington and Sedgefield,” printed at Rouen, 1689. 5. “The chiefest matters contained in sundry Discourses made to the clergy of the archdeaconry of Durham, since his majestic‘ s coming to the crown. Summed up and seasonably brought again to their view in a loyal farewell visitation speech on the 13th of November last, 88, being ten days after the landing of the prince of Orange.*’ This is dated from his study at Rouen Nov. 15, 1689. With a preface to the reader and an advertisement. 6.” A copy of a paper penned at Durham, by the author, Aug. 27, 1688, by way of reflection on the then dismal prognostics of the time.“7.” Directions which Dr. Granville, archdeacon of Durham, rector of Sedgefield and Easington, enjoins to be observed by the curates of those his parishes, given them in charge at Easter-visitation held at Sedgefield, in the year 1669."

, surnamed the Great, was born of a patrician family, equally conspicuous for its virtue and nobility at Rome, where his father Gordian was a senator, and extremely rich; and, marrying a lady of distinction, called Sylvia, had by her this son, about the year 544. From his earliest years he discovered genius and judgment; and, applying himself particularly to the apophthegms of th ancients, he fixed every thing worth notice in his memory, where it was faithfully preserved as in a store-house; he also improved himself by the conversation of old men, in which he took great delight. By these methods he made a great progress in the sciences, and there was not a man. in Rome, who surpassed him in grammar, logic, and rhetoric; nor can it be doubted but he had early instructions in the civil law, in which his letters prove him to have been well versed: he was nevertheless entirely ignorant of the Greek language. These accomplishments in a young nobleman procured him senatorial dignities, which he filled with great reputation and he was afterwards appointed praefect of the city by the emperor Justin the Younger but, being much inclined to a monastic life, he quitted that post, and retired to the monastery of St. Andrew, which he himself had founded at Rome in his father’s house, and put it under the government of an abbot, called Valentius. Besides this, he founded six other convents in Sicily; and, selling all the rest of his possessions, he gave the purchase-money to the poor.

He had not, however, enjoyed his solitude in St. Andrew’s long, when he was removed from it by pope Pelagius II. who made him his seventh deacon, and sent him as his nuncio to the emperor Tiberius at Constantinople, to demand succours against the Lombards. The pope, it is said, could not have chosen a man better qualified than Gregory for so delicate a negociation; but the particulars of it are unknown. Meanwhile, he was not wanting in exerting his zeal for religion. While he was in this metropolis, he opposed Eutychius the patriarch, who had advanced an opinion bordering on Origenism, and maintained, that after the resurrection the body is not palpable, but more subtile than air. In executing the business of his embassy, he contracted a friendship with some great men, and so gained the esteem of the whole court, by the sweetness of his behaviour, that the emperor Maurice chose him for a godfather to one of his sons, born in the year 583. Soon after this he was recalled to Rome, and made secretary to the pope; but, after some time, obtained leave to retire again into his monastery, of which he had been chosen abbot.

Here he had indulged himself with the hopes of gratifymg his wish, in the enjoyment of a solitary and unruffled lite, when Pelagius II. dying Feb. 8, 590, he was elected pope by the clergy, the senate, and the people of Rome; to whom he had become dear by his charity to the poor, whom the overflowing of the Tiber, and a violent plague, had left perishing with hunger. This promotion was so disagreeable to him, that he employed all possible methods to avoid it; he wrote a pressing letter to the emperor, conjuring him not to confirm his election, and to give orders for the choice of a person who had greater capacity, more vigour, and better health than he could boast; and hearing his letter was intercepted by the governor of Rome, and that his election would be confirmed by the imperial court, he fled, and hid himself in the most solitary part of a forest, in a cave firmly resolved to spend his days there, till another pope should be elected and, the people despairing to find him, a new election ensued. In this case, the Roman clergy, always fond of miracles, tell us that Gregory would never accept the papal chair, till he had manifestly found, by some celestial signs, that God called him to it. It is pretended, that a dove flying before those who sought for him, shewed them the way they were to go; or that a miraculous light, appearing on a pillar of fire over his cavern, pointed out to them the place of his reeat.

However that be, it is almost as certain that his reluctance was sincere, as that he at length accepted the dignity, and was enthroned pope, Sept. 3, 590. And it appeared by his conduct, that they could not have elected a person more worthy of this exalted station; for, besides his great learning, and the pains he took to instruct the church, both by preaching and writing, he had a very happy talent to win over princes, in favour of the temporal as well as spiritual interests of religion. It would be tedious to run over all the particulars of his conduct on these occasions; and his converting the English to Christianity, a remarkable fact in our history, is on that account generally known. In this attempt Gregory owed his success to the assistance of queen Ethelburga, who not only prompted the king Ethelbert her consort, to treat the pope’s missionaries kindly, but also to become himself a convert.

The new pope, according to custom, held a synod at Rome the same year, 591; whence he sent letters to the four patriarchs of the East, with a confession of his faith, declaring his reverence to the four general councils, and the fifth too, as well as the four gospels. In this modesty he was not followed by his successors; and he even exceeded some of his predecessors in that and other virtues, which for many ages past have not approached the chair of St. Peter. As he had governed his monastery with a severity unparalleled in those times; so now he was particularly careful to regulate his house and person according to St. Paul’s directions to Timothy. Even in performing divine worship, he used ornaments of but a moderate price, and his common garments were still more simple. Nothing was more decent than the furniture of his house, and he retained none but clerks and religious in his service. By this means his palace became a kind of monastery, in which there were no useless people; every thing in his house had the appearance of an angelic life, and his charity surpassed all description. He employed the revenues of the church entirely for the relief of the poor; he was a constant and indefatigable preacher, and devoted all his talents for the instruction of his flock.

In the mean time, he extended his care to the other churches under his pontifical jurisdiction, and especially those of Sicily, for whom he had a particular respect; he put an end to the schism in the church of Iberia the same year: this was effected by the gentle methods of persuasion, to which, however, he had not recourse till after he had been hindered from using violence. Upon this account he is censured as an intolerant; and it is certain his maxims on that head were a little inconsistent. He did not, for instance, approve of forcing the Jews to receive baptism, and yet he approved of compelling heretics to return to the church. In some of his letters too he exclaims against violence in the method of making converts, yet at the same time was for laying heavier taxes on such as would not be converted by persuasive means; and in the year 593, he sent a nuncio to Constantinople, and wrote a letter the same year to the emperor Maurice, declaring his humility and submission to that sovereign; he also shewed the same respect to the kings of Italy, though they were heretics.

The same year he composed his “Dialogues,” a work filled with fabulous miracles and incredible stories; the style is also, low, and the narration coarse yet they were received with astonishing applause and Theodilinda, queen of the Lombards, having converted her husband to the catholic faith, the pope rejoiced at it, and sent his “Dialogues,” composed the following year, to that princess. She is thought to have made use of his book at this time for the conversion of that people, who were easily influenced by such compositions, for the same reason pope Zachary, about 150 years after, translated it into Greek for the use of those people, who were so delighted with it, that they gave St. Gregory the surname of Dialogist. Still these dialogues being the composition of Gregory is a point now thought very doubtful. In the year 594, he excommunicated and suspended the bishop of Salona, the metropolis of Dalmatia, who, however, paid no regard to the exercise of his power in these censures. The same year he laboured to convert the infidels in Sardinia by gentle methods/ according to his system: which was, to punish heretics, especially at their first rise, as rebels and traitors, but to compel infidels only indirectly; that is, treating the obstinate with some rigour, and persuading them as much by promises, threats, and gentle severities, as by argument and reason. This was the distinction he made in treating with the Manichees and pagans.

In the year 595, he refused to send the empress Constantia any relics of St. Paul, which she had requested, desiring to look at the body of that apostle. On this occasion he relates several miraculous punishments for such a rash attempt, all as simply devised as those in his< Dialogues." The same year he warmly opposed John patriarch of Constantinople, for assuming the title of oecumenical or universal, which he himself disclaimed, as having Do right to reduce the other bishops to be his substitutes; and afterwards forbad his nuncio there to communicate with that patriarch, till he should renounce the title. His humility, however, did not keep him from resenting an affront put upon his understanding, as he thought, by the emperor, for proposing terms of peace to the Lombards, who besieged Rome this year: the same year he executed the famous mission into England; and as Brunehaut, queen of France, had been very serviceable in it, he wrote a letter of thanks to her on the occasion. The princess is represented as a profligate woman, but very liberal to the ecclesiastics; founding churches and convents, and even sueing t9 the pope for relics. This was a kind of piety which particularly pleased Gregory; and accordingly, he wrote to the queen several letters, highly commending her conduct in that respect, and carried his complaisance so far as to declare the French happy above all other nations in having such a sovereign. In the year 598, at the request of the Christian people at Caprita, a small island at the bottom of the gulph of Venice, he ordered another bishop to be ordained for that place, in the room of the present prelate, who adhered to the Istrian schism. This was done contrary to the orders of the emperor Maurice, against taking any violent measures with schismatics.

In the year 599, he wrote a letter to Serenus bishop of Marseilles, commending his zeal in breaking some images which the people had been observed to worship, and throwing them out of the church; and the same year a circular letter to the principal bishops of Gaul, condemning simoniacal ordinations, and the promotions of laymen to bishoprics he likewise forbad clerks in holy orders to live with women, except such as are allowed by the canons and recommended the frequent holding assemblies to regulate the affairs of the church. The same year he re-r fused, on account of some foreseen opposition, to take cognizance of a crime alleged against the primate of Byzacena, a province in Africa. About the same time he wrote an important letter to the bishop of Syracuse, concerning ceremonies, in which he says, “That the church of Rome followed that of Constantinople, in the use of ceremonies; and declares that see to be undoubtedly subject to Rome, as was constantly testified by the emperor and the bishop of that city.” He had already this year reformed the office of the church, which is one of the most remarkable actions of his pontificate. In this reform, as it is called, he introduced several new customs and superstitions; amongst the rest, purgatory. He ordered pagan temples to be consecrated by sprinkling holy water, and an annual feast to be kept, since called wakes in England, on that day; with the view of gaining the pagans in England to the church-service. Besides other less important ceremonies, added to the public forms of prayer, he made it his chief care to reform the psalmody, of which he was excessively fond. Of this kind he composed the “Ainiphone ,” andnch tiines as hest suited the psalms, the hymns, the prayers, the verses, the canticles, the lessons, the epistles and gospels, the prefaces, and the Lor-i’s prayer. He likewise instituted an academy of chanters for all the clerks, as far as the deacons exclusively: he gave them lessons himself, and the bed, in which he continued to chant amidst his last illness, was preserved with great Generation in the palace of St. John Lateran for a long time, together with the whip with which he used to threaten the young clerks and singing hoys, when they sang out of tune. He was so rigid in regard to the chastity of ecclesiastics, that he was unwilling to admit a man into the priesthood who was not strictly free from defilement by any commerce with women. The candidates for orders were according to his commands questioned particularly on that subject. Widowers were excepted, if they had observed a state of continency for some considerable tiifie.

At this time, as well as the next, year 600, he was confined to his bed by the gout in his feet, which lasted for three years; yet he celebrated mass on holidays, although with much pain. This brought on a painful burning heat all over his body, which tormented him in the year 601. His behaviour in this sickness was very exemplary. It made him feel for others, whom he compassionated, exhorting them to make the right use of their infirmities, both by advancing in virtue and forsaking vice. He was always extremely watchful over his flock, and careful to preserve discipline; and while he allowed that the misfortunes of the times obliged the bishops to interfere in worldly matters, as he himself did, he constantly exhorted them not to be too intent on them. This year he held a council at Rome, which made the monks quite independent by the dangerous privileges which he granted them. Gregory forbad the bishops to diminish in any shape the goods, lands, and revenues, or titles of monasteries, and took from them the jurisdiction they ought naturally to have over the converts in their dioceses. But many of his letters shew, that though he favoured the monks in some respects, he nevertheless knew how to subject them to all the severity of their rules. The same year he executed a second mission into England, and, in answer to the bishop of Iberia, declared the validity of baptism by the Nestorians, as being performed in the name of the Trinity.

The dispute about the title of Universal Bishop and the equality of the two sons of Rome and Constantinople still subsisting, and the emperor Maurice having declared for the latter, our pope saw the murder of him and his family without any concern by Phocas. This usurper having sent his picture to Rome in the year C03, Gregory received it with great respect, and placed it with that of the empress his consort (Leontia) in the oratory of St. Csesarius in the palace; and soon after congratulated Phocas’s accession to the throne. There are still extant, written upon this occasion, by the holy pontiff, three letters^ wherein he expresses his joy, and returns thanks to Godj for that execrable parricide’s accession to the crown, as the greatest blessing that could befall the empire; and he praises God, that, after suffering under a heavy galling yoke, his subjects begin once more to enjoy the sweets of liberty under his empire flatteries unworthy a man of honour, and especially a pope and for which his historian, Maimbourg, condemns them. But Gregory thought himself in conscience obliged to assert the superiority of his see above that of Constantinople, and he exerted himself much to secure it. In general he had the pre-eminence of the holy see much at heart; accordingly this same year, one Stephen, a Spanish bishop, having complained to him of an unjust deprivation of his bishopric, the pope sent a delegate to judge the matter upon the spot, giving him a memorial of his instructions, in which among other particulars he orders thus: “If it be said, that bishop Stephen, had neither metropolitan nor patriarch, you must answer, that he ought to be tried, as he requested, by the holy see, which is the chief of all churches.” It was in the same spirit of preserving the dignity of his pontificate, that he resolved to repair the celebrated churches of St. Peter and St. Paul; with which view, he gave orders this year to the subdeacon Sabinian (afterwards his successor in the popedom), to fell all the timber necessary for that purpose in the country of the Brutii, and send it to Rome: he wrote several other letters on this occasion, which are striking proofs of his zeal for carrying on the repairs of old churches, although he built no new ones.

But while he was thus intent in correcting the mischiefs of the late war, he saw it break out again in Italy, and still to the disadvantage of the empire, the affairs of which were in a critical situation, not only in the provinces of the west, but every where else. Gregory was much afflicted with the calamities of this last war, and at the same time his illness increased. The Lombards made a truce in November 603, which was to continue in -force till April 605. Some time after, the pope received letters from queen Theodilinda, with the news of the birth and baptism of her son Adoaldus. She sent him also some writings of the abbot Secundinus upon the fifth council, and desired him to answer them. Gregory “congratulates her on having caused the young prince, destined to reign over the Lombards, to be baptised in the catholic church.” And as to Secundinus, he excuses himself on account of his illness: I am afflicted with the gout,“says he,” to such a degree, that I am not able even to speak, as your envoys know; they found me ill when they arrived here, and left me in great danger when they departed. If God restores my health, I will return an exact answer to all that the abbot Secundinus has written to me. In the mean time, I send you the council held under the emperor Justinian, that by reading it he may see the falsity of all that he has heard against the holy see and the catholic church. God forbid that we should receive the opinions of any heretic, or depart in any respect from the letter of St. Leo, and the four councils:“he adds,” I send to the prince Adoaldus, your son, a cross, and a book of the gospel in a Persian box; and to your daughter three rings, desiring you to give them these things with your own hand, to enhance the value of the present. I likewise beg of you, to return my thanks to the king, your consort, for the peace he made for us, and engage him to maintain it, as you have already tlone."

This letter, written in January 604, is the last of Gre* gory’s that has any date to it; he died the 12th of March following, worn out with violent and almost incessant ill* ness. His remains were interred in a private manner, near the old sacristy of St. Peter’s church, at the end of the great portico, in the same place with those of some preceding popes. It is thought he was not above sixty years of age. We shall only add one particular relating to our own country. Augustin the missionary having followed the rule approved by former popes of dividing the revenues of all the English churches into four parts, the first for the bishop, the second for the clergy, the third for the poor, and the fourth for repairing the church; this division was confirmed by Gregory, who directed farther, that the bishop’s share should be not only for himself, but likewise for all his necessary attendants, and to keep up hospitality,

It remains to be observed, in justice to this pope, that the charge of his causing the noble monuments of the ancient splendour of the Romans o be destroyed, in order to prevent those who went to Rome from paying more attention to the triumphal arches, &. than to things sacred, is rejected by Platina as a calumny. Nor is the story, though credited by several learned authors, particularly by Brucker, of his reducing to ashes the Palatine library founded by Augustus, and the burning an infinite number of pagan books, particularly Livy, absolutely certain. However, it is undeniable, he had a great aversion to all such books, which he carried to that excess, that he flew in a violent passion with Didier, archbishop of Venice, for no other reason than because he suffered grammar to be taught in his diocese. In this he followed the apostolical constitutions: the compiler whereof seems also to have copied from Gregory Nazianzen, who thought reading pagan books would turn the minds of youth in favour of their idolatry; and we have seen more recently the same practice zealously defended, and upon the same principle too, by Mr. Tillemont. Yet Julian the apostate is charged with using the same prohibition, as a good device to effect the ruin of Christianity, by rendering the professors contemptible on account of their ignorance. Dupin says, that his genius was well suited to morality, and he had acquired an inexhaustible fund of spiritual ideas, which he expressed nobly mough, generally in periods, rather than sentences: his :omposition was laboured, and his language inaccurate, but sy, well connected, and always equally supported. He left more writings behind him than any other pope from the foundation of the see of Rome to the present period. 'hese consist of twelve books of “Letters,” amounting to ipwards of eight hundred in number. “A comment on :he book of Job,” generally known by the name of “Grejry’s Morals on Job.” “A Pastoral,” or a treatise on duties of a pastor. This work was held in such veneration by the Gallican church, that all the bishops were jbiiged, by the canons of that church, to be thoroughly icquainted with it, and punctually to observe the rules contained in it. He was author also of “Homilies” on the prophet Ezekiel; and on the gospels, and of four books of “Dialogues.” His works have been printed over and over again, in almost all forms, and at a number of different places on the continent, as Lyons, Paris, Rouen, Basil, Antwerp, Venice, and Rome. The best edition is that of Paris, in 1705, in 4 vols. folio.

, the principal event in whose life is the reformation he introduced in the Roman calendar, was born at Bologna in 1502. His name before his promotion was Hugh Buoncompagno. He was brought up to the study of the civil and canon law, which he taught in his native city with uncommon reputation. He was afterwards appointed judge of the court of commerce at Bologna. From this city he removed to Rome, where, after various preferments, he was on the death of Pius V. in 1572, unanimously elected his successor, and at his consecration he took the name of Gregory XIII. His reformation of the calendar, was according to a method suggested by Lewis Lilio, a Calabrian astronomer, which after his death was presented to the pope by his brother. This method, which was immediately adopted in all catholic countries, but was rejected by the protestants and by the Greeks, was intended to reform the old or Julian year, established by Julius Caesar, which consisted of'365 days 6 hours, or 365 difys and a quarter, that is three years of 365 days each, and the fourth year of 366 days. But as the mean tropical year consists only of 365 days 5 hours 48 minutes 57 seconds, the former lost 11 minutes 3 seconds every year, which in the time of pope Gregory had amounted to 10 <lays, and who, by adding these 10 days, brought the account of time to its proper day again, and at the same time appointed that every century after, a day more should be added, thereby making the years of the complete centuries, viz. 1600, 1700, 1800, &c. to be common years of 365 days each, instead of leap-years of 366 days, which makes the mean Gregorian year equal to 365 days 5 hours 45 minutes 36 seconds. This computation was not introduced into the account of time in England, till 1752, when the Julian account had lost 11 days, and therefore the 3d of September, was in that year by act of parliament accounted the 14th, thereby restoring the 11 days which had thus been omitted.

In 1584 Gregory incurred the suspicion, although some think without foundation, of having encouraged the assas, smation of Elizabeth queen of England, by Parr, an Eng* lisn catholic, who was detected in a conspiracy against the queen’s life. This pope contributed greatly to correct and amend Gratian’s decretals, which he enriched with learned He died of a quinsey, in the eighty-fourth year of Jbis age, and the 14th of his pontificate, in 1586. Several of his “Letters,” “Harangues,”&c. are said to be in existence.

, was born A. D. 324, at Azianzum, an obscure village belonging to Nazianzum, a town of the second Cappadocia, situated in a poor, barren, and unhealthy country. His parents were persons of rank, and no less eminent for their virtues: his father, whose name was also Gregory, had been educated in a religion called Hypsistarianism*, to which, being the religion of his ancestors, he was a bigot in his younger years; and the deserting it not only lost him the kindness of his friends, but estranged him from his mother, and deprived him of his estate. This, however, he bore with great cbearfulness for the sake of Christianity, to which he was converted by his wife, though not without the help of an emphatical dream; he was afterwards made bishop of Nazianzum, being the second who sat in that chair, where he behaved with great prudence and diligence. Nor was our author’s mother less eminent; descended of a pious family, sh was herself, for piety, so much the wonder of her age, that this son was said to have been the pure effect of her prayers, and of a vow to devote him to God, after the example of Hannah; and upon his birth she was careful to perform her vow.

Thus advantageously born, he proved a child of pregnant parts; by which, and the advantage of a domestic institution under his parents, he soon outstrip! his contemporaries in learning. Nature had formed him of a grave and serious temper, so that his studies were not obstructed by the little sports and pleasures of youth. After some time, he travelled abroad for his farther improvement; in which rout, the first step he took was to Crcsarea, and having rifled the learning of that university, he travelled to Caesarea Philippi in Palestine, where some of the most celebrated masters of that age resided, and where Eusebius then sat bishop. Here he studied under the famous orator Thespasias, and had among other fellow-pupils, Euzo'ius, afterwards

mixture, made of Judaism and Pagan- but disowned circumcision. They

With the Gentiles, they did honour to but the almighty, supreme, and most

fire and burning lights, but rejected high God; whence they assumed

idols and sacrifices; with the Jews, their characteristic above-mentioned,

tUcy observed th labbath, and a strict tytslot, signifying The Most High., the Arian bishop of that place. He applied himself par* ticularly to rhetoric, minding the elegance, not the vanity and affectation, which then too much disgraced that pro* fession. Hence he removed to Alexandria, whose schools were famous next to those of Athens, which he designed for his last stage; and therefore went aboard a ship belon.ingto JEgina, an Island not far from Athens, the mari’si -3 of which were his familiar acquaintance?; but it being about the middle of November, a season for rough weather, they were taken with a storm in the road near Cyprus; and the case was become desperate, when suddenly the tern" pest, it was affirmed, ceased by the prayers of Gregory, Thus miraculously preserved, he arrived safe at Athens, where he was joyfully entertained, his great abilities rendering him the admiration both of the scholars and professors. Here he commenced a friendship wiih St. Basil, the great companion of his life; here too he became acquainted with Julian, afterwards emperor and apostate, an event which he remarkably foretold, although at that time Julian had given no ground for suspicion.

After the departure of his friend, Nazianzen was prevailed upon by the students to undertake the professor’s place of rhetoric, and he sat in that chair with great applause for a little while; but being now thirty years of age, and much solicited by his parents tq return home, he complied', taking his journey by land to Constantinople. Here he met his brother Crcsarius, just then arrived from Alexandria, so accomplished in all the polite learning of that age, and especially in physic, which he had made his particular study, that he had not been there long before he had public honours decreed him, matches proposed from noble families, the dignity of a senator offered him, and a committee appointed to wait upon the emperor, to intreat him, that though the city at that time wanted no learned men in any faculty, yet this might be added to all its other glory, to have Cccsarius for its physician and inhabitant. But Nazianzen’s influence prevailed against all these temptations; and the two brothers returned home together, to the great joy of their aged parents.

Nazianzen now thought it time to fulfil a vow which he had made during the storm above-mentioned, to consecrate himself to God by baptism. Afterwards he was ordained a presbyter by his father, who soon had occasion to avail himself of his assistance. Gregory, the father, among several of the eastern bishops, had received a creed composed by a convention at Constantinople, in the year 395, in which the word consubstantial being laid aside, that article was expressed thus: “that the Son was in all things like the Father, according to the Scriptures.” In consequence, the monks of Cappadocia, in denying him communion, were followed by a great part of the people. Nazianzen, therefore, zealously endeavoured to make up this breach. He first convinced his father of the error, which he found him as ready to recant, and give public satisfaction to the people; then he dealt with the other party, whom he soon prevailed with to be reconciled; and, to bind all with a lasting cement, he made on this occasion his first oration, “Concerning Peace.”

Julian had now ascended the throne; and in order to suppress Christianity, published a law, prohibiting Christians not only to teach, but to be taught the books and learning of the Gentiles. The defeat of this design, next to the two Apollinarii in Syria, Was chiefly owing to Na0ianzen, who upon this occasion composed a considerable part of his poems, comprehending all sorts of divine, grave, and serious subjects, in all kinds of poetry; by which means the Christian youth of those times were completely furnished;, and found no want of those heathen authors that were taken from them. Julian afterwards coming to Caesarea, in the road to his Persian expedition, one part of the army was quartered at Nazianzum, where the commander peremptorily required the church (which the elder Gregory had not long since built) to be delivered to him. But the old man stoutly opposed him, daily assembling the people to public prayers, who were so affected with the common cause, that the officer was forced to retire for his own safety. Julian being slain not long after, Nazianzen published two invective orations against him, which are at once remarkable proofs of his wit and eloquence, but which qualities were mixed with too much virulence and acriiony.

Having by Julian’s death obtained some respite from public concerns, he made a visit to his friend Basil, who was then in monastic solitude upon a mountain in Pontus, whither he had often solicited Nazianzen’s company. The latter was naturally inclined to such a course of life, and always looked upon his entering into orders as a kind of force and tyranny put upon him, which he could hardly digest; yet he knew not how to desert his parents. But his brother Caesarius being now returned from court, where he had been for some years, with a purpose to fix in his possession at home, gave him an opportunity to indulge his inclination. He accordingly retired to his old companion, with whom in his solitary recess he remained several years, passing the time in watching, fasting, and all the several acts of mortification. He was tbus employed when the necessity of affairs at home obliged him to quit his retirement. His father laboured under the infirmities of age, and being no longer able to attend his charge, prevailed with him to come home; he returned accordingly about Easter, and published a large apologetic in excuse of his flight, which had been much censured. He had not long entered upon his charge of assistant to his father, u-ben the family had the misfortune to lose his brother Cacsarius, who departed this life October 11, 358. Some time after, died of a malignant fever, his sister Gorgonia, whose funeral-sermon he preached; as he did also that of his father, the aged bishop of Nazianzum, who died not long after, near one hundred years old, having been fortyfive years bishop of that place. In the conclusion of thig latter oration he addressed himself to his mother Norma, to support her mind under so great a loss, consolations which were proper and seasonable: for she, being thus deprived of her affectionate partner, and being nearly of equal years to her husband, expired, as may probably be conjectured, soon after.

By these breaches in the family, Nazianzen was sufficiently weaned from the place of his nativity; and, though he was not able to procure a successor to" his father, he resolved to throw up his charge, and accordingly retired to Seleucia, famous for the temple of St. Thercla, the virginmartyr; where, in a monastery of devout virgins dedicated to that saint, he continued a long time, and did not return till the death of St. Basil, whom he deeply regretted he could not attend at his last hours, being himself confined by sickness. About this time he was summoned to a council at Antioch, holden anno 378, to consider the emperor’s late edict for tolerating the catholics, in order to suppress Arianism; and, being ordered by the council to fix himself for that purpose at Constantinople, he presently repaired thither. Here he found the catholic interest at the lowest ebb; the Arians, favoured by Valens, had possessed themselves of all the churches, and proceeded to such extremities that scarcely any of the orthodox dared avow their faith. He first preached in his lodgings to those that repaired thither, and the congregation soon growing numerous, the house was immediately consecrated by Nazianzen, under the name of the church of Anastasia, or the resurrection; because the catholic faith, which in that city had been hitherto oppressed, here seemed to have its resurrection. The opposition to his measures but increased his fame, together with the number of his auditors, and even drew admirers and followers from foreign parts; among whom St. Jerom, lately ordained presbyter, came on purpose to put himself under his tutelage and discipline; an honour in which Jerom glories on every occasion. As the catholics grew more considerable, they chose him for their bishop, and the choice was confirmed by Meletus of Antioch, and Peter who succeeded Athanasius at Alexandria; but he was opposed by the Arians, who consecrating Maximus, a famous cynic philosopher and Christian, gave him a great deal of trouble. The Arian bishop, however, was at length forced to retire, and his successor Demophilus was deposed by the emperor Theodosius, who directed an edict to the people of Constantinople, February 27, 380, re-establishing the orthodox faith; and afterward coming thither in person, he treated Nazianzen with all possible kindness and respect, and appointed a day for his instalment in the see.

But this ceremony was deferred for the present at his own request; and falling sick soon after, he was visited by crowds of his friends, who all departed when they had made their compliments, except a young man with a pale look, long hair, in squalid and tattered cloaths, who, standing at the bed’s feet, made all the dumb signs of the bitterest sorrow -and lamentation. Nazianzen, starting, asked him, “Who he was, whence he came, and what he wanted?” To which he returned no answer, but expressed so much the moi'e passion and resentment, howling, wringing his hands, and beating his breast in such a manner that the bishop himself was moved to tears. Being at length forced aside by one who stood by, he told the bishop, “This, sir, is the assassin, whom some had suborned to murder you; but his conscience has molested him, and he is here come ingenuously to confess ins fault, and to beg your pardon.” The bishop replied. “Friend, God Almighty be propitious to you, his gracious preservation of me obliges me freely to forgive you the desperate attempt you designed has made you mine, nor do I require any other reparation, than that henceforth you desert your party, and sincerely give up yourself to God.”

Theodosius being highly solicitous about the peace of the church, summoned a council to meet at Constantinople in May anno 382. This is called the second general council, in which the Nicene Creed was ratified; and, because the article concerning the Holy Ghost was but barely mentioned, which was become one of the principal controversies of the age, and for the determination of which the council had been chiefly summoned, the fathers now drew up an explanatory creed, composed, as it is said, by Gregory of Nyssen, and is the same which in our liturgy is called the Nicene Creed. The see of Constantinople was also now placed next in precedence to that of Rome. Our author carried a great sway in that council, where all things went on smoothly, till at last they fell into disturbances on the following occasion.

There had been a schism for some time in the church of Antioch, occasioned by the ordination of two bishops to that see; and one of those, named Melitus, happening to die before the end of the council, Nazianzen proposed to continue the other, named Paulinus, then grown old, for his life. But a strong party being made for one Flavianus, presbyter of the church, these last carried it; and, not content with that, resolved to deprive their grand opposer of his seat at Constantinople. To prevent this he made a formal resignation to the emperor, and went to his paternal estate at Nazmnzum, resolving never to episcopize any more; insomuch, that though, at his return, he found the see of Nazianzum still vacant, and over-run with the heresy of Apollinarius, yet he pertinaciously resisted all intreaties that were made to take that charge upon him. And, when he was summoned to the re-assembling of the council the following year, he refused to give his attendance, and even did not stick to censure all such meetings as factious, and governed by pride and ambition. In the mean time, in defence of his conduct, he wrote letters to the Roman praetorian prefect, and the consul; assuring them, that, though he had withdrawn himself from public affairs, it was not, as some imagined, from any discontent for the loss of the great place he had quitted; and that he would not abandon the common interests of religion; that his retirement was a matter of choice more than necessity, in which he took as great pleasure as a man that has been tossed in a long storm at sea does in a safe and quiet harbour. And, indeed, being now freed from all external cares, he entirely gave himself up to solitude and contemplation, and the exercise of a strict and devout life. At vacant hours he refreshed the weariness of his old age with poetry, which he generally employed upon divine subjects, and serious reflections upon the former passages of his life; an account of which he drew up in iambics, whence no inconsiderable part of his memoir is derived. Thus he passed the remainder of his days till his death in the year 389. He made a will, by which, except a few legacies to some relations, he bequeathed his whole estate to the poor of the diocese of Nazianzum. In this spirit, during the three years that he enjoyed the rich bishopric of Constantinople, he never touched any part of the revenues, but gaVe it all to the poor, to whom he was extremely liberal.

He was one of the ablest champions of the orthodox faith concerning the Trinity, whence he had the title given him of e SeoAoyes, “The Divine,” by unanimous consent. His moral and religious qualities were attended with the natural graces of a sublime wit, subtle apprehension, clear judgment, and easy and ready elocution, which were all set off with as great a stock of human learning as the schools of the East, as Alexandria, or Athens itself, was able to afford. All these excellences are seen in his works, of which we have the following character by Erasmus; who, after having enriched the western church with many editions of the ancient fathers, confesses, that he was altogether discouraged from attempting the translation of Nazianzen, by the acumen and smartness of his style, the grandeur and sublimity of his matter, and those somewhat obscure allusions that are frequently interspersed among his writings. Upon the whole, Erasmus doubts not to affirm, that, as ha lived in the most learned age of the church, so he was the be*t scholar of that age. His works consist of sermons, letters, and poems, the latter evidently imbued with genius, and have been printed in Greek and Latin, Paris, 1609 and 1611, 2 vols. fol. with notes by the learned abbot de Billi, who was also author of the Latin translation. This edition is more esteemed than the new one of 1G30. There are some poems by St. Gregory in “Tollii insignia itinerarii Italici,” Utrecht, 1696, 4to, never printed before.

, was the younger brother of St. Basil, and had an equal care taken of his education, being brought up in all the polite and fashionable modes of learning; but, applying himself particularly to rhetoric, he valued himself more upon being accounted an orator than a Christian. On the admonition of his friend Gregory Nazianzen he quitted those studies; and, betaking himself to solitude and a monastic discipline, he turned his attention wholly to the holy scriptures, and the controversies of the age; so that he became as eminent in the knowledge of these as he had before been in the course of more pleasant studies. Thus qualified for the highest dignity in the church, he was placed in the see of Nyssa, a city on the borders of Cappadocia. The exact time of his promotion is not known, though it is certain he was bishop in the year 371. He proved in this station a stout champion for the Nicene faith, and so vigorously opposed the Arian party, that he was soon after banished by the emperor Valens; and, in a synod held at Nyssa by the bishop of Pontus and Galatia, was deposed, and met with very hard usage. He was hurried from place to place, heavily fined, and exposed to the rage and petulance of the populace, which fell heavier upon him, as he was both unused to trouble, and unapt to bear it. In this condition he remained for seven or eight years, during which, however, he went about countermining the stratagems of the Arians, and strengthening those in the orthodox faith; and in the council of Antioch in the year 378, he was, among others, delegated to visit the eastern churches lately harassed by the Arian persecution.

He went not long after to Arabia; and, having dispatched the affairs of the Arabian churches, he proceeded to Jerusalem, having engaged to confer with the bishops of those parts, and to assist in their reformation. Upon his arrival, finding the place overrun with vice, schism, and faction, some shunning his communion, and others setting up altars in opposition to him, he soon grew weary of it, and returned with a heavy heart to Antioch: and being on this occasion consulted afterwards, whether it was an essential part of religion to make pilgrimages to Jerusalem (which, it seems, was the opinion of the monastic disciplinarians at that time), he declared himself freely in the negative. After this, he was summoned to the great council at Constantinople, where he made no inconsiderable figure, his advice being chiefly relied on in the most important cases; and particularly the composition of the creed, called by us the Nicene creed, was committed to his care. He composed a great many other pieces, commentaries on different parts of the scriptures; sermons; lives, and letters. There is a good edition of his works by Fronton du Due, 1615, 2 vols. fol. and another of 1638, 3 vols. fol. more ample, but not so correct. They are, however, in less estimation than the works of almost any of the fathers. He lived to a great age, and was alive when St. Jerom wrote his “Catalogue of Ecclesiastical Writers” in the year 392; and two years after was present at the synod of Constantinople, on adjusting the controversy between Agapius and Bagadius, as appears by the acts of that council. He died March 9, 396. He was a married man, and lived with his wife Theosebia, even after he was bishop. Gregory Nazianzen, in a consolatory letter to his sister on her death, gives her extraordinary commendations.

, surnamed Thaumaturgus, was descended of parents eminent for their birth and fortune, at Neo-Cesarea, the metropolis of Cappadocia, where he was born. He was educated very carefully in the learning and religion of the Gentiles by his father, who was a warm, zealot; but, losing this parent at fourteen years of age, he, enlarging his inquiries, began by degrees to perceive the vanity of that religion in which he had been bred, and turned his inclinations to Christianity. Having laid the necessary ground-work of his education at home, and studied the law for some time, to which he had no great inclination, he resolved to accomplish himself by foreign travels, to which purpose he went first to Alexandria, then become famous by the Platonic school lately erected there*. Departing from Alexandria, he came back probably through Greece, and staid awhile at Athens whence returning home, he applied himself to his old study of the law but again growing weary of it, he turned to the more agreeable speculations of philosophy.

The fame of Origen, who at that time had opened a school at Csesarea, in Palestine, and whose renown tid doubt was great at Alexandria, soon reached his ears. To that city therefore he betook himself, where meeting with Fermilian, a Cappaclocian gentleman, and afterwards bishop of Ca^area, in that country, he commenced a friendship with him, there being an extraordinary sympathy and agreement in their tempers and studies; and they jointly put themselves, together with his brother Athenodorus, under the tutorage of that celebrated master. Origen endeavoured to settle him in the full belief of Christianity, of which he had some insight before, and to ground him in the knowledge of the holy scriptures, as the best system of true wisdom and philosophy.

Neo-Caesarea was a large and populous place, but being miserably overgrown with superstition and idolatry, Christianity had as yet scarce made its entrance there. However, our young philosopher was appointed to be a guide of souls in the place of his nativity. Phredinius, bishop of Amasia, a neighbouring city in that province, cast his eye upon him for that purpose; and it was thought his relation to the place would more endear the employment tohim. But, upon receiving the tirst intimation of the design, he shifted his quarters, and, as oft as sought for, fled from one desert to another; so that the bishop by all his arts and industry could not obtain intelligence of him; he therefore constituted him bishop of the place in his absence, and how averse soever he seemed to be before, he now accepted the charge, when perhaps he had a more formal and solemn consecration. The province he entered upon was difficult; the city and neighbourhood being wholly addicted to the worship of demons, and there not being above seventeen Christians in those parts, so that he must find a church before he could govern it. The country was overrun with heresies; and himself, though accomplished sufficiently in human learning, was altogether unexercised in theological studies and the mysteries of religion. But here again he had immediate assistance from heaven; for, one night, as it is related by his biographer, Gregory of Nyssen, with the superstitious spirit then prevalent, while he was musingupon these things, and discussing matters of faith in his own mind, he bad a vJsJon, in which St. John the evangelist and the blessed virgin appeared in the chamber where he was, and discoursed before him concerning those points. In consequence, after their departure, he immediately penned that canou and rule of faith which they had declared. To this creed he always kept himself, and bequeathed it as an inestimable deposit to his successors. The original, written with his own hand, we are informed, was preserved in that church in his name. It is cited by Dr. Waterland, as express and explicit respecting the doctrine of the Trinity. There can be no doubt of its authenticity, although the Socinians have taken much pains to prove the contrary.

Thus furnished, he began to apply himself more directly to the charge committed to him, and he was said to b^> endowed with the power of working miracles: hence the title of Thaurnaturgus, or wonder-worker, is constantly ascribed to him in the writings of the church. St Basil assures us, that upon this account the Gentiles used to call him a second Moses. In this faithful and successful government of his flock he continued quietly till about anno '2bO, when he fled from the Decian persecution; but, as soon as the storm was over, he returned to his charge, and in a general visitation of his diocese, established in every place anniversary festivals and solemnities in honour of the martyrs who had suffered in the late persecution. In the reign of Galienus, about the year 260, upon the irruption of the northern nations into the Roman empire, the Goths breaking into Pontus, Asia, and some parts of Greece, created such confusion, that a neighbouring bishop of those parts wrote to Gregory for advice what to do: our author’s answer, sent by Euphrasymus, is called his “Canonical Epistle,” still extant among his works. Not long afterwards was convened that synod at Antioch, wherein Paul of Samosata, bishop of the place, which he did not care to lose, made a feigned recantation of his heretical opinions. Our St. Gregory was among the chief persons in this synod which met in the year 264, but did not long survive it, dying either this or most probably the following year.

St. Basil says he was an evangelical man in his whole life. In his devotion he shewed the greatest reverence: yea and nay, were the usual measures of his communication. He was also a man of uncommon meekness and humility, and a firm adherent to truth. With respect to the miracles ascribed to him, they do not rest upon the authority of his contemporaries, and are more numerous and extraordinary than will now be readily credited. His works *vere primed in Greek and Latin, 1626, folio, and in the library of the fathers. Gerard Vossius also printed a& edition at Mentz in 1604, 4to. Many of his writings, however, are supposed to be lost.

, St., or frequently called Geregius Florentius Gregorius, an eminent bishop and writer of the sixth century, descended from a noble family of AuTergne, was born about the year 544. He was educated by his uncle Gallus, bishop of Clermont, and became so eminent for learning and virtue, as to be appointed bishop of Tours in the year 573. He assisted at the council held at Paris in the year 577, respecting Pretextat, bishop of Rouen, and strongly opposed the violence of some of the members of that assembly, particularly Chilperic and Fredegonde. He went afterwards to visit the tomb of > the apostles at Rome, where he formed a friendship with St. Gregory the Great, and died Norember 27, 595. This bishop wrote a “History of France,” in ten books; eight books of “The Miracles, or Lives of the Saints;” and other works, in the library of the fathers. The best edition-is that by Dom Ruinart, 1699, fol. His history is very useful; for though the style is dry and coarse, and the author extremely simple and credulous, yet an ingenious critic may easily separate the truths contained in it from the falsehoods. This work has been translated into French by the abbeé de Marolles, 1668, 2 vols. 8vo.

, general of the Augustines 1357, who died in 1358, was a celebrated scholastic divine, surnamed the Authentic Doctor, and wrote a “Commentary on the Master of the Sentences,” Valentia, 1500, fol. with an addition, printed at Venice, 1522, fol.; “A Treatise on Usury,” and other works, Rimini, 1522, fol.

, a Flemish geometrician, was born at Bruges in 1584, and became a Jesuit at Rome at twenty years of age. He studied mathematics under the learned Jesuit Clavius. He afterward became a reputable professor of those sciences himself, and his instructions were solicited by several princes he was called to Prague by the emperor Ferdinand II. and Philip IV. king of Spain was desirous of having him to teach the mathematics to his ion, the young prince John of Austria. He was not less estimable for his virtues than his skill in the sciences. His well-meant endeavours were very commendable, when his holy zeal, though for a false religion, led him to follow the army in Flanders one compaign, to confess the wounded and dying soldiers, in which he received several wounds himself. He died of an apoplexy at Ghent, in 1667, at eighty-three years of age.

As a writer, Gregory of St. Vincent was very diffuse and voluminous, but he was an excellent geometrician. He published, in Latin, three mathematical works, the principal of which was his “Opus Geometricum Quadratures Circuli, et Sectionum Coni,” Antwerp, 1647, 2 vols. folio. Although he has not demonstrated, in this work, the quadrature of the circle, as he pretends to have done, the book nevertheless contains a great number of truths and important discoveries; one of which is this, viz. thai if one asymptote of an hyperbola be divided into parts in geometrical progression, and from the points of division ordinates be drawn parallel to the other asymptote, they will divide the space between the asymptote and curve into equal portions; from whence it was shewn by Mersenne, that, by taking the continual sums of those parts, there would be obtained areas in arithmetical progression, adapted to abscisses in geometrical progression, and which therefore were analogous to a system of logarithms.

, the first of an eminent family of learned men in Scotland, was the son of the Rev. Mr. John Gregory, minister of Drumoak in the county of Aberdeen, and was born at Aberdeen in November 1638. His mother was a daughter of Mr. David Anderson of Finzaugh, or Finshaugh, a gentleman who possessed a singular turn for mathematical and mechanical knowledge. This mathematical genius was hereditary in the family of the Andersons, and from them it seems to have been transmitted to their descendants of the names of Gregory, Reid, &c. Alexander Anderson, cousin -german of the said David, was professor of mathematics at Paris in the beginning of the seventeenth century, and published there several valuable and ingenious works; as may be seen in our vol. II. The mother of James Gregory inherited the genius of her family; and observing in her son, while yet a child, a itrong propensity to mathematics, she instructed him herself in the elements of that science. His education in the languages he received at the grammar-school of Aberdeen, and went through the usual course of academical studies at Marischal college, but was chiefly delighted with philosophical researches, into which a new door had been lately opened by the key of the mathematics. Galileo, Kepler, and Des Cartes were the great masters of this new method; their works, therefore, Gregory made his principal study, and began early to make improvements upon their discoveries in optics. The first of these improvements was the invention of the reflecting telescope, which still bears his name; and which was so happy a thought, that it has given occasion to the most considerable improvements made in optics, since the invention of the telescope. He published the construction of this instrument in his “Optica promota,” 1663, at the age of twenty-four. This discovery soon attracted the attention of the mathematicians, both of our own and foreign countries, who immediately perceived its great importance to the sciences. But the manner of placing the two specula upon the same axis appearing to Newton to be attended with the disadvantage of losing the central rays of the larger speculum, he proposed an improvement on the instrument, by giving an oblique position to the smaller speculum, and placing the eye-glass in the side of the tube. It is observable, however, that the Newtonian construction of that instrument was long abandoned for the original or Gregorian, which is now always used when the instrument is of a moderate size; though Herschel has preferred the Newtonian form for the construction of those immense telescopes which he has of late so successfully employed in observing the heavens.

About 1664 or 1665, coming to London, he became acquainted with Mr. John Collins, who recommended him to the best optic glass-grinders there, in order to have his telescope executed. But as this could not be done for want of skill in the artists to grind a plate of metal for the object speculum into a true parabolic concave, which the design required, he was much discouraged; and after a few imperfect trials made with an ill-polished spherical one, which did not succeed to his wish, he dropped the pursuit, and resolved to make the tour of Italy, then the mart of mathematical learning, in the view of prosecuting his fa* vourite study with greater advantage.

He had not been long abroad when the same inventive genius, which had before shewn itself in practical mathematics, carried him to some new improvements in the speculative part. The sublime geometry on the doctrine of curves was then hardly passed its infant state, and the famed problem of squaring the circle still continued a reproach to it; when our author discovered a new analytical method of summing up an infinite converging series, by which the area of the hyperbola, as well as the circle, may be computed to any degree of exactness. He was then at Padua; and getting a few copies of his invention printed there in 1667 under the title “Vera Circuli et Hyperbolae Quadratura,” he sent one to his friend Mr. Collins, who communicated it to the royal society, where it met with the commendation of lord Brounker and Dr. Wallis. He reprinted it at Venice, and published it the following year, 1668, together with another piece entitled “Geometric pars universalis, inserviens quantitatum curvarum transmutationi et mensurae,” in which he is allowed to have shewn, for the first time, a method for the transmutation of curves. These works engaged the notice, and procured the author the correspondence of the greatest mathematicians of the age, Newton, Huygens, Wallis, and others. An account of this piece was also read by Mr. Collins before the royal society, of which Gregory, being returned from his travels, was chosen a member, admitted the 14th of January this year, and communicated to them an account of the controversy in Italy about the motion of the earth, which was denied by Riccioli and his followers.

The same year, his quadrature of the circle being attacked by Mr. Huygens, a controversy arose between those two eminent mathematicians, in which our author produced some improvements of his series. But in this dispute it happened, as it generally does in most others, that the antagonists, though setting out with decent temper, yet grew too much heated in the combat. This was the case here, especially on die side of Gregory, whose defence was, at his own request, inserted in the “Philosophical Transactions;” but Leibnitz, who allows Gregory the highest merit for his geniui and discoveries, is of opinion, that Huygens has pointed out, though not errors, some considerable deficiencies in the treatise above-mentioned, and has shewn a much simpler method of attaining the same end. Gregory also received from Mr. Collins, about this time, an account of the series invented by sir Isaac Newton; who in that had actually effected what our author was stiffly contending against Huygens to be utterly impossible: that is, the ratio of the diameter of a circumference, expressed in a series of simple terms, independent of each other, and entirely freed from the magic vinculum of surds, in which they had till then been indissolubly held.

In 1668 our author published at London another work, entitled “Exercitationes Geometricae,” which contributed still much farther to extend his reputation. About this time he was elected professor of mathematics in the university of St. Andrew’s, an office which he held for six years. During his residence there he married, in 1669, Mary, the daughter of George Jameson, the celebrated painter, whom Mr, Walpole has termed the Vandyke of Scotland, and who was fellow disciple with that great artist in the school of Rubens at Antwerp. His fame placed him in so great esteem with the royal academy at Paris, that, in the beginning of 1671, it was resolved by that aca^ demy to recommend him to their grand monarch for a pension; and the design was approved even by Mr. Huygens, though he said he had reason to think himself improperly treated by Mr. Gregory, on account of the controversy between them. Accordingly, several members of that academy wrote to Mr. Oldenburg, desiring him to acquaint the council of the royal society with their proposal; informing him likewise, that the king of France was willing to allow pensions to one or two learned Englishman, whom they should recommend. But no answer was ever made to that proposal; and our author, with respect to this particular, looked upon it as nothing more than a compliment.

In 1672 he published “The great and new art of weighing Vanity or a discovery of the ignorance and arrogance of the great and new artist, in his pseudo-philosophical writings. By M. Patrick Mathers, arch-bedal to the university of St. Andrew’s. To which are annexed some tentamina de motu penduli et projectorum.” Under this assumed name, our author wrote this little piece to expose the ignorance of Mr. Sinclare, professor at Glasgow, in his hydrostatical writings, and in return for some ill-usage of that author to a colleague of Mr. Gregory’s. In the same year, sir Isaac Newton, on his wonderful discoveries in the nature of light, having contrived a new reflecting telescope, and made several objections to Mr. Gregory’s, this gave birth to a dispute between those two philosophers, which was continued during that and the following year, in the most amicable manner on each side; Mr. Gregory defending his own construction so far, as to give his antagonist the whole honour of having made the catoptric telescopes preferable to the dioptric; and shewing, that the imperfections in these instruments were not so much owing to a defect in the object-speculum as to the different refrangibility of the rays of light. In the course of this dispute, our author described a burning concave mirror, which was approved by sir Isaac, and is still in good esteem. Several letters that passed in this dispute are printed by Dr. Desaguliers, in an appendix to the English edition of Dr. David Gregory’s “Elements of Catoptrics and Dioptrics.” All this while he attended the proper business of his professorship with great diligence, which taking up the greatest part of his time, especially in the winter season, interrupted him in the pursuit of his proper studies. These, however, led him to farther improvements in the invention of infinite series, which he occasionally communicated to his intimate friend and correspondent Mr. Collins. In 1674 Mr. Gregory was called to Edinburgh, to fill the chair of mathematics in that university. This place he had held but little more than a year, when, in October 1675, being employed in shewing the satellites of Jupiter through a telescope to some of his pupils, he was suddenly struck with total blindness, and died a few days after, to the great loss of the mathematical world, at only thirty-seven years of age.

The most shining part of Gregory’s character is that of his mathematical genius as an inventor. In this view, particularly, he merits a place in these memoirs; and therefore we shall conclude this article with a list of the most remarkable of his inventions. His reflecting telescope; burning concave mirror; his quadrature of the circle, by an infinite converging series; and his method for transformation of curves, have been already mentioned. Besides these, he was the first who gave a geometrical demonstration of lord Brounker’s series for squaring the hyperbola, as it had been explained by Mercator in his “Logarithmotechnia.” He was likewise the first who demonstrated the meridian line to be analogous to a scale of logarithmic tangents, of the half compliment of latitude. He also invented and demonstrated geometrically, by the help of the hyperbola, a very simple converging series for making the logarithms, and therefore recommended by Dr. Halley as very proper for practice. He also sent to Mr. Collins the solution of the famous Keplerian problem by an infinite series. He found out a method of drawing tangents to curves geometrically, without any previous calculations. He gave a rule for the direct and inverse method of tangents, which stands upon the same principle (of exhaustions) with that of fluxions, and differs not much from it in the manner of application. He likewise gave a series for the length of the arc of a circle from the tangent, and v ice versa; as also for the secant and logarithmic tangent and secant, and vice versa. These, with others, for certifying, or measuring the length of the elliptic and hyperbolic curves, were sent to Mr. Collins, in return for some received from him of sir Isaac Newton’s; and their elegance being admirable, and above whatever he had produced before, and after the manner of sir Isaac, gave room to think he had improved himself greatly by that master, whose example he followed, i delivering his series in simple terms, independent on each other.

We are assured, that at his death he was in pursuit of a general method of quadrature, by infinite series, like that of sir Isaac. This appeared by his papers, which came into the hands of his nephew, Dr. David Gregory, who published several of them; and he himself assured Mr. Collins, he had found out the method of making sir Isaac’s series; who thereupon concluded he must have written a treatise upon it. This encouraged Mr. Stewart, professor of mathematics in Aberdeen, to take the trouble of examining his papers, then in the hands of Dr. David Gregory, the late dean of Christ church, Oxford; but no such treatise could be found, nor any traces of it, and the same had been declared before by Dr. David Gregory; whence it happens, that it is still unknown what his method was of making those serieses. However, Mr. Stewart affirms, that, in turning over his papers, he saw several curious upon particular subjects, not yet printed. On the contrary, some letters which he saw confirmed Dr. David Gregory’s remark, and made it evident, that our author had never compiled any treatise, containing the foundations of this general method, a very short time before his death; so that all that can be known about his method can only be collected from his letters, published in the short history of his “Mathematical Discoveries,” compiled by Mr. Collins, and his letters to that gentleman in the “Commercium Epistolicum.” From these it appears, that, in the beginning of 1670, when Mr. Collins sent him sir Isaac Newton’s series for squaring the circular zone, it was then so much above every thing he comprehended in this way, that after having endeavoured in vain, by comparing it with several of his own, and combining them together, to discover the method of it, he concluded it to be no legitimate series; till, being assured of his mistake by his friend, he went again to work, and after almost a whole year’s indefatigable pains, as he acknowledges, he discovered, at last, that it might be deduced from one of his own, upon the subject of die logarithms, in which he had given a method for finding the power to any given logarithm, or of turning the root of any pure power into an infinite series; and in the same manner, viz. by comparing and combining his own series together, or else by deduction therefrom, he fell upon several more of sir Isaac’s, as well as others like them, in which he became daily more ready by continual practice; and this seems to have been the utmost he ever actually attained to, in the progress towards the discovering any universal method for those series.

, elder brother of the preceding, was born in 1627 or 1628, and although he possessed all the genius of the other branches of his family, was educated by his father for trade, and served an apprenticeship to a mercantile house in Holland. Having a stronger passion, however, for knowledge than for money, he abandoned trade in 1655, and returning to his own country, he succeeded, upn the death of an elder brorher, to the estate of Kinarclie, situated about forty miles north of Aberdeen, where he lived many years, and where thirty-two children were born to him by two wives. Of these, three sons made a conspicuous figure in the republic of letters, being all professors of mathematics at the same time in three of the British universities, viz. David at Oxford, James at Edinburgh, and Charles at St. Andrew’s.

Mr. Gregory, the subject of this memoir, while he lived at Kinardie, was a jest among the neighbouring gentlemen for his ignorance of what was doing about his own farm, but an oracle in matters of learning and philosophy, and particularly in medicine, which he had studied for his amusement, and began to practise among his poor neighbours. He acquired such a reputation in that science, that he was employed by the nobility and gentlemen of that county, but took no fees. His hours of study were singular. Being much occupied through the day with those who applied to him as a physician, he went early to bed, rose about two or three in the morning, and, after applying to his studies for some hours, went to bed again, and slept an hour or two before breakfast. He was the first man in that country who had a barometer; and having paid great attention to the changes in it, and the corresponding changes in the weather, he was once in danger of being tried by the presbytery for witchcraft or conjuration. A deputation of that body waited upon him to inquire into the ground of certain reports that had come to their ears; but, affording them ample satisfaction, a prosecution was prevented.

About the beginning of the last century, he removed with his family to Aberdeen, and in the time of queen Anne’s wars employed his thoughts upon an improvement in artillery, in order to make the shot of great guns more destructive to the enemy, and executed a model of the engine he had contrived. The late Dr. Reid, in his additions to the lives of the Gregorys, published in Hutton’s Dictionary, informs us that he conversed with a clockmaker at Aberdeen, who had been employed in making this model; but having made many different pieces by direction without knowing their intention, or how they were to be put together, he could give no account of the whole. After making some experiments with this model, which satisfied him, Mr. Gregory was so sanguine in the hope of being useful to the allies in the war against France, that he set about preparing a field equipage with a view to make a campaign in Flanders, and in the mean time sent his model to his son the Savilian professor, the subject of our next article, that he might have his, and sir Isaac Newton’s opinion of it. His son shewed it to Newton without letting him know that his own father was the inventor of it. Sir Isaac was much displeased with it, saying, that if it had tended as much to the preservation of mankind, as to their destruction, the inventor would have deserved a great reward: but, as it was contrived solely for destruction, and would soon be known by the enemy, he rather deserved to be punished, and urged the professor very strongly to destroy it, and if possible, to suppress the invention. It is probable the professor followed this advice, as he died soon after, and the model was never found. Sir Isaac’s objection, however, appears rather to be fastidious, and might apply with equal force to any improvement in muskeis, &c. or to gunpowder itself. When the rebellion broke out in 1715, Mr. Gregory went a second time to Holland, and returned when it was over to Aberdeen, where he died about 1720, aged ninety-three, leaving behind him a history of his own time and country, which was never published. One of his daughters was mother to the late celebrated Dr. Thomas Reid of Glasgow, by whom the above particulars were first communicated.

, son of the preceding, and nephew to the inventor of the reflecting telescope, was born June 21, 1661, at Aberdeen; where he also received the first grounds of his learning, but was afterwards removed to Edinburgh, and took his degree of M. A. in that university. The great advantage of his uncle’s papers induced his friends to recommend the mathematics to him; and he had a natural subtilty of genius particularly fitted for that study, to which he applied with indefatigable industry, and succeeded so well that he was advanced to the mathematical chair, at Edinburgh, at the age of twenty-three. The same year he published a treatise, entitled “Exercitatio Geometrica de dimensione figurarum,” Edinb. 1684, 4to, in which assuming the doctrine of indivisibility, and the arithmetic of infinites, as already known, he explained a method which not only suited his uncle’s examples, left by him without any way of finding them, but discovered others, by which an infinite number of curve-lines, and the areas contained between them and right lines (such as no other method then known extended to) might be measured. He already seen some bints in his uncle’s papers concerning sir Isaac Newton’s method, of which he made the best use he could *; and the advantage he found thereby raised an ardent desire in him to see that method published. Under this impatient expectation, the “Principia” was no sooner out in 1687, but our author took it in hand, and presently made himself so much master of it as to be able to read his professorial lectures upon the philosophy contained in it, and, causing his scholars to perform their exercises for their degrees upon several branches of it, became its first introducer into the schools.

He continued at Edinburgh till 1691, when, hearing of Dr. Bernard’s intention to resign the Savilian professorship of astronomy at Oxford, he left Scotland, and, coming to London, was admitted a member of the royal society: and paid his addresses to sir Isaac Newton, who took the first opportunity of recommending him to Mr. Flamstead (master of the mathematical school in Christ’s-hospital, London), with a letter, recommending his mathematical merit above all exception in these terms: “Sir, it. is almost a fortnight since I intended, with Mr. Paget and another friend or two, to have given you a visit at Greenwich; but sending to the Temple coffee-house, I understood you had not been in London for two or three weeks before, which made me think you were retired to your living for a time. The bearer hereof, Mr. Gregory, mathematic professor of Edinburgh college, in Scotland, intended to have given you a visit with us. You will find him a very ingenious person, and a good mathematician, worth your acquaintance.” In proceeding, he mentions our author as a fit person, in case of Mr. Flamstead’s death, to carry on his astronomical views. Thus recommended, the royal astronomer used his best interest to procure him success at Oxford, where he was elected astronomy-professor this year, having been first admitted of Baliol college, and incorporated M. A. February 8, and he was created M. D. on the

practice, without some farther artifice, after his death; and Mr. Cotes, of CamThis is observed hy Mr. Maclaurin, bridge, spoke slightly of his abilities i

it in 1745. 8vo, with additions, and the 144. second edition was printed at Edin18th of the same month, but he had no relish for the technical part of his profession, and was seldom seen in the ohservatory. His genius lay more to geometry, and in that way he succeeded very well, both in his elements of optics*, and of physical and geometrical astronomy. This last is reckoned his master-piece; and, having finished it in 1702, folio, he immediately engaged in carrying on the noble design of his predecessor, Dr. Bernard, to print all the works of the ancient mathematicians, the first-fruits of which appeared in an edition of Euclid’s works in Greek and Latin, folio, the following year. In the same design he afterwards joined with his colleague, Dr. Hailey, in preparing an edition of “Apollonius’s Conies:” Dr. Bernard had left materials for the four first books, which our author undertook to complete, but was prevented by his death, which happened October 10, 1708. He died at the Greyhound-inn, at Maidenhead, in Berkshire, in his way from London to Bath. His disorder was a consumption. He was interred at Maidenhead, but there is a handsome marble monument erected to his memory in St. Mary’s church at Oxford, by his wife.

Our professor’s genius lay chiefly in inventing new and elegant demonstrations of the discoveries made by others. He gave the first demonstration of that curve, which is well known since by the name of catenaria, or the curve that is formed by a chain fastened at each end; and first discovered, that this curve inverted gave the form of a true and legitimate arch, all the parts supporting each other f. There are several other papers of his in the “Philosophical Transactions,” vols. XVIII. XIX. XXI. XXIV. and XXV. He left also in ms. “A short treatise of the nature and arithmetic of Logarithms,” which is printed at the end of KeilTs translation of Commandine’s Euclid; and the “Treatise of Practical Geometry” mentioned in the note, as published by Mr. Maclaurin. His explication of sir Isaac Newton’s

* It was published in 1695, in La- by Dr. Browne; and a third in 1735,

tin, entitled “Catoptricae & Dioptric by Dr. Desaguliers, who added an apSpherics Elementa, Oxon.” 8vo, and pendix, containing the history of th

uncle James Gregory. It was much 11 other forms, in stone, brick, and the

esteemed for the neatness and easiness like, are only supported by including

of the demonstrations; and a second some catenary curve, within the breadth edition in English came out in 1705, of their forming stones. method, to construct the orbit of a comet by three accurate observations, is commended by Dr. Halley. Our author was a most intimate and confidential friend of sir Isaac, and was intrusted with a manuscript copy of the “Principia,” for the purpose of making observations on it. Of these Newton availed himself in the second edition, they having come too late for his first publication, which was exceedingly hurried by Dr. Halley, lest Newton’s backwardness might not let it appear at all. There is a complete copy of these observations preserved in the library of the university of Edinburgh, presented to it by Dr. James Gregory, the present professor of the practice of medicine. These contain many sublime mathematical discussions, many valuable commentaries on the “Principia,” and many interesting anecdotes. There are in it some paragraphs in the hand-writing of Huygens relative to his theory of light.

Dr. David Gregory married, in 1695, Elizabeth, the daughter of Mr. Oiiphant of Langtown in Scotland. By this lady he had four sons, of whom, the eldest, David, was elected, from Westminster school in 1714, student of Christ church, Oxford; became rector of Semly in Wiltshire; was installed canon of Christ church, June 8, 1736, and dean, May 18, 1756. He was appointed the first professor of modern history and languages on the foundation of that professorship by George 1. prolocutor of the lower house of convocation, and master of Sherburn hospital, near Durham. He died and was interred in Christ church cathedral, 1767, in the seventy -first year of his age, in the same grave with his wife Mary (Grey), who died in 1762.

When Dr. David Gregory, the Savilian professor, quitted Edinburgh, he was succeeded in the professorship at that university by his brother James, likewise an eminent mathematician; who held that office for thirty-three years, and, retiring in 1725, was succeeded by the celebrated Maclaurin. A daughter of this professor James Gregory, a young lady of great beauty and accomplishments, was the victim of an unfortunate attachment, that furnished the subject of Mallet’s well-known ballad of “William and Margaret.” Another brother, Charles, was created professor of mathematics at St. Andrew’s by queen Anne, in 1707. This office he held with reputation and ability for thirty-two years; and, resigning in 1739, was succeeded by his son, who eminently inherited the talents of his family, and died in 1763.

, professor of medicine in the university of Edinburgh, was born at Aberdeen in 1724. He was the third son of James Gregory, M. D. professor of medicine in King’s college, Aberdeen, by Anne, daughter of the rev. George Chalmers, principal of King’s college there. His grandfather was David Gregory of Kinardie, and his grand-uncle the James Gregory, whose life we have first given, the inventor of the reflecting telescope. Though the father of Dr. John Gregory died when he was very young, his education was carefully superintended, and he made a rapid progress in his studies, and like the rest of his ancestors became deeply versed in mathematical knowledge. He also cultivated an elegant and just taste, clearness -and beauty of expression, with precision of judgment, and extensive knowledge. He was the early, intimate, and constant friend and associate of Drs. Gerard, Beattie, and the other eminent men who belonged to the university of Aberdeen. In 1742, he went to Edinburgh, to prosecute the study of medicine, and thence to Leyden in 1745, and to Paris in 1746, for further improvement. On his return he was appointed professor of philosophy in King’s college, Aberdeen, and had at the same time the degree of M. D. conferred upon him. He held this professorship for a few years. In 1754, he went to London, where he. cultivated the acquaintance, and fixed the esteem and friendship of' some of the most distinguished literati there. Edward Montague, esq. an eminent mathematician, maintained a firm friendship for the doctor, founded on a similarity of manners and studies. His, lady the celebrated Mrs. Montague? and George lord Lyttelton, were of the number of his friends; and it is not improbable that he would have continued in London, and practised there in his profession, if the death of his brother Dr. James Gregory, professor of physic in King’s college, Aberdeen, in 1756, had not occasioned his being recalled to his native university to fill that chair. His occupations in physic now began to be active; he gave a course of lectures in physic, and practised in his profession, with great success. In the above-mentioned year, while at London, he was elected a fellow of the royal society. In 1766, on the death of Dr. Robert Whytt, the ingenious professor of the theory of physic at Edinburgh, Dr. Gregory was called to succeed him, as his majesty’s first physician in Scotland; and about the same time he was chosen to fill the chair of professor of the practice of physic, which was just resigned by Dr. Rutherford. Dr. Gregory gave three successive courses of practical lectures. Afterwards by agreement with his ingenious colleague, Dr. Cullen, they lectured alternate sessions, on the practice and institutions of medicine, with just and universal approbation, till the time of Dr. Gregory’s death.

The doctor having attained the first dignities of his profession in his native country, and the most important medical station in the university, far from relaxing from that attention to the duties of his profession which had raised him, endeavoured to merit the rank he held in it, and in the public esteem, by still greater exertions of labour and assiduity. It was during this time of business and occupation, that he prepared and published his practical Syllabus for the use of students, which, if it had been finished, would have proved a very useful book of practice; and likewise, those admired “Lectures on the Duties, Office, and Studies of a Physician.”

Dr. Gregory, for many years before his death, felt the approach of disease, and apprehended, from an hereditary and cruel gout, the premature death, which indeed too soon put a period to his life and usefulness. In this anxious expectation, he had prepared “A Father’s Legacy to his Daughters.” But for some days, and even that preceding his death, he had been as well as usual; at midnight, he was left in good spirits by Dr. Johnstone, late physician in Worcester, at that time his clinical clerk; yet at nine o'clock in the morning of the 10th of February, 1773, he was found dead in his bed.

Dr. Gregory was tall in person, and remarkable for the sweetness of his disposition and countenance, as well as for the ease and openness of his manners. He was an universal and elegant scholar, an experienced, learned, sagacious, and humane physician a professor, who had the happy talent of interesting his pupils, and of directing their attention to subjects of importance, and of explaining difficulties with simplicity and clearness. He entered with great warmth into the interests and conduct of his hearers, and gave such as deserved it every encouragement and assistance in his power: open, frank, social, and undisguised in his life and manners, sincere in his friendships, a tender husband and father: and an unaffected, cheerful, candid, benevolent man.

Dr. Gregory married in 1752, Elizabeth, daughter of William lord Forbes: he lost this amiable lady in 1761 she left the doctor three sons and three daughters. His eldest son, James Gregory, M. D. now professor of medicine in Edinburgh, is likely to perpetuate the honours of this learned family, which has given sixteen professors to British universities.

Dr. Gregory published: 1. “Comparative View of the state and faculties of Man with those of the Animal World,” 8vo. This work was first read to a private literary society at Aberdeen, and without the most distant view to publication. Many hints are thrown out in it on subjects of consequence, with less formality, and more freedom, than if publication had been originally intended. The author put his name to the second edition of this work many additions are also joined to it and it is dedicated to George lord Lyttelton, who always professed a high esteem for the author and his writings. This work, indeed, if the author had left no other, must convince every one, that, as a man of science, he possessed extensive knowledge, exquisite taste and judgment, and great liberality of mind. 2. 4 * Observations on the duties and offices of a Physician, and on the method of prosecuting inquiries in Philosophy,“1770, 8vo, published by one who heard the professor deliver them, in lectures; but they were acknowledged, and republished in a more correct form, by the author, in the same year. 3.” Elements of the practice of Physic for the use of Students," 1772, repubiished 1774, and intended as a text book, to be illustrated by his lectures on the practice of physic; but he died before he had finished it, and before he had finished the first course of lectures which he gave on that text.

The doctor’s death happened while he was lecturing on the pleurisy. His son, Dr. James Gregory, finished that course of lectures, to the general satisfaction of the university and published in 1774, a small tract of his father’s, entitled “A Father’s Legacy to his Daughters” which was written solely for their use (about eight years before the author died) with the tenderest affection, and deepest concern for their happiness. This work evinces great knowledge of human nature, and of the world, and manifests such solicitude for their welfare as strongly recommends the advice which he gives. In 1788, all his works were published together in 4 vols. 8vo, with a life of himself, and an account of his family.

, a learned divine of a different family from the preceding, wus born November 10, 1607, at Agmondesham, in Buckinghamshire. There appeared in his infancy such a strong inclination to learning, as recommended him to the notice of some persons of the best rank in the town; and, his parents being well respected for their piety and honesty, it was resolved to give him a liberal education at the university, the ex pence of which they were not able to support. To this purpose, he was chosen at the age of fifteen, by Dr. Crooke, to go with sir William Drake to Christ church, in Oxford, whom he attended in the station of a servitor, and he was soon after retained by sir Robert Crook in the same capacity; Dr. George MorJey, afterwards bishop of Winchester, was their tutor. Mr. Gregory made the best use of this favour, and applied so closely to his studies, for several years at the rate of sixteen hours each day, that he became almost a prodigy for learning. He took his first degree in arts in 1628, and commenced master in 1631; about which time, entering into orders, the dean, Dr. Brian Duppa, gave him a chaplain’s place in that cathedral. In 1634, he published a second edition of sir Thomas Ridley’s “View of the Civil and Ecclesiastical Law,” 4to, with notes; which was well received, and afforded the world eminent proofs of his extensive knowledge; the notes shewing him well versed in? historical, ecclesiastical, ritual, and oriental learning, and a considerable master of the Saxon, French, Italian, Spanish, and all the eastern languages. All these acquisitions were the pure fruit of his own industry; for he had no assistance, except for the Hebrew tongue, in which Mr. John Dod, the decalogist, gave him some directions, during one vacation that he resided with him near Banbury. His merit engaged the farther kindness of Dr. Duppa; and, when that prelate was promoted to the bishopric of Chichester in 1638, he made Mr. Gregory his domestic chaplain, and some time after gave him a prebend in that church. His patron also continued his favours after his translation to the see of Salisbury in 1G41, when he seated him in a stall of that cathedral.

But he did not enjoy the benefit of these preferments long being a firm loyalist, as well as his patron > he was deprived or both by the tyranny of the usurpers, and was reduced some years before his death to great distress. In. these circumstances, he was taken into the house of one Sutton, to whose son he had been tutor; this was an obscure ale-house on Kiddington-green, near Oxford, where he died March 13, 1646, of an hereditary gout, with which he had been troubled for above twenty years, and which at last seized his stomach. His corpse was carried to Oxford, and interred, at the expence of some friends, in that cathedral. He was honoured with the acquaintance and favour of the greatest men of the age, and held a correspondence with several eminent persons abroad, as well Jews and Jesuits, as others. His works are, “Notes and Observations on some passages of Scripture,” published a little before his death in 1646, 4to, and besides being reprinted four times in the same form, were translated into Latin, and inserted in the “Critici Sacri.” His posthumous works were published by his friend Mr. John Gurgany, B D. of Merton college, in a quarto volume, entitled “Gregorii Posthuma,” 1650, 1664, 1671, and 1683. This volume contains, I. “A Discourse of the LXX Interpreters; the place and manner of their interpretation.” II. “A Discourse declaring what time the Nicene Creed began to be sung in the Church.” III. “A Sermon upon the Resurrection, from 1 Cor. xv. verse 20.” IV. “Kaivav tievrep-, or, a Disproof of him in the third of St. Luke, verse 36.” V. “Episcopus Puerorum in die Innocentium.” VI. “De JEris & Epochis, shewing the several accounts of time among all nations from the creation to the present age.” VII. “The Assyrian Monarchy, being a description of its rise and fall.” “VIII.” The description and use of the Terrestrial Globe.“Besides these, he wrote a tract entitled” Alkibla,“in which he endeavoured to vindicate the antiquity of worshiping towards the East. There is a manuscript of his entitled” Observationes in loca quaedam excerpta ex Johannis Malelae chronographia,“in the public library at Oxford; and he intended to have published a Latin translation of that author with annotations. He translated likewise from Greek into Latin, 1.” Palladius de Gentibus Indiae & Brachmanibus“2.” S. Ambrosius de Moribus Brachmannorum“3.” Anonymus de Brachmanibus" which translations came after his death into the hands of Mr. Edmund Chilmead, chaplain of Christ church, Oxford, and then into those of Edward Byshe, esq. who published them in his own name at London, 1665, 4to.

, D. D. a divine and miscellanebus writer, was descended from a family, originally from Scotland, but a branch of which was settled in Ireland. His father, who had been educated in Trinity college, Dublin, held, at the time of his son’s birth, the living of Edernin, and a prebend in the cathedral of Ferns. Dr. Gregory was born April 14, 1754, and after his father’s death in 1766, was removed to Liverpool, where his mother fixed her residence. He passed some time under the tuition of an excellent schoolmaster of the name of Holder), by whom he was much distinguished for his proficiency in learning. As it was his mother’s desire that he should be brought up to commerce, he spent some years in mercantile employments; but a taste for literature, which continued to be his ruling propensity, produced a final determination in favour of a learned profession. Although the regular process of education for this purpose had been interrupted, the intervening variety of pursuit and observation proved the foundation of a great store of information relative to the arts and sciences, to commerce, manufactures, and political institutions, that was very useful in his subsequent compilations. When his destination was fixed, he passed an interval of study at the university of Edinburgh, and in 1776 entered into holy orders. He first officiated as a curate at Liverpool, where he distinguished himself as a preacher, and wrote some occasional pieces in the periodical journals and magazines, particularly against the slave trade, which he had the spirit to attack in the principal seat of that traffic. In 1782 he removed to London, and obtained the curacy of St. Giles’s Cripplegate, in which parish he became very popular, both in that capacity and afterwards as their morningpreacher. His other London preferments, if they may be so called, were the curacy and lectureship of St. Botolph’s, the lectureship of St. Lute’s, one of the weekly lectureships of St. Antholin’s, and a small prehend in St. Paul’s, which he relinquished for the rectory of Stapleford in Hertfordshire. He was also some time one of the evening preachers at the Foundling hospital. In 1804 he was presented by Mr. Addington, now lord Sidmbuth, to the valuable living of West Ham in Essex, where in a little time the powers of his constitution, although apparently a strong one, suddenly gave way, and he died, after a short confinement, March 12, 1808.

The greater part of Dr. Gregory’s time, after his arrival in London, was spent in literary employment, and principally in compilations that were successful and useful. He was the first who, about 1782-3, suggested a series of extracts from eminent authors, which were published by the late Mr. Kearsley of Fleet-street, under the name of “Beauties,” and had a very extensive sale. He afterwards published an original work, entitled “Essays historical and moral,” 1785, &vo, which introduced him very favourably to the notice of the public, and reached a second edition in 1788. This was followed by, 1. A translation of Lowth’s Lectures on the sacred poetry of the Hebrews, 1787.“2.” Church History,“1788, and 1795, 2 vols. 3.” Life of Chatterton,“1780, 8vo, inserted afterwards in the” Biographia Britannica,“for which it was originally intended. 4.” Sermons,“1789. 5. A translation of Telemachus, or rather a revisal of Hawkesworth’s translation, 1795, 4to. 6.” The Economy of Nature,“3 vols. 8vo. 7.” A Dictionary of Arts and Sciences,“1806, 2 vols. 4to. To some of these it is supposed he contributed little more than his name; but the number of works which he compiled without his name, would furnish perhaps a more numerous list. Among others he was many years editor of the” New Annual Register,“conducted through the whole of the French war with bitter hostility to the measures of the British government. He took advantage, however, of the short interval of peace, to give it a turn favourable to the then administration, which it is said procured him the living of West Ham. He left in the press” Letters on Natural and Experimental Philosophy,“and a” Series of Letters to his Son," which have since been published.

, a celebrated Dominican in the sixteenth century, one of the greatest masters of what Roman catholics call the spiritual life, was born in 1504, at Grenada. He was educated in the house of the marquis de Mondejar, and acquired great reputation by his piety, preaching, and writings. The kings of Portugal and Castile had a particular esteem for him, and would have raised him to the highest ecclesiastical dignities, but he persisted in refusing their offers. He died December 31, 1588. His works have been translated into French by Mr. Girard, in 2 vols. folio, and 10 vols. 8vo. They are said to be written with uncommon eloquence of style, and contain solid instruction. The principal are, “The Sinner’s Guide,” 1 vol. the “Memorial of the Christian Life,” with the supplement, 3 vols. a “Treatise on Prayer,” 2 vols. an excellent “Catechism,” 4 vols. the edition of 1709 is more complete than the preceding ones. “Instructions for Preachers,” 8vo, a treatise on the duties of bishops; “Sermons,” 6 vols. 8vo, Antwerp, 1604, in Latin the Life of the Holy Priest, Avila, &C.

, descended of an ancient family distinguished by many honourable persons, which took its name from a town so called in Norfolk, was the younger son of sir Richard Gresham, knight, alderman, sheriff, and lord mayor of London, an opulent merchant, and a man of great public spirit, who died in February 1548. His brother, sir John Gresham, was also an opulent merchant, and had served the offices of alderman, sheriff, and lord mayor. He died of a pestilential fever in 1556, after, among other acts of munificence, endowing the free school of Holt in Norfolk, and bestowing the government of it on the fishmongers’ company in London. Thomas, the son of the preceding sir Richard, was born in 1519 at London, and bound apprentice to a mercer there while he was young: but, to enlarge his mind by an education suitable to his birth and fortune, was sent to Caius college, then Gonvil-hall, in Cambridge; where he remained a considerable time, and made such improvements in learning, that Caius the founder of the college styles him “doctissimus mercator,” the very learned merchant. However, the profits of trade were then so great, and such large estates had been raised by it in his own family, that he afterwards engaged in it, and was admitted a member of the Mercers’ company in 1543. About this time he warned Anne, the daughter of William Femley, esq. of West Creting, in Suffolk, und widow of William Heade, of Fulham, in Middlesex, esq., by whom he had a son named Richard, who not long after succeeded his father in the office of agent to king Edward for taking up money of the merchants at Antwerp, and removed to that city with his family in 1551.

The business of his employ gave him a great deal of trouble and much uneasiness. The usual method in which the business of taking up money of the merchants at Antwerp for the king’s use, had been managed, was greatly to the prejudice of the crown of England, as well by giving a very large interest for the money borrowed, as other inconveniences, when the principal was not paid within the time of the contract. And as the money which was now taken up in Mr. Gresham’s agency, was not paid at the time agreed on, this gave him great uneasiness, his business being then to get it prolonged, which was not to be done without the consideration of the king’s purchasing jewels or some other commodities to a large amount, as a consideration for prolonging the debt, besides continuing the interest. But this way of proceeding he neither thought for his majesty’s honour nor his own credit, as his agent, and therefore projected the following scheme to bring the king wholly out of debt in two years Provided the king and council would assign him 1200l. or 1300l. a week, to be secretly received at one man’s hands, that so it might be kept secret, he would so use that matter in Antwerp, that every day he would be seen to take up in his own name 200l. sterling by exchange, which would amount in one year to 73,000l. and so doing; it should not be perceived nor give occasion to make the exchange fall. He proposed farther, that the king should take all the lead into his own hands, and making a staple of it, should put out a proclamation or shut up the custom-house, that no lead should be conveyed out of the kingdom for five years; by which the king might cause it to rise, and feed them at Antwerp from time to time, as they should have need. By which means he might keep his money within the realm, and bring himself out of the debts which his father and the Jate duke of Somerset had brought upon him. This scheme being put into execution, had the proposed effect in discharging his majesty’s debts, which were very considerable, as well as in raising his majesty’s credit so high abroad, that he might have borrowed what sums he pleased; and, by the advantageous turn which by this means was given to the exchange in favour of England, not only the price of all foreign commodities was greatly sunk and abated; but likewise gold and silver, which before had been exported in large quantities, were most plentifully brought back again.

In the performance of these services, Gresham often stretched his own credit, and kept up the exchange at his own risk, by which he frequently lost several hundred pounds at a time; and on one particular time he took up 50,000l. for the king’s service. In the course of these transactions, he had frequently occasion to meddle with political affairs, as well as those immediately committed to his charge, through the application of the emperor’s sister, then regent in the Netherlands, as well as that of the Icing his master; so that he made at least forty journeys from England to Antwerp during the remainder of the short reign of Edward VI. These services were so acceptable to the young monarch, that about three weeks before his death, he granted to Mr. Gresham, as a mark of his favour, Iool a year to him and his heirs for ever. Mr. Gresham also obtained, in the course of that reign grants of estates and reversions to the value of about 300l. a year. He was but a young man when first employed by king Edward; and the skill and prudence displayed in the various matters in which he was employed, discovered an uncommon knowledge of mercantile affairs. But notwithstanding his abilities, and the considerable services he had rendered to the crown, he was, upon the accession of queen Mary, removed from his agency. This induced him to draw up a memorial of his services to the late king, which he sent to a minister of state to be laid before her majesty; and the services lepresented as done, not only to the king, but to the nation in general, by the increase both of money and trade, and the advancement of the public credit, being observed to be fact, he was taken soon after into the queen’s service, and reinstated in his former employment, as appears by the commissions given him at different times during that reign. After the decease of queen Mary, in 1558, he was taken immediately into the service of queen Elizabeth, who employed him on her accession to provide and buy up arms; and in 1559 she conferred on him the honour of knighthood, and appointed him her agent in foreign parts. In this state of credit and reputation, he thought proper to provide himself with a mansion-house in the city, suitable to his station and dignity; and with this spirit built a large and sumptuous house for his own dwelling, on the west-side of Bishopsgate-street, London, afterwards called Gresham-college, where he maintained an establishment becoming his character and station. But this flow of prosperity received a heavy check by the loss of his only son, aged 16 years, who died in 1564, and was buried in St. Helen’s church, opposite to his mansion house.

At this time the merchants of London met in Lombardstreet, exposed to the open air and all the injuries of the weather. To remedy wbich inconvenience, sir Thomas’s father during his shrievalty wrote a letter to sir Thomas Audeley then lord-privy-seal, acquainting him that there were certain houses in that street belonging to sir George Monoux, which if purchased and pulled down, a handsome exchange might be built on the ground; he therefore desired his lordship to move his majesty, that a letter might be sent to sir George, requiring him to sell those houses to the mayor and commonalty of the city of London for that purpose. The building he supposes would cost upwards of 2000l., 1000l. of which he doubts not to raise before he was out of his office: but nothing effectual was done in it. Sir Thomas therefore took up his father’s design, and improving upon his spirit, proposed that if the citizens would give him a piece of ground in a proper place large enough for the purpose, he would build ari exchange at his own expence with large and covered walks, where the merchants and traders of all sorts might daily assemble and transact business at all seasons, without interruption from the weather or impediments of any kind. This generous offer was gratefully accepted, and in 1566 several houses upon Cornhill and the back of it, with three alleys, called Swan-alley, New-alley, and St. Christopher’s alley, containing in all eighty houses, were purchased by the citizens for more than 3532l. and sold for 478l. on condition of pulling them down, and carrying off the stuff. This done, the ground-plot was made plain at the charges of the city, and possession given to sir Thomas, who was styled “Agent to the queen’s highness” and who, on the 7th of June, laid the first stone of the foundation and the work was forthwith followed with such diligence, that by Nov. 1567, the same was covered with slate, and the shell shortly after fully finished. It is said that the timber of which this fabric was built, was first framed and put together at Battisford, near Ipswich, in Suffolk, and thence brought to London.

The plan of this edifice, was formed from the exchange at Antwerp, being an oblong square, with a portico supported with pillars of marble, ten on the north and south sides, and seven on the east and west; under which stood the shops each seven feet and a hall' long, and five feet broad, in all 120, twenty-five on each side east and west, and thirty-four and an half north, and thirty-five and an half south, each of which paid sir Thomas 47. 105. a year upon an average. There were likewise other shops fitted up at first in the vaults below, but the dampness and darkness rendered these so inconvenient, that the vaults were soon let out to other uses; upon the roof stood at each earner, upon a pedestal, a grasshopper, which was the crest of sir Thomas’s arms. This edifice was fully completed, and the shops opened in 1569; and Jan. 29, 1570, queen Elizabeth attended by her nobility, came from Somerset-house thither, and caused it by a trumpet and a herald to be proclaimed “The Royal Exchange.” The story, however, of sir Thomas’s having on this day reduced a costly pearl to powder, and drank it up in a glass of wine, seems to rest on very slender foundation, and is very inconsistent with his character, who knew how to unite the magnificence of the nobleman with the prudence of the merchant.

In the mean time he had scarcely entered upon the execution of this noble design, when in 1566, he was sent over to Antwerp to take up the sum of 14,667l. Flemish money, for her majesty, and prolong the time of payment for 34,3S5l. more; and in December of the same year, there was another debt of the queen’s prolonged of S532l. Flemish. Sir Thomas, however, perceiving the disadvantage of borrowing money from foreigners, at an exorbitant interest, advised her majesty to take up what money she wanted of her own merchants; which advice, however, was not immediately adopted, but in 1569 an opportunity occurred which rendered his advice necessary. The quarrel which at this time took place between queen Elizabeth and the king of Spain, obliged the English merchants to send their effects to Hamburgh, on which the duke of Alva, governor of the Netherlands, prohibited all commerce with England. Upon this, secretary Cecil, who was then at the head of the exchequer, had nis tears lot the merchants would not have money enough to carry on their trade, and the queen lest the falling off in the duties on cloth might prevent her paying her debts abroad. Sir Thomas, however, when consulted, told the secretary that in his opinion the queen needed be at no difficulty to pay her creditors, if she saw her merchants well paid in London their first payment, which was half of her debt to them; for by the time the other half should be payable, the merchants would have plenty of money both here and at Hamburgh. He assured him, that the commodities shipped by our merchants from Hamburgh were well worth 100,000l.; and those shipped hence with our goods thither, were worth upwards of 200,000l. so that the duty upon cloths (10,000l. at least) would enable the queen to discharge her debt. As to the secretary’s fears respecting the merchants, sir Thomas observed that there was no foundation for them, considering the great vent our commodities had at Hamburgh already, and were likely to have, and therefore he advised that the first payment agreed on at Hamburgh should above all things be provided for; assuring the secretary, that he knew certainly that the duke of Alva was more troubled with the queen’s great credit, and with the vent of her commodities at Hamburgh, than he was with any thing else, and “quaked for fear;” that this xvas one of the principal hindrances to the payment of the tenth, penny, then demanded by the duke for the sale of any kind of goods in the Netherlands; which he believed would be his undoing. He then renewed his advice respecting borrowing of her own subjects in preference to foreigners, urging many reasons grounded on facts. When, however, the motion of lending money to the queen was first proposed among the merchants by sir Thomas, it met with great opposition, and was negatived in the common-hall; but upon more mature consideration afterwards several of the merchants and aldermen lent her majesty various sumg of money, to the value of 16,000l. for six months, at 6 per cent, interest for that time. She gave bonds to each of them separately for re-payment, and likewise -other accustomed bonds to discharge them of the statute of usury; and when the six months were expired, she prolonged the payment for six month? more, paying the same interest, with brokage. As her majesty was thus enabled to borrow money of her own subjects, instead of foreigners, and the commerce with Flanders, particularly Antwerp, was now prohibited, sir Thomas’s office as agent for her majesty in those parts, ceased of course. But in 1572, to shew her regard for him, she was pleased to appoint him, together with the archbishop of Canterbury, the bishop of London, and other persons of eminence, assistants to the lord mayor for the government of the city of London during her intended progress that summer. This method was afterwards continued on similar occasions, and sir Thomas Gresham was joined in the commission till 1578.

Though sir Thomas had purchased very large estates in several counties of England, yet he thought a country seat near London, to which he might retire from business and the hurry of the city as often as he pleased, would be very convenient. With this view he bought Osterley-park, near Brentford, in Middlesex, where he built a large magnificent seat within the park, which he impaled, being well wooded, and furnished with many ponds stocked with fish and fowl, and of great use for mills, as paper-mills, oilmills, and corn-mills. In 1578, queen Elizabeth visited Osterley, where sir Thomas entertained her magnificently. On this occasion, having given it as her opinion that the court before the house would look better divided with a wajl, sir Thomas in the night sent for workmen from London, who so speedily and so silently performed their task, that before morning the wall was finished, to the great surprize of the queen and her courtiers, one of whom, however, observed, that it was no wonder that he who could build a change should so soon change a building. This became afterwards the property of the family of Child, and is now that of the right hon. the earl of Jersey, by marriage into that family.

Before Osterley was completed, sir Thomas projected and executed that noble design of converting his mansionhouse in Bishopsgate-street into a seat for the muses, and endowing it with the revenues arising from the royal exchange after his decease. While he was meditating this design, the university of Cambridge wrote him an elegant Latin letter, reminding him of a promise, as they had been informed, to give them 500l. either towards building a new college there, or repairing one already built. This letter was dated March 14, 1574-5; and it was followed by another of the 25th, to acquaint him with a report they had heard, that he had promised lady Burghley both to found and endow a college for the profession of the seven liberal sciences. They observe, that the only place proper for such a design, was either London, Oxford, or Cambridge; they endeavour to dissuade him from London, lest it should prove prejudicial to the two universities; and they hope he will not make choice of Oxford, since he was himself bred at Cambridge, which might presume upon a superior regard from him on that account. At the same time, they wrote another letter to the lady Burghley, in which they earnestly request that she will please to use her interest with him, to rix upon Cambridge for the place of his intended college.

But these letters had not the desired effect he persisted in his resolution to settle it in his house at London and accordingly, by an indenture dated May 20, 1575, he made a disposition of his several manors, lands, tenements, and hereditaments; with such limitations and restrictions, particularly as to the royal exchange and his mansionhouse, as might best secure his views with regard to the uses for which he designed them. This indenture was soon followed by two wills, one of his goods, and the other of his real estates: the former of these bears date July 4th ensuing, whereby he bequeaths to his wife, whom he makes his sole executrix, all his goods, as ready money, plate, jewels, chains of gold, with all his stock of sheep and other cattle if within the realm of England, and likewise gives several legacies to his relations and friends and to all his servants, amounting in the whole to upwards of 2000l. besides some small annuities. The other will is dated July the 5th, wherein he gives one moiety of the royal exchange to the mayor and commonalty of London, and the other to the Mercers company, for the salaries of seven lecturers in divinity, law, physic, astronomy, geometry, music, and rhetoric, at 50l. per annum for each, with his house in Bishopsgate-street for the lecturers’ residence, where the lectures were to be read. He likewise leaves 53l. 6s. Sd. yearly for the provision of eight almsfolks residing in the alms-houses behind his house, and lOl. yearly to each of the prisons in Newgate, Ludgate, KingVbench, the Marshalsea, and Compter in Woodstreet, and the like sum to each of the hospitals of Christchurch, St. Bartholomew, Bedlam, Southwark, and the Poultry-compter; and 100l. yearly to provide a dinner fof the whole Mercers company in their hall on every of their quarter days, at 25l. each dinner. By this disposition sufficient care was taken that the two corporations, to whom the affair was trusted, should receive no damage by the execution of it; for the stated annual payments amount to no more than 6031. 6s. Sd. and the yearly rents of the exchange received by sir Thomas were 740l. besides the additional profits that must arise from time to time by fines, which were very considerable. But the lady Anne his wife was to enjoy both the mansion-house and the exchange during her life if she survived sir Thomas, and then they were both vested in the two corporations for the uses declared in the will for the term of fifty years; which limitation was made on account of the statutes of mortmain, that prohibited the alienation of lands or tenements to any corporation, without licence first had from the crown. And that space of time the testator thought sufficient for procuring such licence, the doing of which he earnestly recommends to them without delay; in default whereof, at the expiration of fifty years, these estates were to go to his heirs at law.

Having thus settled his affairs so much to his own honour, the interest of the public, and the regards due to his family, he was at leisure to reap the fruits of his industry and success. But he did not long enjoy this felicity, for Nov. 21, 1579, coming from the exchange to his house in Bishopsgate-street, he suddenly fell down in his kitchen, became speechless, and presently died. He was buried in his own parish church of St. Helen’s. His obsequies were performed in a very solemn manner, the corpse being attended by 100 poor men, and the like number of poor women, whom he had ordered to be cloathed in black gowns of 5s. 8d. per yard at his own expence. The charges of the funeral amounted to 800. His corpse was deposited in a vault at the north-east corner of the church, which he had before provided for himself and family, with a curious marble tomb over it; on the south and west sides of which are his own arms, and on the north and east the same impaled with those of his lady. The arms of sir Thomas, together with the City of London and Mercers company, are likewise painted in the glass of the east window of the church, above the tomb, which stood as he left it without any inscription, till 1736, when the following words, taken from the parish register, were cut on the stone that covers it, by order of the church-wardens: “Sir Thomas Gresham, knight, was buried December 15, 1579.” By his death many large estates in several counties of England, amounting at that time to the clear yearly value of 2300l. and upwards, came to his lady, who survived him many years, and continued to reside after his decease in the mansionhouse at London, in the winter, and at Osterley-park in the summer season, at which last place she died Nov. 23, 1596, very aged. Her corpse was brought to London, and buried in the same vault with her husband.

Mr. Ward has drawn sir Thomas’s character at large, and observes, that he had the happiness of a mind every way suited to his fortune, generous and benign; ready to perform any good actions and encourage them in others. He was a great friend and patron of our celebrated rnartyrologist John Fox. He was well acquainted with the ancient and several modern languages; he had a very comprehensive knowledge of all affairs relating to commerce, whether foreign or domestic; and his success was not less, being in his time esteemed trie richest commoner in England. He transacted queen Elizabeth’s mercantile affairs so constantly, that he was called “The Royal Merchant,” and his house was sometimes appointed for the reception of foreign princes upon their first arrival at London. As no one could be more ready to perform any generous actions which might contribute to the honour of this country, so he very well knew how to make the best use of them for the most laudable purposes. Nor was he less serviceable both to the queen and her ministry on other occasions, who often consulted him, and sought his advice in matters of the greatest importance relating to the welfare of the government. But the most shining part of his character appears in his public benefactions. The royal exchange was not pnly a singular ornament to the city of London, and a great convenience to the merchants, who wanted such a place to meet and transact their affairs in, but likewise contributed very much to the promotion of trade, both by the number of shops erected there, and the much greater number of the poor; who were employed in working for them. And the donation of his own mansionhouse for a seat of learning and the liberal arts, with the handsome provision made for the endowment and support of.it, was such an instance of a generous and public spirit as has been equalled by few, and must perpetuate his memory with the highest esteem and gratitude so long as any regard to learning and virtue is preserved among us. Nor ought his charities to the poor, his alms-houses, and the liberal contributions to the ten prisons and hospitals in London and Southwark, to be omitted.

His public benefactions, the royal exchange, and his mansion-house on the decease of his lady, immediately came into the hands of the two corporations, the City of London and the Mercers’ company, who, according to their trust, obtained a patent from the crown, dated Feb. 3, 1614, 12 Jacobi I. to hold them for ever upon the terms expressed in the will of the donor.

, a French poet of considerable eminence, was born 1709, at Amiens, entered among the Jesuits at 16, and quitted the society at the age of 26, about the end of J735. It was about this time his “Ver Vert” first came out, which has been so justly admired, as the production of a genius (in Rousseau’s judgment) “at once refined, embellished, ornamented;” appearing in short, “in all its perfection.” This great poet considers the author as “displaying in his familiar style, whatever is most brilliant in poetry, and every idea >vith which a complete knowledge of the world could furnish a man who had passed his whole life in it.” He thought the same of the “Chartreuse,” another of his productions, but accused its author of negligence in his other pieces, being of opinion that the familiar style did not exclude the perfection of poetry. M. Cresset was admitted into the French academy in 1748, and gave up poetry that he might devote himself wholly to works of piety, and died June 16, 1777, at Amiens, after having received letters of nobility, and been appointed historiographer of the order of St. Lazore. He married in 1751, mademoiselle Galland, daughter of a merchant of Amiens, but had no children. Besides the pieces above-mentioned, he wrote “Le Lutrin vivant;” Les Ombres;“” Epistles;“66 Odes” a poetical translation of Virgil’s Eclogues “Edward III.” a tragedy “Sidney,” and “Le Mechant,” comedies the latter of which is deservedly admired. They have all been collected in 1748, 2 vols. 12mo. Two little poems in the style of “Ver Vert” were found among his papers, one entitled “Le Gazetin;” the other, “Le Parrain Magnifique,” but not the two cantos which he had added to the Ver Vert. This last poem has been versified in English by Gilbert Cooper, and by Dr. Geddes.

, a learned German, was born at Marcdorf about 1561, and entered among the society of Jesuits at the age of seventeen. When he had finished his studies, he was appointed a professor at Ingolstad, where he spent twenty-four years, teaching philosophy, morality, and school-divinity, employments which did not hinder him from, composing an unusual number of books. The catalogue of them, as given by Niceron, consists of near 153 articles; which, he tells us, were copied by him from the proposals, published in 1753, for priming an edition of all Gretser’s works at Ratisbon, in 17 vols. folio. His great erudition was equalled by his modesty, and we are told he could not bear to be commended. The inhabitants of Marcdorf were desirous of having his picture; but when informed of the earnest application they had made to his superiors for that purpose, he expressed his chagrin, and told them, that if they wanted his picture, they need but draw that of an ass. Still, however, to shew their regard, and in a way more acceptable to him, they purchased all his works, and devoted them to the use of the public. He died at Ingolstad, in 1635. He spent his whole life in writing against foreign and English protestant authors (See Thomas James), and in defending the order to which he belonged. Some authors have bestowed very great encomiums upon him, but others think his works only compilations of materials that may be useful to writers of more judgment. They were printed according to the proposals above-mentioned, at Ratisbon, 1739, 17 vols. folio.

, lord Brooke, an ingenious writer, was the eldest son of sir Fulk Greville, of Beauchamp-court (at Alcaster) in Warwickshire, and born there in 1554. It is conjectured, that he was educated at the school in Shrewsbury; whence he was removed to Cambridge, and admitted a fellow-commoner at Trinitycollege; and some time after, making a visit to Oxford, he became a member of that university, but of what college is not certain. Having completed his academical studies, he travelled abroad to finish his education and Upon his return, being well accomplished, was introduced to the court of queen Elizabeth by his uncle Robert Greville, where he was esteemed a most ingenious person, and particularly favoured by the lovers of arts and sciences. He was soon nominated to some beneficial employment in the court of marches of Wales by his kinsman, sir Henry Sidney, then lord-president of that court and principality.

Our author was not then above twenty-two years of age, so that this post may be esteemed an honourable attestation of his merit. But the nature of it did not please him; his ambition prompted him to another course of life. He had already made some advances in the queen’s favour, had attained a competent familiarity with the modern languages, and some expertness in the martial exercises of those times; these were qualifications for a foreign employment, which was more agreeable to the activity of his temper, and promised a quicker access to some of the first posts in the state. In reality he was so eager to advance his fortune in this line, that to gratify his desire, he ventured to incur his royal mistress’s displeasure, and made several attempts in it, not only with, but even without her majesty’s consent. Out of many of these we have an account of the few following from his own pen. First, when the two mighty armies of Don John and the duke Casimire were to meet in the Low-countries, he applied and obtained her majesty’s leave under her own hand, to go thither; but after his horses with all other preparations were shipped at Dover, the queen (who always discouraged these excursions) sent her messenger, sir Edward Dyer, with her mandate to stop him. He was so much vexed at this disappointment, that afterwards, when secretary Walsingham was sent ambassador in 1578, to treat with those two princes, an opportunity of seeing an affair in which so much Christian blood and so many Christian empires were concerned, was so tempting, that he resolved not to risque a denial, and therefore stole away without leave, and went over with the secretary incog. The consequence was, that at his return the queen forbade him her presence for many months. To the same ambition may also be referred his engagement with sir Philip Sidney to accompany sir Francis Drake in his last expedition but one to the WestIndies in 1515, in which they were both frustrated by the same authority. Again, when the earl of Leicester was sent general of her majesty’s forces the same year, and had given Mr. Greville the command of one hundred horse, “Then I,” to use his own words, “giving my humour over to good order, yet found that neither the intercession of this grandee, seconded with my own humble suit, and many other honourable friends of mine, could prevail against the constant course of this excellent lady (the queen) with her servants, so as I was forced to tarry behind, and for this importunity of mine to change my course, and seem to press nothing before my service about her; this princess of government as well as kingdoms made me live in her court a spectacle of disfavour too long as I conceived.”

During his excursions abroad, his royal mistress granted him the reversion of two of the best offices in the court of the marches of Wales, one of which falling to him in 1580, he met with some difficulties about the profits. In this contest he experienced the friendship of sir Philip Sidney, who by a letter written to his father’s secretary, Mr. Molyneux, April 10, 1581, prevailed on him not to oppose his cousin Greville' s title in any part or construction of his patents; and a letter of sir Francis Walsingham to the president, the next day, April 11, put an end to the opposition that had been made from another quarter. This office appears to be clerk of the signet to the council of Wales, which is said to have brought him in yearly above 2000l. arising chiefly from the processes which went out of that court, all of which are made out by that officer. He was also constituted secretary for South and North Wales by the queen’s letters patent, bearing date April 25, 1583. In the midst of these civil employments he made a conspicuous figure when the French ambassadors, accompanied by great numbers of their nobility, were in England a second time to treat of the queen’s marriage with the duke of Anjou, in 1581. Tilts and tournaments were the courtly entertainments in those days; and they were performed in the most magnificent manner on this occasion by two noblemen, beside sir Philip Sidney and Fulk Greville, who with the rest behaved so bravely as to win the reputation of a most gallant knight. In 1586 these two friends were separated by the unfortunate death of the former, who be* queathed to his dear friend one moiety of his books.

In 1558 Mr. Greville attended his kinsman, the earl of Essex, to Oxford; and among other persons in that favourite’s train was created M. A. April 11, that year. In 1558 he was accused to the lords of the council, by a certificate of several gentlemen borderers upon Farickwood in Warwickshire, of having made waste there to the value of 14,000 but the prosecution seems to have been dropped, and, October 1597, he received the honour of knighthood. In the beginning of March the same year, he applied for the office of treasurer of the war; and about two years afterwards, in the 41st of Elizabeth, he obtained the place of treasurer of marine causes for life. In 1599 a commission was ordered to be made out for him as rear-admiral of the fleet, which was intended to be sent forth against another threatened invasion by the Spaniards.

During this glorious reign he frequently represented his county in the house of commons, together with sir Thomas Lacy; and it has been observed that a better choice could not have been made, as both of them were learned, wise, and honest. He continued a favourite of queen Elizabeth to the end of her reign. The beginning of the next opened no less in his favour. At the coronation of James I. July 15, 1603, he was made K. B. and his office of secretary to the council of the court of marches of Wales was confirmed to him for life, by a patent bearing date July 24. In the second year of this king he obtained a grant of Warwick castle. He was greatly pleased with this favour; and, the castle being in a ruinous condition, he laid out at least 20,000l. in repairing it.

He was afterwards possessed of several very beneficial places in the marches court of Wales, and at this time he seems to have confined his views within the limits of these offices. He perceived the measures of government quite altered, and the state waning from the lustre in which he had seen it shine; besides, he had little hopes of being preferred to any thing considerable in the ministry, as he met with some discouragements from sir Robert Cecil, the secretary, and the persons in power. In this position of affairs he seems to have formed some schemes of retirement, in order to write the history of queen Elizabeth’s life. With this view he drew up a plan, commencing with the union of the two roses in the marriage of Henry VII. and had made some progress in the execution of it; but the perusal of the records in the council chest being denied him by the secretary, as he could not complete his work in that authentic and substantial manner which would do him credit, he broke off the design, and disposed himself to revise the product of his juvenile studies and his poetical recreations with sir Philip Sidney.

During the life of the treasurer Cecil, he obtained no advancement in the court or state; but, in 1615, some time after his death, was made under-treasurer and chancellor of the exchequer; in consequence of which he was called to the board of privy-council. In 1617 he obtained from the king a special charter, confirming all such liberties as had been granted to any of his ancestors in behalf of the town of Alcester, upon a new reserved rent of ten shillings a year; and, in 1620, was created lord Brooke of Beau* champ-court. He obtained this dignity as well by his merit and fidelity in the discharge of his offices as by his noble descent from theNevils, Willoughbys de Brook, and Beauchamps. In September 1621, he was made one of the lords of the king’s bed-chamber; and on this, resigning his post in the exchequer, he was succeeded therein by Richard Weston, afterwards earl of Portland. After the demise of king James, he continued in the privy-council of Charles I. in the beginning of whose reign he founded a historylecture in the university of Cambridge, and endowed it with a salary of lOOl. per annum. He did not long survive this last act of generosity; for, though he was a munificent patron of learning and learned men, he at last fell a sacrifice to the extraordinary outrage of a discontented domestic. The account we have of this fatal event is, that his lordship, neglecting to reward one Ralph Heywood, who had spent the greatest part of his life in his service, this attendant expostulated thereupon with his lordship in his bed-chamber, at Brook-house in Holborn; and, being severely reproved for it, presently gave his lordship a mortal stab in the back with a knife or sword; after which he withdrew into another room, and, locking the door, murdered himself with the same weapon. He died September 30, 1628, and his corpse being wrapt in lead, was conveyed from Brook-house, Holborn, to Warwick; where it was interred on the north side of the choir of St. Mary’s church, there, in his own vault, which had formerly been a chapter-house of the church; and where, upon his monument, there is this inscription: “Fulke Greville, servant to queen Elizabeth, counsellor to king James, and friend to sir Philip Sidney. Tropheum peccati.” He made that dear friend the great exemplar of his life in every thing; and Sidney being often celebrated as the patron of the muses in general, and of Spenser in particular, so we are told, lord Brooke desired to be known to posterity under no other character than that of Shakspeare’s and Ben Jonson’s master, lord-chancellor Egerton and bishop Overal’s patron. His lordship also obtained the office of clarencieux at arms for Mr. Camden, who very gratefulty acknowledged it in his life-time, and at his death left him a piece of plate in his will. He also raised John Speed from a mechanic to be an historiographer.

His lordship had an inclination to history and poetry. Hence, with respect to the former, it was that lord Bacon submitted his “Life of Henry VII.” to his perusal and animadversions. And his extraordinary kindness to sir William Davenant must be added to other conspicuous evidences of the latter; that poet he took into his family when very young, and was so much delighted with his promising genius, that, as long as the patron lived, the poet had his residence with him, and probably formed the plan of some of his first plays under his lordship’s encouragement, since they were published soon after his death. This noble lord was never married, so that his honour falling by the patent to his kinsman Robert Greville, he directed his estate also by his will to go along with it to the same relation, being next of kin to him.

Notwithstanding lord Orford’s flippant and detracting estimate of lord Brooke’s talents and character, he appears to have cherished a taste for all kinds of polite learning, though, as just noticed, his inclination led him more particularly to poetry and history. Phillips, or Milton, remarks, that in all his poems is observable a close, mysterious, and sententious way of writing, but without much regard to elegance of style or smoothness of verse. His principal works are, 1. “The Life of the renowned sir Philip Sidney,” London, 1652, 12mo, rather a kind of dissertation than a life, but sufficiently expressive of his connection with, and attachment to that eminent character. 2. “Certaine learned and elegant workes of the right hon. Fulke lord Brooke, written in his jouth, and familiar exercise with sir Philip Sidney,” Lond. 1633; all the copies extant of this work want twenty-two pages at the beginning. These pages are said to have contained “A treatise on Religion,” and were cancelled, as Mr. Malone (in his History of the Stage) surmises, by order of archbishop Laud. The rest of the volume consists of poetical treatises and letters, and the tragedies of Alaham and Mustapha. 3. “The Remains of sir Fulk Greville, lord Brooke; being poems of Monarchy and Religion, never before printed,” Lond. 1670, 8vo*.

The Robert Greville, whom we have mentioned as the adopted heir of lord Brooke, was educated by him as became the estate and dignity to which he was to succeed; but when the civil war commenced, he joined the parliament army, in whose cause he had written some treatises, and was killed in battle at Litchfield, in 1643, in the thirtyfilth year of his age. He wrote, i. “The Nature of Tiuth; its union and unity with the soule, which is one in its essence, faculties, acts; one with truth,” Lond. 1641, 12mo, an abstruse piece of metaphysical reasoning, which, however, Mr. (afterwards Dr.) Waliis, professor of geometry, understood so well as to be able to answer it, in 1643. 2. “A Discourse opening the nature of that Episcopacie which is exercised in England,” ibid. 1641, 4to. 3. “Two Speeches, spoken in the Guildhall, London, concerning his majesty’s refusal of a Treaty of Peace,” ibid. 1642. 4. “Answer to the Speech of Philip earl of Pembroke, concerning Accommodation, in the house of lords, Dec. 19, 1642,” printed by order of the house, and reprinted in lord Somers’s tracts; but which appears to have been drawn up by lord Clarendon, as containing the substance of lord Brooke’s sentiments. 5. “Speech at the Election of his captains and commanders at Warwick-castle,” London, 1643.

, a French poet and physician, was born at Clermont, in Beauvoisis, in 1533. He began early to write, producing his tragedy of the “Death of Caesar” in his fifteenth year; and practised physic with success. He was long retained in the service of Margaret of France, duchess of Savoy, whom he followed to Piedmont. He

* Lord Orford erroneously attributes 4to, which was evidently written by to him “Sir Fulke Grevilta’s Five one of the presbyterian party, and was Yeares of king James, or the condition afterwards republishetl, with additions, of the state of England, and the rela- under the title of” The first Fourteen tion it had to other provinces,“1643, Years of king James,” 1651, 4to. died at Turin the 5th of November 1573. There are three plays extant of his: “The Treasurer’s Wife,” a comedy, in 1558; the “Death of Caesar,” a tragedy; and the “Frighted Ones, (Les Esbahis)” a comedy, both acted the same day at the college of Beauvais in 1560. Grevin, though snatched away by a premature death, had acquired a great reputation, not only as a poet, but as a physician. Some of his countrymen, speaking of his dramas, give him this favourable testimony, “that he effaced all who preceded him on the French stage, and that eight or ten such poets as he would have put it on a good footing, his versification being easy and smooth, especially in his comedies, and his plots well contrived.” His poems and plays were printed at Paris, 1561, 8vo. He left also a “Treatise on Poisons,” and another “against Antimony,” both translated into Latin, and printed in 4to. It was by his means that the absurd decree of the faculty of Paris, afterwards confirmed by parliament, against the use of antimony in medicine, was passed. He was a Calvinist, and united with Rochandieu and Florence Christian in their ingenious poem entitled “The Temple,” which they wrote against Ronsard, who had abused the Calvinists in his discourse on the Miseries of Time."

, a worthy parish priest, was born in November 1607, at Atherston, in the parish of Manceter, Warwickshire; and, having been well grounded in grammar-learning under his uncle Mr. John Denison, was admitted a student of Baliol college, Oxford, in 1624. Here pursuing his studies carefully, he became qualified for academical honours; and, taking both his degrees in arts at the regular times, he was ordained at twenty-eight years of age by Dr. Wright, bishop of Coventry and Lichfield. In the beginning of the civil wars he sided with the parliament party, took the covenant, and, at the request of the corporation of Coventry, became minister of the great parish of St. Michael in that city, in which station he was admired for his conscientious performance of all his duties. The soundness of his doctrine according to his persuasion, the prudence and sanctity of his conversation, the vigilancy and tenderness of his care, were of that constant tenor, that he seemed to do all which the best writers upon the pastoral office tell us should be done. As he sided with the presbyterians against the hierarchy, so he joined with that party also against the design of destroying the king. In this, as in other things, he acted both with integrity and courage, of which we have the following remarkable instances. In 1648, when Cromwell, then lieutenant-general, was at Coventry upon his march towards London, Mr. Grew took this opportunity to represent to him the wickedness of the design, then evidently on foot, for taking off his majesty, and the sad consequences thereof, should it take effect; earnestly pressing him to use his endeavours to prevent it, and not ceasing to solicit him till he obtained his promise for it. Nor was he satisfied with this; for afterwards, when the design became more apparent, he addressed a letter to him, reminding him of his promise, and took care to have his letter delivered into CromwelPs own hands. At another time he was required to read in the church the proclamation against sir George Booth, and threatened by Lambert’s soldiers, then in Coventry, with the loss of his place if he refused, yet he determined not to read it. Of his liberality we have this instance: When Mr. Panton, a minister of the royalist party, was obliged to sell his library, Dr. Grew bought some of the books, and being afterwards requested to return them, with an offer of the money he paid, he returned the books, but refused the money, as he knew that Mr. Panton could not yet afford the money so well as himself.

In 1651 he accumulated the degrees of divinity, and completed that of doctor the ensuing act, when he preached the “Concio ad Clerum” with applause. In 1654 he was appointed one of the assistants to the commissioners of Warwickshire, for the ejectionof such as were then called scandalous, ignorant, and insufficient ministers and school^ masters. He continued at St. Michael’s greatly esteemed and beloved among his parishioners, till his majesty’s restoration; after which he resigned his benefice in pursuance to the act of conformity in 1661, although bishop Hacket was urgent with him to conform, and allowed him to preach a month beyond the prescribed time, but he delivered his farewell sermon, and afterwards restricted his labours to a few private hearers. Even in this, however, he was carefully watched, and underwent some severe trials, particularly an imprisonment of six months. He still, however, preserved the respect and affection of the citizens of Coventry till his death, which happened October 22, 1689. He published “A Sinner’s Justification by Christ, &c. delivered in several Sermons on Jer. ii. 6, 1670,” 8vo; and “Meditations upon our Saviour’s Parable of the Prodigal Son, &c. 1678,” 4to, both at the request, and for the common benefit, of some of his quondam parishioners.

, the first and most universal vegetable anatomist and physiologist of this country, the son of the preceding, was born at Coventry. The year of his birth is not mentioned, but from some circumstances appears to have been 1628. He was brought up a presbyterian, his father having taken the covenant; and on the change of the national form of religion, at the restoration of Charles II. he was sent to study in some foreign university, where he took his degree of doctor of physic. He settled first at Coventry, and probably resided there in 1664, when, as he informs us in tht 1 preface to his Anatomy of Plants, he first directed his thoughts to the subject of that work, “upon reading some of the many and curious inventions of learned men, in the bodies of animals. For considering that both of them came at first out of the same hand, and were therefore the contrivances of the same wisdom; I thence,” says he, “fully assured myself, that it could not be a vain design to seek it in both. That so I might put somewhat upon that side the leaf which the best botanicks had left bare and empty.” Four years afterwards he consulted his brother-in-law, Dr. Henry Sampson, who encouraged him to go on, by pointing out a passage in Glisson’s book “De Hepate,” chap. 1, in which the anatomy of plants is hinted at as an unexplored, but very promising line of study for a practical observer. For some time he resided at Coventry, but determining to settle in London, he came thither about 1672. Before this his first essay on the anatomy of plants was communicated to the royal society in 1670, by bishop Wilkins, under the title of an “Idea of a Philosophical History of Plants.” It was received with the honour and attention it deserved, being ordered to be printed, and its author, in that year also, on the recommendation of the same learned divine, became a fellow of the royal society. He was appointed secretary in 1677, in which capacity he published the Philosophical Transactions from Jan. 1677-8, to Feb. in the following year. In 1680 he was made an honorary fellovr of the college of physicians. He is said to have attained to considerable practice in his profession, nor did his being a nonconformist deprive him of the credit justly due to his piety and philosophical merit, even in the worst times. He lived indeed to see various changes of opinions and professions, apparently with the tranquillity becoming a philosopher and a good man, and died suddenly, March 25, 1711.

Dr. Grew’s Anatomy of Vegetables, of Roots, and of Trunks, originally formed three separate publications in 8vo, but were subsequently collected into a folio volume, and published in 1682, with 83 plates. In this work, truly original, though Malpighi had about the same time, or rather before, pursued the same line of inquiry, scarcely any thing relative to the vegetable anatomy is left untouched. It was the character of Grew to observe every thing, and if a more philosophical observer, more aware of what is best worth remarking, be, in general estimation, a superior character, the latter is more likely to see through the false medium of dazzling theory. The works of Grew are a storehouse of facts, for the use of less original and more indolent authors. They seldom require correction, except where theory is interwoven with observation, and even his theories have passed current till very lately. His chemistry is, of course, that of his time, but his remarks on vegetable secretions, and their multifarious and peculiar properties, abound with ingenuity and originality, as well as his comparative examinations of the various kinds of fruits and seeds. If he had no correct ideas of the propulsion or direction of the sap, we must not forget that he was one of the first who adopted and illustrated the doctrine of the sexes of plants, nor did even the principles of methodical arrangement entirely escape his notice.

In 1681 Dr. Grew published a folio volume, entitled “Museum Regalis Societatis,” or a catalogue and description of the natural and artificial rarities belonging to the Royal Society, and preserved at Gresbam college. This is a scientific and descriptive catalogue, with learned references to preceding writers. It is accompanied by “the Comparative Anatomy of Stomachs and Guts begun, being several lectures read before the Royal Society in 1676.” Twenty-two plates illustrate the first part of this volume, and nine the latter, which were given to him by Daniel Coiwell, esq. the founder of the collection. The latest publication of our author was “Cosmographia Sacra, or a Discourse of the Universe, as it is the creature and kingdom of God.” He was an illustrious proof that it is the fool, and not the philosopher, “who hath said in his heart there is no God” The works of Grew were soon translated into French and Latin, but the latter very incorrectly. His funeral sermon was preached at the meeting in the Old Jewry by the rev. John Shower. It appears by this discourse that Dr. Grew illustrated his learned character by a life of strict piety, humility, and charity.

, was an illustrious personage of the blood royal of England by both parents: her grandmother on her father’s side, Henry Grey marquis of Dorset, being queen-consort to Edward IV.; and her grandmother on her mother’s side, lady Frances Brandon, being daughter to Henry VII. queen-dowager of France, and mother of Mary queen of Scots. Lady Jane was born, 1537, at Bradgate, her father’s seat in Leicestershire, and very early gave astonishing proofs of the pregnancy of her parts; insomuch that, upon a comparison with Edward VI. who was partly of the same age, and thought a kind of miracle, the superiority has been given to her in every respect. Her genius appeared in the works of her needle, in the beautiful character in which she wrote; besides which, she played admirably on various instruments of music, and accompanied them with a voice exquisitely sweet in itself, and assisted by all the graces that art could bestow. These, however, were only inferior ornaments in her character; and, as she was far from priding herself upon them, so, through the rigour of her parents in exacting them, they became her grief more than her pleasure.

Her father had himself a tincture of letters, and was a great patron of the learned. He had two chaplains, Harding, and Aylmer afterwards bishop of London, both men of distinguished learning, whom he employed as tutors to his daughter; and under whose instructions she made such a proficiency as amazed them both. Her own language she spoke and wrote with peculiar accuracy: the French, Italian, Latin, and it is said Greek, were as natural to her as her own. She not only understood them, but spoke and wrote them with the greatest freedom: she was versed likewise in Hebrew, Chaldee, and Arabic, and all this while a mere child. She had also a sedateness of temper, a quickness of apprehension, and a solidity of judgment, that enabled her not only to become the mistress of languages, but of sciences; so that she thought, spoke, and reasoned, upon subjects of the greatest importance, in a manner that surprized all. With these endowments, she had so much mildness, humility, and modesty, that she set no value upon those acquisitions. She was naturally fond of literature, and that fondness was much heightened as well by the severity of her parents in the feminine part of her education, as by the gentleness of her tutor Aylmer in this: when mortified and confounded by the unmerited chicling of the former, she returned with double pleasure to the lessons of the latter, and sought in Demosthenes and Plato, who were her favourite authors, the delight that was denied her in all other scenes of life, in which she mingled but little, and seldom with any satisfaction. It is true, her alliance to the crown, as well as the great favour in which the marquis of Dorset her father stood both with Henry VIII. and Edward VI. unavoidably brought her sometimes to court, and she received many marks of Edward’s attention; yet she seems to have continued for the most part in the country at Bradgate.

Here she was with her beloved books in 1550, when the famous Roger Ascham called on a visit to the family in August; and all the rest of each sex being engaged in a hunting-party, he went to wait upon lady Jane in her apartment, and found her reading the “Phaedon” of Plato in the original Greek. Astonished at it, after the first compliments, he asked her, why she lost such pastime as there needs must be in the park; at which smiling, she answered, “I wist all their sport in the park is but a shadow to that pleasure that I find in Plato. Alas, good folk, they never felt what true pleasure meant.” This naturally leading him to inquire how a lady of her age had attained to such a depth of pleasure both in the Platonic language and philosophy, she made the following very remarkable reply: “I will tell you, and I will tell you a truth, which perchance you will marvel at. One of the greatest benefits which ever God gave me is, that he sent me so sharp and severe parents, and so gentle a schoolmaster. For when I am in presence either of father or mother, whether I speak, keep silence, sit, stand, or go, eat, drink, he merry or sad, be sewing, playing, dancing, or doing any thing else, I am so sharply taunted, so cruelly threatened, yea presently sometimes with pinches, rips, and bohs, and other ways (which I will not name, for the honour I bear them), so without measure misordered, that 1 think myself in hell, till time come that I must go to Mr. Aylmer, who teachfcth me so gently, so pleasantly, with such fair allurements to learning, that I think all the time nothing while I am with him; and, when I am called from him I fall on weeping, because whatsoever I do else but learning is full of grief, trouble, fear, and wholly misliking unto me. And thus my book hath been so much my pleasure, and bringeth daily to me more pleasure and more, and that in respect of it all other pleasures in very deed be but trifles and troubles unto me” What reader is not melted with this speech What scholar does not envy Ascham’s felicity at this interview He was indeed very deeply affected with it, and to that impression we owe the discovery of some farther particulars concerning this lovely scholar.

At this juncture he was going to London in order to attend sir Richard Morrison on his embassy to the emperor Charles V. and in a letter wrote the December following to Sturmius, the dearest of his friends, having informed him that he had had the honour and happiness of being admitted to converse familiarly with this young lady at court, and that she had written a very elegant letter to him, he proceeds to mention this visit at Bradgate, and his surprise thereon, not without some degree of rapture. Thence he takes occasion to observe, that she both spoke and wrote Greek to admiration; and that she had promised to write him a letter in that language, upon condition that he would send her one first from the emperor’s court. But this rapture rose much higher while he was penning a letter addressed to herself the following month. There, speaking of this interview, he assures her, that among all the agreeable varieties which he had met with in his travels abroad, nothing had occurred to raise his admiration like that incident in the preceding summer when he found her, a young maiden by birth so noble, in the absence of her tutor, and in the sumptuous house of her most noble father, at a time too when all the rest of the family, both male and female, were regaling themselves with the pleasures of the chace; “I found,” continues he, “a Zw Km Eoi, O Jupiter and all ye gods I I found, I say, the divine virgin diligently studying the divine ‘ Pbaedo’ of the divine Plato in the original Greek. Happier certainly in this respect than in being descended, both on the father and mother’s side, from kings and queens.” He then puts h.er in mind of the Greek epistle she had promised; and prompted her to write another also to his friend Sturmius, that what he had said of her, whenever he came, might be rendered credible by such authentic evidence.

If lady Jane received this letter in the country, it is probable she did not stay there long after, since some changes happened in the family which must have brought her to town; for, her maternal uncles, Henry and Charles Brandon, both dying at Buckden, the bishop of Lincoln’s palace, of the sweating sickness, her father was created duke of Suffolk, October 1551. Dudley earl of Warwick was also created duke of Northumberland the same day, and in November the duke of Somerset was imprisoned for a conspiracy against him as privy-counsellor. During this interval came the queen-dowager of Scotland from France, who, being magnificently entertained by king Edward, was also, among other ladies of the blood royal, complimented as her grandmother, by lady Jane, who was now at court, and much in the king’s favour. In the summer of 1552 the king made a great progress through some parts of England, during which, lady Jane went to pay her duty to his majesty’s sister, the lady Mary, at Newhall, in Essex; and in this visit her piety and zeal against popery prompted her to reprove the lady Anne Wharton for making a curtesy to the host, which, being carried by some officious person to the ear of the princess, was retained in her heart, so that she never loved lady Jane afterwards; and, indeed, the events of the following year were not likely to work a reconciliation.

The dukes of Suffolk and Northumberland, who were now, upon the fall of Somerset, grown to the height of their wishes in power, upon the decline of the king’s health in 1553, began to think how to prevent thui reverse of fortune which, as things then stood, they foresaw must happen upon his death. To obtain this end, no other remedy was judged sufficient but a ciiange in the succession of the crown, 'and transferring it into their own families. What other steps were taken, preparatory to this bolU attempt, may be seen in the general history, and is foreign to the plan of this memoir, which is concerned only in relating the part that was destined for lady Jane to act in the intended revolution: but this was the principal part; in reality the whole centered in her. Those excellent and amiable qualities, which had rendered her dear to all who had the happiness to know her, joined to her near affinity to the king, subjected her to become the chief tool of an ambition, notoriously not her own. Upon this very account she was married to the lord Guilford Dudley, fourth, son to the duke of Northumberland, without being acquainted with the real design of the match, which was ceJebrated with great pomp in the latter end of May, so much to the king’s satisfaction, that he contributed bounteously to the expence of it from the royal wardrobe. In the mean, time, though the populace were very far from being pleased with the exorbitant greatness of the duke of Northumberland, yet they could not help admiring the beauty and innocence which appeared in lord Guilford and his bride.

But the pomp and splendor attending their nuptials was the last gleam of joy that shone in the palace of Edward, who grew so weak in a few days after, that Northumberland thought it high time to carry his project into execution. Accordingly, in the beginning of June, he broke the matter to the young monarch; and, having first made all such colourable objections as the affair would admit against his majesty’s two sisters, Mary and Elizabeth, as well as Mary queen of Scots, he observed, that, “the lady Jane, who stood next upon the royal line, was a person of extraordinary qualities that her zeal for the reformation was unquestioned that nothing could be more acceptable to the nation than the prospect of such a princess that in. this case he was bound to set aside all partialities of blood and nearness of relation, which were inferior considerations, and ought to be over-ruled by the public good.” To corroborate this discourse, care was taken to place about the king those who should make it their business to touch frequently upon this subject, enlarge upon the accomplishments of lady Jane, and describe her with all imaginable advantages: so that at last, the king’s affections inclining to this disposition of the crown, he consented to overlook his sisters, and set aside his father’s will. Agreeably to which, a deed of settlement being drawn up In form of law' by the judges, was signed by his majesty^ and all the lords of the council.

This difficult affair once accomplished, and the letters patent having passed the seals before the close of the month, the next step was to concert the properest method for carrying this settlement into execution, and till that was done to keep it as secret as possible. To this end Northumberland formed a project, which, if it had succeeded, would have made all things easy and secure. He directed letters to the lady Mary in her brother’s name, requiring her attendance at Greenwich, where the court then was; and she had got within half a day’s journey of that place when the king expired, July 6, 1553; but, having timely notice of it, she thereby avoided the snare which had been so artfully laid to entrap her. The two dukes, Suffolk and ^Northumberland, found it necessary to conceal the king’s decease, that they might have time to gain the city of London, and to procure the consent of lady Jane, who was so far from having any hand in this business, that as yet she was unacquainted with the pains that had been taken to procure her the title of queen. At this juncture, Mary sent a letter to the privy council, in which, though she did not take the title of queen, yet she clearly asserted her right to the crown; took notice of their concealing her brother’s death, and of the practice into which they had since entered; intimating, that there was still room for reconciliation, and that, if they complied with their duty in proclaiming her queen, she could forgive and even forget what was past: but in answer to this they insisted upon the indubitable right, and their own unalterable fidelity to queen Jane, to whom they persuaded the lady Mary to submit.

These previous steps being taken, and the tower and city of London secured, the council quitted Greenwich and came to London; and July 10, in the forenoon, the two last mentioned dukes repaired to Durham-house, where the lady Jane resided with her husband, as part of Northumberland’s family. There the duke of Suffolk with much solemnity explained to his daughter the disposition the late king had made of his crown by letters patent; the clear sense the privy-council had of her right; the consent of the magistrates and citizens of London; and, in conclusion, himself and Northumberland fell on their knees, and paid their homage to her as queen of England, The poor lady, somewhat astonished at their discourse, but not at all moved by their reasons, or in the least elevated by such unexpected honours, returned them an answer to this effect: “That the laws of the kingdom and natural right standing for the king’s sisters, she would beware of burdening her weak conscience with a yoke which did belong to them that she understood the infamy of those who had permitted the violation of right to gain a sceptre that it were to mock God and deride justice, to scruple at the stealing of a shilling, and not at the usurpation of a crown. Besides,” said she, “I am not so young, nor so little read in the guiles of fortune, to suffer myself to be taken bjr them. If she enrich any, it is but to make them the subject of her spoil; if she raise others, it is but to pleasure herself with their ruins what she adored but yesterday is to-day her pastime and, if I now permit her to adorn and crown me, 1 must to-morrow suffer her to crush and tear me to pieces. Nay, with what crown does she present me! a crown which hath been violently and shamefully wrested from Catharine of Arragon, made more unfortunate by the punishment of Anne Boleyn, and others that wore it after her: and why then would you have me add my blood to theirs, and be the third victim, from whom this fatal crown may be ravished with the head that wears it But in case it should not prove fatal unto me, and that all its venom were consumed, if fortune should give me warranties of her constancy, should I be well advised to take upon me these thorns, which would dilacerate, though not kill me outright; to burden myself with a yoke, which would not fail to torment me, though I were assured not to be strangled with it My liberty is better than the chain you proffer me, with what precious stones soever it be adorned, or of what gold soever framed. I will not exchange my peace for honourable and precious jealousies, for magnificent and glorious fetters. And, if you love me sincerely and in good earnest, you will rather wish me a secure and quiet fortune, though mean, than an exalted condition, exposed to the wind, and followed by some dismal fall.”

However, she was at length prevailed upon, by the exhortations ofher father, the intercession of her mother, the artful persuasions of Northumberland, and above all, the earnest desires of her husband, whom she tenderly loved, to yield her assent to what had been and was to be done. And thus, with a heavy heart, she suffered herself to be conveyed by water to the Tower, where she entered with all the state of a queen, attended by the principal nobility, and, which is very extraordinary, her train supported by the duchess of Suffolk, her mother, in whom, if in any of this line, the right of succession remained. About six in the afternoon she was proclaimed with all due solemnities in the city; the same day she also assumed the regal, and proceeded afterwards to exercise many acts of sovereignty; but, passing over the transactions of her short reign, which are the subject of general history, it is more immediately our business to conclude this article with her behaviour on her fall. Queen Mary was no sooner proclaimed, than the duke of Suffolk, who then resided with his daughter in the Tower, went to her apartment, and, in the softest terms he could, acquainted her with the situation of their affairs, and that, laying aside the state and dignity of a queen, she must again return to that of a private person to which, with a settled and serene countenance, she made this answer “I better brook this message than my former advancement to royalty out of obedience to you and my mother, I have grievously sinned, and offered violence to myself. Now I do willingly, and as obeying the motions of my soul, relinquish the crown, and endeavour to salve those faults committed by others (if at least so great a fault can be salved) by a willing relinquishment and ingenuous acknowledgement of them.”

Thus ended her reign, but not her misfortunes. She "saw the father of her husband, with all his family, and many of the nobility and gentry, brought prisoners to the tower for supporting her claim to the crown; and this grief must have met with some accession from his being soon after brought to the block. Before the end of the month, she had the mortification of seeing her own father, the duke of Suffolk, in the same circumstances with herself; but her mother, the duchess, not only remained exempt from all punishment, but had such an interest with the queen as 10 procure the duke his liberty on the last day of the month. Lady Jane and her husband, being stiil in confinement, were Nove'mber 3, 1553, carried from the Tower to Guildhall with Cranmer and others, arraigned and convicted of high treason before judge Morgan, who pronounced on them sentence of death, die remembrance of which afterwards affected him so far, that he died ravingHowever, the strictness of their confinement was mitigated in December, by a permission to take the air in the queen’s garden, and other little indulgences. This might give some gleams of hope; and there are reasons to believe the queen would have spared her life, if Wyat’s rebellion had not happened; but her father’s being engaged in that rebellion gave the ministers an opportunity of persuading the queen, that she could not be safe herself, while lady Jane and her husband were alive: yet Mary was not brought without much difficulty to take them off. The news made no great impression upon lady Jane the bitterness of death was passed she bad expected it long, and was so well prepared to meet her fate, that she was very little discomposed.

But the queen’s charity hurt her more than her justice. The day first fixed for her death was Friday February the 9th; and she had, in some measure, taken leave of the world by writing a letter to her unhappy father, who she heard was more disturbed with the thoughts of being the author of her death than with the apprehension of his own*. In this serene frame of mind, Dr. Feckenham, abbot of Westminster, came to her from the queen, who was very desirous she should die professing herself a papist, as her father-in-law had done. The abbot was indeed a very fit instrument, if any had been fit for the purpose, having, with an acute wit and a plausible tongue, a great tenderiless in his nature. Lady Jane received him with much civility, and behaved towards him with so much calmness and sweetness of temper, that he could not help bein overcome with her distress: so that, either mistaking or pretending to mistake her meaning, he procured a respite of her execution till the 12th. When he acquainted her with it, she told him, “that he had entirely misunderstood her sense of her situation; that, far from desiring her death might be delayed, she expected and wished for it as the period of her miseries, and her entrance into eternal happiness.” Neither did he gain any thing upon her in regard to popery; she heard him indeed patiently, but answered all his arguments with such strength, clearness, and steadiness of mind, as shewed plainly that religion had been her principal care . On Sunday evening, which was the last she was to spend in this world, she wrote a letter in the Greek tongue, as some say, on the blank leaves at the end of a testament in the same language, which she bequeathed as a legacy to her sister the lady Catharine Grey; a piece which, if we had no other left, it is said, were sufficient to render her name immortal. In the morning, the lord Guilford earnestly desired the officers, that he might take his last fare well of her; which though they willingly permitted, yet upon notice she advised the contrary, “assuring him that such a meeting would rather add to his afflictions then increase his quiet, wherewith they had prepared their souls for the stroke of death; that he demanded a lenitive which would put fire into the wound, and that it was to be feared her presence would rather weaken than strengthen him that he ought to take courage from his reason, and derive constancy from his own heart that if his soul were not firm and settled, she could not settle it by her eyes, nor conform it by her words that he should do well to remit this interview to the other world that there, indeed, friendships were happy, and unions indissoluble, and that theirs would be eternal, if their souls carried nothing with them of terrestrial, which might hinder them from rejoicing.” All she could do was, to give him a farewell out of a window, as he passed to the place of his dissolution, which he suffered on the scaffold on Tower-hill with much Christian meekness. She likewise beheld his dead body wrapped in a linen cloth, as it passed under her window to the chapel within the Tower.

And, about an hour after, she was led to a scaffold: she was attended by Feckenham, but was observed not to give much heed to his discourses, keeping her eyes stedfastly fixed on a book of prayers which she had in her hand. After some short recollection, she saluted those who were present, with a countenance perfectly composed: then, taking leave of Dr. Feckenham, she said, “God will abundantly requite you, good Sir, for your humanity to me, though your discourses gave me more uneasiness than all the terrors of my approaching death.” She next addressed herself to the spectators in a plain and short speech; after which, kneeling down, she repeated the Miserere in English. This done, she stood up and gave to her women her gloves and handkerchief, and to the lieutenant of the Tower her Prayer-book. In untying her gown, the executioner offered to assist her; but she desired he would let her alone; and turning to her women, they undressed, and gave her a handkerchief to bind about her eyes. The executioner, kneeling, desired her pardon, to which she answered, el most willingly.“He desired her to stand upon the straw; which bringing her within sight of the block, she said,” I pray dispatch me quickly;“adding presently after,” Will you take it off before I lay me down“The executioner answered,” No, madam.“Upon this, the handkerchief being bound close over her eyes, she began to feel for the block, to which she was guided by one of the spectators. When she felt it, she stretched herself forward, and said,” Lord, into thy hands I commend my spirit;" and immediately her head was separated at one stroke.

Her fate was universally deplored even by the persons best-affected to queen Mary; and, to a woman of any feeling, it must certainly have given much disquiet to begin her reign with such an unusual effusion of blood; especially in the present case of a near relation, one formerly honoured with her friendship and favour, who had indeed usurped, but without desiring or enjoying, the royal diaclem which she assumed, by the constraint of an ambitious father and an imperious mother, and which at the first motion she chearfully and willingly resigned. This made her exceedingly lamented at home and abroad; the fame of her learning and virtue having reached over Europe, excited many commendations, and some express panegyrics in different nations and different languages. Immediately after her death, there came out a piece, entitled, “The precious Remains of Lady Jane Grey,” in 4to.

Besides the pieces already mentioned, there are three Latin epistles to Bullinger printed in the “Epistolae ab Ecclesiie Helvetica; reformatoribus vel ad eos scriptae,” 1742, 8vo, and the letter she wrote the night before her death to her sister Katherine which is here printed in Latin. Of her writing also are four Latin verses from her prison, and her speech on the scaffold. Holinshed and Baker say she wrote other things, and Bale mentions “The Complaint of a Sinner,” and “The Devout Christian.” A letter to Harding, her father’s chaplain, on his apostatizing to popery, is in the “Phcenix.” Other notices respecting fragments of her writing may be seen in our authorities.

, a learned schoolmaster of the seventeenth century, was born in London in 1590, and was educated at Westminster-school, whence he was elected student of Christ-church, Oxford, in 1606. Here he made great proficiency under the tuition of Dr. Samuel Fell, and was considered even at this early period as eminent for his learning in the Greek and Latin languages. Having taken his degrees in arts, he was in 1614 appointed first master of the Charter-house, or Sutton’s new foundation of the hospital school; but some years afterwards, having rendered himself incapable of holding that office by marriage, the governors gave him the living of Castle Camps in Cambridgeshire. On the 29th of January 1624, he was admitted chief master of Merchant Taylors’ school, on a disputed election, which, however, terminated in hw favour, and he enjoyed the place with much reputation until 1631, when he resigned and was elected head master of Eton school, and a fellow. He was ejected by the usurping powers from both his mastership and living, and reduced to much distress. At length he obtained the mastership of Tunbridge school, in which he continued until the restoration, when he was re-appointed to his former preferments, but did not long live to enjoy them. He died very poor at Eton in October 1660, and was. buried in the choir of the chapel, near the stairs leading to the. organ-loft. He published 1. “A Dictionary” in Latin and English, and English and Latin, an improvement on Rider’s, but afterwards superseded by Holyoak’s. 2. “Luculenta e sacra scriptura testimonia, ad Hugonis Grotii baptizatorum puerorum institutionem,” Lond. 1647, 8vo, dedicated to his learned and excellent fellow collegian John Hales. This catechism of Grotius, which was written in Latin verse, was such a favourite as to be translated into Greek verse by Christopher Wase, and into English verse by Francis Gouldsmith, ol Gray’s-inn, esq. 3. “Parabolse evangelical, Lat. redditse carmine paraphrastico varii generis in usum scholar Tunbrigiensis,” Lond. 8vo, no date. Of the second article above-mentioned, we have an edition of 1668, the title of which is, “Hugonis Grotii Baptizatorum Puerorum Institutio, alternis interrogationibus et responsionibus.” This contains Wase’s translation into Greek, with grammatical notes, and other notes by Barth. Beale, and Gouldsmith’s English version.

, an ingenious and learned English divine, the son of John Grey of Newcastle, was born there in 1694, and in 1712 was entered of Lincoln college, Oxford, where he took the degree of B. A. May 15, 1716, and that of M. 4- January 16, 1718-19. May 1, he was ordained deacon, and priest April 10, 172Q, by Crew bishop of Durham, to whom he was chaplain and secretary, and who gave him, in 1721, the rectory of Hinton, near Brackley, in Northamptonshire; and obtained for him, from lord Willoughby de Broke, the rectory of Kimcote in Leicestershire. ' He was alsp a prebendary of St. Paul’s. In 1746, he was official and commissary of the archdeaconry of Leicester. In 1730, he published at Oxford a “Visitation-Sermon” and, the same year, '< Memoria Technica or a new Method of artificial Memory“a fourth edition of which came out in 1756. At this time also appeared his” System of English Ecclesiastical Law, extracted from the Codex Juris Ecclesiastic! Anglican!“of bishop Gibson, 8vo. This was for the use of young students designed for orders; and for this the university gave him the degree of D. D. May 28, 1731. He printed an assize sermon in 1732, called” The great Tribunal,“and in 1736, was the author of a large anonymous pamphlet, under the title of” The miserable and distracted State of Religion in England, upon the Downfall of the Church established,“8vo and, the same year, printed another Visitation- Sermon. He also published” A new and easy Method of learning Hebrew without points, 1738;“” Historia Josephi,“and” Paradigmata Verborum, 1719;“” Liber Jobi, 1742;“”Answer to Warburton’s Remarks,“1744;” The last Words of David,“1749;” Nova Methodus Hebraice discendi diligentius recognita & acl Usum Scholarum accornmodata, &c.“1751;” A Sermon at the opening of Steane chapel, Northampt.“1752; and, lastly, an English translation of Mr. Hawkins Browne’s poem” De Animi Immortalitate,“1753. He died Feb. 28, 1771, in his 77th year. He married Joyce, youngest daughter of the rev. John Thicknesse of Brazen-nose-college, Oxford, and sister of the late Philip Thicknesse, esq. by whom he left three daughters, the eldest of whom married Dr. Philip Lloyd, dean of Norwich, and was well-known for her genius in working in worsted, and for her painted windows in that cathedral. Dr. Grey was buried at Hinton, as is his widow, who died Jan. 12, 1794, aged eighty-nine. His” Memoria Technica" was at one time a very popular book, and the system has lately in part been revived by a foreigner, which has been the means of again directing the public attention to Dr. Grey’s book; but it seems agreed that such helps are of very little substantial efficacy, and that attention and exercise are the only means to assist or prolong memory. Dr. Grey was a man of piety and liberality, as appears by his frequent correspondence with Dr. Doddndge.

, LL. D. an English divine, and miscellaneous writer, was of a Yorkshire family, originally from France. He was born in 1687, and was admitted a pensioner in Jesus college, Cambridge, April 18, 1704, but afterwards removed to Trinity-ball, where he was admitted scholar of the house, Jan. 6, 1706-7; LL. B. 1709 LL. D. 1720; and though he was never fellow of that college, he was elected one of the trustees for Mr. Ayloffe’s benefaction to it. He was rector of Houghton Conquest in Bedfordshire: and vicar of St. Peter’s and St. Giles’s parishes in Cambridge, where he usually passed the winter, and the rest of his time at Ampthill, the neighbouring market-town to his living. He died Nov. 25, 1766, at Ampthill, and was buried at Houghton Conquest. Very little of his history has descended to us. How he spent his life will appear by a list of his works. He is said to have been of a most amiable, sweet, and communicative disposition; most friendly to his acquaintance, and never better pleased than when performing acts of friendship and benevolence. Being in the commission of the peace, and a man of reputable character, he was much courted for his interest in elections. He was not, however, very active on those occasions, preferring literary retirement. His works were, 1. “A Vindication of the Church of England, in answer to Mr. Pearce’s Vindication of the Dis^ senters; by a Presbyter of the Church of England.” 1720, 8vo. 2. “Presbyterian Prejudice displayed,” 1722, 8vo. 3. “A pair of clean Shoes and Boots for a Dirty Baronet; or an answer to Sir Richard Cox,” 1722. 4. “The Knight of Dumbleton foiled at his own weapons, &c. In a Letter to Sir Richard Cocks, knt. By a Gentleman and no Knight,” 1723. 5. “A Century of eminent Presbyterians: or a Collection of Choice Sayings, from the public sermons before the two houses, from Nov. 1641 to Jan. 31, 1648, the day after the king was beheaded. By a Lover of Episcopacy,” 1723, 6. “A Letter of Thanks to Mr. Benjamin Bennet,” 1723. This Bennet published “A memorial of the Reformation,” full of gross prejudices against the established church, and “A defence of it.” 7. “A Caveat against Mr. Benj. Bennet, a mere pretender to history and criticism. By a lover of history,” 1724, 8vo. 8. “A Defence of our ancient and modern Historians against the frivolous cavils of a late pretender to. Critical History, in which the false quotations smd unjust inferences of the anonymous author are confuted and exposed in the manner they deserve, la two parts,” 1725, 4vo. In reply, Oldmixon, the critical historian alluded to, published “A Review of Dr. Zachary Grey’s Defence of our ancient and modern historians. Wherein, instead of dwelling upon his frivolous cavils, false quotations, unjust inferences, &c it is proved (to his glory be it spoken) that there is not a book in the English tongue, which contains so many falsehoods in so many pages. Nori vitiosus homo es, Zachary, sed vitium. By the author,” &c. y. “An Appendix by way of Answer to the Critical Historian’s Review,” 1725. 10. * f A Looking-glass for Fanatics, or the true picture of Fanaticism; by a gentleman of the university of Cambridge,“1725. 11.” The Ministry of the Dissenters proved to be null and void from Scripture and antiquity,“1725. 12. In 1732 he wrote a preface to his relation dean Moss’s sermons,” by a learned hand.“Mr. Masters in his history of C. C. C. C. ascribes this to Dr. Snape, who might perhaps have been editor of the sermons, but it was written by Dr. Grey. 13.” The spirit of Infidelity detected, in answer to Barbeyrac, with a defence of Dr. Waterland,“1735, 8vo. 14.” English Presbyterian eloquence. By an admirer of monarchy and episcopacy,“1736, 8vo. 15.” Examination of Dr. Chandler’s History of Persecution,“1736, 8vo. 16.” The true picture of Quakerism,“1736. 17.” Caveat against the Dissenters,“1736, 8vo. 18.” An impartial Examination of the second volume of Mr. Daniel Neal’s History of the Puritans,“1736, 8vo. The first volume of Neal had been examined by Dr. Madox, assisted in some degree by Dr. Grey, who published his examination of the third volume in 1737, and that of the fourth in 1739. J 9.” An examination of the fourteenth chapter of Sir Isaac Newton’s Observations upon the prophecies of Daniel,“1736, 8vo. This is in answer to sir Isaac’s notion of the rise of Saintworship. 20.” An attempt towards the character of the Royal Martyr, king Charles I.; from authentic vouchers,“1738. 21.” Schismatics delineated from authentic vouchers, in reply to Neal, with Dowsing' s Journal, &c. By Philalethes Cantabrigiensis,“1739, 8vo. 22.” The Quakers and Methodists compared,“&c. 1740. 23.” A Review of Mr. Daniel Neil’s History of the Puritans, with a Postscript. In a letter to Mr. David Jennings;“a pamphlet, Cambridge, 174-4. 24.” Hudibras with large annotations, and a prelate,“&c. 1744, 2 vols. 8vo. 2b.” A serious address to Lay Methodists: by a sincere Protestant,“1745, 8vo. 27.” Popery in its proper colours, with a list of Saints invocated in England before the Reformation,“17, 8vo. 28,” Remarks upon a late edition of Shakspeare, with a long string of emendations borrowed by the celebrated editor from the Oxford edition without acknowledgement. To which is prefixed, a Defence of the late sir Thomas Hanmer, bart. addressed to the rev. Mr. Warburton, preacher of Lincoln’s-Inn,“8vo, no date, but about 1745. 29.” A word or two of Advice to William Warburton, a dealer in many words; by a friend. With an Appendix, containing a taste of William’s Spirit of Railing,“1746, 8vo. 30.” A free and familiar Letter to that great refiner of Pope and Shakspeare, the rev. William Warburton, preacher at Lincoln’s-Inn. With Remarks upon the epistle of friend W. E. (query if not T. E. i. e. Thomas Edwards). In which his unhandsome treatment of this celebrated writer is exposed in the manner it deserves. By a Country Curate,“1750, 8vo, 31.” A Supplement to Hudibras,“1752, 8vo. 32.” Critical, historical, and explanatory notes on Shakspeare, with emendations on the text and metre,“1755, 2 vols. 8vo. 33.” Chronological account of Earthquakes,“1757, 8vo. In 1756 he assisted iVIr. Whalley in his edition of Shakspeare; he had also contributed to Mr. Peck’s” Desiderata,“and” Life of Cromwell," and collected some materials for a Life of Baker, the Cambridge antiquary, which were afterwards enlarged and published by the rev. Robert Masters. Dr. Grey left some other Mss. and a collection of letters, now in Mr. Nichols’s possession.

From this copious account of Dr. Grey’s literary employments, an idea may be formed of his character and sentiments. It would appear that in early life he had studied ffce history of the church to which he belonged, particularly during the seventeenth century when she suf* fered the severest shock; and having examined into the personal history of the artful agents, as well as the more artful means by which the hierarchy and civil government were overthrown, conceived an implacable dislike to the whole body of non-conformists, which by an easy transition, he continued towards their immediate successors, the dissenters. Finding the latter frequently employed in vindicating the cause of republican church-government, 'and bestowing all their pity on those who suffered by the restoration, without any notice of those whom they made to suffer by the previous revolution, he directed his power* of controversy to some of those advocates, and by his laborious researches into the private history, annals, and pamphlets of the Cromwell period, was enabled to become a very formidable antagonist. His Examinations of Neal are, in this respect, the most valuable of his writings, and strict impartiality will be found to require a close attention, in the readers of Neal, to what Dr. Grey and his precursor bishop Madox have advanced. The same researches which Dr. Grey had occasion to pursue in answering Neal and others of that party, seem to have furnished him with the matter of the notes by which he afterwards illustrated his edition of Butler’s Hudibras, a work which will probably preserve his memory to a very long date, as his plan was entirely new. Yet, he did not escape attacks, both serious and jocular on this publication. Warburton, in his preface to Shakspeare, “hardly thinks there ever appeared, in any learned language, so execrable an heap of nonsense, under the name of Commentaries, as hath lately been given us on this satiric poet:” and Fielding, in the preface to his “Voyage to Lisbon,” has introduced “the laborious much-read Dr. Zachary Grey, of whose redundant notes on Hudibras he shall only say, that it is, he is confident, the single book extant, in which above 500 authors are quoted, not one of which could be found in the collection of the late Dr. Mead.” But Dr. Warton has very well observed, that, “if Butler is worth reading, he is worth explaining; and the researches used for so valuable and elegant a purpose merit the thanks of genius and candor, not the satire of prejudice and ignorance.”

The above attack by Warburton produced, from Dr. Grey, the pamphlets mentioned above, No. 28, 29, and 30, in which there is much of the grossness as well as the acuteness of the controversial spirit. Warburton’s conduct, however, appears wanton and unprovoked, for he not only was at one time on good terms with Grey, and had himself some thoughts of illustrating Hudibras, but had actually supplied Grey with the result of his own inquiries, and was therefore a contributor to “so execrable an heap of nonsense;” for which Grey makes very grateful acknowledgment in his preface. To account for Warburton’s contempt for a commentator whom he had thus assisted, and for a plan which he meant to have executed (perhaps as he executed his plan on Shakspeare), we are inclined to prefer the conjeeture of a gentleman whom extensive reading, reflection, and taste have constituted an able umpire in literary quarrels. Mr. D'Israeli thinks that V/arburton’s motive was jealousy, and that “though he had naif reluctantly yielded the few notes he had prepared, his proud heart sickened when he beheld the amazing subscription Grey obtained for his first edition of Hudibras he received for that work 1500l. a proof that J;his publication was felt as a want by the public.” Grey, “however, may be entitled to a higher merit than that of gratifying the public taste by his edition of Hudibras. He was unquestionably the founder of that species of commentary which has since been so successfully employed in illustrating Shakspeare, by bringing together all the information, the contemporary writing, and the style, manners, prejudices, and peculiarities of the age, however distant, in which the author to be explained wrote. And although this example has been followed, perhaps in some instances, to a degree of minuteness that exposes the commentator to the ridicule of the wits, and although it must be allowed that some of the Shakspeare commentators have” bestowed all their tediousness“upon us with a too liberal hand, yet it cannot be controverted, that they have pursued the only just and legitimate process for elucidating the writings of distant ages. The merit of this example, therefore, is due to Grey, and is that on which his fame as a writer and literary antiquary will rest, long after his other publications, with the exception perhaps of his Examinations of Neal, are forgotten. He had also made some progress in an edition of Shakspeare upon the plan of his Hudibras, which we presume his advanced age prevented his completing. What he had collected, however, appeared in his” Critical, historical, and explanatory notes“above-mentioned. Of this work Dr. Johnson says that” what Dr. Grey undertook he has well enough performed, but as he neither attempts judicial nor emendatory criticism, he employs rather his memory than his sagacity;“and he adds,” It were to be wished that all would endeavour to imitate his modesty, who have not been able to surpass his knowledge?."

, surnamed Mofa, was a learned civilian of Padua, who, after being a law professor at Padua, Pisa, and Pavia, as far as 1557, left Italy, in order to make a public profession of the Protestant religion; but who, like some other Italian converts, imbibed the heresy of the Antitrinitarians. After having been professor of civil law at Tubingen for some time, he quitted the employment, in order to escape the punishment he would have incurred, had he been convicted of his errors. He was seized at Bern, where he feigned to renounce his opinions, in order to escape very severe treatment; but, as he relapsed again, and openly favoured the heretics, who had been driven from Geneva, he would, as Beza intimates, certainly have been put to death, if he had not died of the plague in September 1567, or as others say in 1564. In a journey to Geneva, during the trial of Servetus, he desired to have a conference with Calvin, which Calvin at first refused, but afterwards granted; and then Gribaldus, though he came according to the appointed time and place, refused to confer, because Calvin would not give him his hand, till they should be agreed on the articles of the Trinity. He was afterwards cited to appear before the magistrates, in order to give an account of his faith; but, his answers not being satisfactory, he was commanded to leave the city. He wrote several works, which are esteemed by the public; as “Commentarii in legem de rerum mistura, & de jure fisci,” printed in Italy. “Commentarii in pandectas juris,” at Lyons. “Commentarii in aliquot praecipuos Digesti,” &c. Francfort, 1577, fol. “Historia Francisci Spira?, cui anno 1548, familiaris aderat, secundum quae ipse viclit & audivit,” Basil, 1550. Sleidan declares, that Gribaldus was a spectator of the sad condition of the apostate Spira, and that he wrote and published an account of his case and sufferings. “De methoclo ac ratione studendi in jure civili libri tres,” Lyons, 1544 and 1556. He is said to have written this last book in a week.

, an eminent professor of law, was born in 1632, at Leipsic. His father, who was minister in that city, dying in 1685, the celebrated Mencke married the widow, and took great care of her son’s education. Gribner assisted in the “Leipsic Journal,” was professor of law at Wittenburgh, then at Dresden, and finally at Leipsic, where he was chosen to succeed M. Mencke. He died in 1734. Besides several academical dissertations, he left < Principia processes Judiciarii“” Principia Juris* prudentite naturalis;^ a small work much esteemed; *' Opuscula Juris public! et privatl," He was also a benefactor to the university of Letpsic, by leaving a considerable legacy co the library, a sum of money as a provision for the widows of the professors, and an annual sum as an exhibition >Y,r a. law student.

, a very extraordinary woman, (whose maiden name is nowhere mentioned), was born in the county of Kilkenny in Ireland, and married to Mr. George Grierson, printer in Dublin. She died in 1733, at the age of twenty-seven; and was allowed to be an excellent scholar, not only in Greek and Roman literature, but in history, divinity, philosophy, and mathematics. She gave a proof of her knowledge in the Latin tongue by her dedication of the Dublin edition of Tacitus to lord Carteret; and by that of Terence to his son, to whom she likewise wrote a Greek epigram. Dr. Harwood esteems her Tacitus one of the best edited books ever published. Among the editions of her husband’s press, is a very fine one of Dupin’s Ecclesiastical History, 1724, 3 vols. folio, a rare book in this country. Mrs. Grierson composed some poems in English, several of which are inserted by Mrs. Barber amongst her own. When lord Carteret was lordlieutenant of Ireland, he obtained a patent for Mr. Grierson, her husband, to be the king’s printer; and, to distinguish and reward her uncommon merit, had her life inserted in it. Besides her parts and learning, she was also a woman of great virtue and piety. Mrs. Pilkington has recorded some particulars of her, and tells us, that, “when about eighteen years of age, she was brought to her father, to be instructed in midwifery; that she was mistress of Hebrew, Greek, Latin, and French, and understood the mathematics as well as most men: and what,” says Mrs. Pilkington, “made these extraordinary talents yet more surprising was, that her parents were poor illiterate country people; so that her learning appeared like the gife poured out on the apostles, of speaking all the languages without the pains of study.” Mrs. Pilkington inquired of her, where she had gained this prodigious knowledge: to which Mrs. Grierson sail, that “she had received some little instruction from the minister of the parish, when she, could spare time from her needle-work, to which she was closely kept by her mother.” Mrs. Pilkington adds, that “she wrote elegantly both in verse and prose; that her turn was chiefly to philosophical or divine subjects; that her piety was not inferior to her learning; and that some of the most delightful hours she herself had ever passed were in the conversation of this female philosopher.” Her son, who was also his majesty’s printer at Dublin, and instructed by her, was a man of uncommon learning, great wit, and vivacity. He died in Germany, at the age of twenty-seven. Dr. Johnson highly respected his abilities, and often observed, that he possessed more extensive knowledge than any man of his years he had ever known. His industry was equal to his talents, he particularly excelled in every species of philological learning, and was perhaps the best critic of his time.

, a French writer of considerable reputation, was born October 9, 1698, at Moulins. He entered early among the Jesuits at Paris, was professor of belles lettres in the college of Louis le Grand, and distinguished himself afterwards in the pulpit. On the dissolution of his order, he retired to Brussels, where he died of a nephritic cholic, February 22, 1775. His works are, 1. An edition of Daniel’s “History of France,” Paris, 1756, 17 vols. 4to, in which the reign of Louis XIII. occupying three volumes, is entirely his own. 2. “Traité des differentes sortes de preuves qui servent à etablir la verite de l'Histoire,” Liege, 1769, 12mo, a very judicious performance. 3. “Sermons,” Liege, 1767, 4 vols. 8vo, not remarkable for spirit or eloquence. 4. Several pious works, among which the most popular is his “Anneé du Chretien,” Paris, 1747, 18 vols. 12mo. 5. “Latin Poems,” written at college, of indifferent character. 6. An improved edition of‘ D’Avrigny’s Memoirs, 1757, 5 vols. 12mo. 7. “Insuffisance de la religion naturelle,” Liege, 2 vols. 12mo. 8. An enlarged edition of the “Delices des Pays Bas,” Liege, 1769, 5 vols. 12mo.

, a landscape painter, born at Amsterdam in 1645, was a pupil of Roland Roghman, whose manner he relinquished after he became acquainted with the more perfect one of A. Vandervelde and Lingelbach. He settled in England, and made views of many of the principal places, which are highly wrought, but with rather an artificial tone of colouring. His execution was minute and laboured, but his pictures are very well completed in that style. He likewise employed his talents in imitations of Rembrandt, Rysdael, Polemburg, and Teniers; and so successfully, that his productions are often taken for originals. He died in the seventy-third year of his age, in 1718. He was known by the appellation of the old Griffier.-^-His son, Robert Griffier, or the young Griffier, practised the same profession as his father, and in the same style. He resided chierly upon the continent, and produced a great number of elaborate pictures of views on the Rhine, &c. with many figures in them. He was alive in 1713.

, a lady once of some note a a writer of novels and plays, whose maiden name was Griffith, was of Welch descent, and early in life married Richard Griffith, a gentleman of a good family, but reduced fortune, in Ireland. The first performance by which she became known was entitled “The Letters of Henry and Frances,” which are said to contain the genuine correspondence between her and her husband before their marriage, and for some years after. They were published at the particular request of Margaret countess of Cork, who was one of her friends, and privy to her connexion with Mr. Griffith, which was at first kept secret. From these letters, a few particulars of the private history of the parties may be collected. Mr. Griffith appears to have received no regular education, although in his youth he had evinced some talents for poetry; he introduced himself, however, by degrees into “the genteelest and most reputable company;” but tired of a city life, passed several years with a relation in the country of Ireland, where he read, learned French, and “studied husbandry philosophically.” He then engaged in a farm and the linen manufacture; and about 1760 appears to have received a place from the duke of Bedford, at that time lord lieutenant of Ireland. His acquaintance with Mrs. Griffith was accidental, and commenced on his parr, to use his own phrase, “as an act of gallantry” but rinding “no probability of success,” a strange declaration and being enafrioured with her writings, conversation, and character, became, at last, a real and honourable lover, but declined matrimony for several years, as she had no fortune, and his expectations from his father were much larger than they were likely to turn out. At length, however, they married, about the year 1752; and their first publication was this correspondence, published by subscription, and not very successful with any class of readers, not even the sentimentalists, for whom it was chiefly calculated. Some of the letters, however, are of a superior cast, and contain many sensible remarks on books, men, and manners. Their next publication, which was also written in conjunction, was “Two Novels, in Letters, 4 vols. the first and second, entitled Delicate Distress, by Frances the third and fourth, entitled the Gordian Knot, by Henry,” 1769, 12mo. Both these are of a strict moral tendency; but, like the correspondence of the authors, too much tinged with the pedantry of quotation and philosophizing, instead of natural description and feeling. Previously to this, Mr. Griffith had published in 1764, “The Triumvirate; or the authentic Memoirs of A. B. and C.” 2 vols. 12mo, a novel of so Joose a kind, that even his wife could not venture to recommend it to the fair sex, and yet adds her opinion that “every gentleman will read it with pleasure, and I trust without any injury to his morals.” Of Mr. Griffith’s performances we hear no more, nor have been able to ascertain the time of his death. Mrs. Griffith’s other novels were “Lady Barton,” and “Juliana HarJey.” She also wrote some dramas which had various success, but none of them have preserved their station on the stage. One of her most agreeable publications svas “The Morality of Shakspeare’s Drama illustrated,” 1775, 8vo. She published also some translations, “The Adventures of Pierre Viaud,” and the “Letters of Ninon de L'Enclos,” c. She died Jan. 3, 1793, at Millecenr, in the county of Kildare. She was unquestionably a woman of considerable literary talents, but does not appear to have found in her lover and husband the judgment which could give them a proper direction. Nor did he contribute much to bar happiness in his latter days. He had long accustomed himself to the cant of sentiment, which is too frequently mistaken for genuine moral feeling. When in his grand climacteric, he seduced a girl of fortune and consequence, with whom he lived the reminder of his days. The libehine notions in his “ Triumvirate” appear to have been more predominant sense he affected to entertain of pure morals in his “Letters.”

, called Bolognese, was born at Bologna in 1606, and studied under A. Caracci, to whom he was related. He was a good designer of figures, but became chiefly distinguished for his landscapes. When he arrived at Rome, Innocent X. did justice to his merit, employed him to paint in the Vatican and the Q,uirinal, and even in churches. This pope used to visit him when at work, and talk familiarly with him. His reputation reached cardinal Mazarine at Paris, who sent for him, settled a large pension on him, and employed him for three years in embellishing hi? palace and the Louvre, by the order of Lewis XIII. The troubles of the state, and the clamours raised against the cardinal, whose party he warmly espoused, put him so much in danger, that his friends advised him to retire among the Jesuits, for whom he painted a decoration for the exposition of the sacrament during the holy days, according to the custom of Rome. This piece was much relished at Paris: the king honoured it with two visits, and commanded him to paint a similar piece for his chapel at the Louvre. Grimaldi after that returned to Italy, and at his arrival at Rome found his great patron Innocent X. dead; but his two successors Alexander VII, and Clement IX. honoured him equally with their friendship, and found him variety of employment. His chief power lay in landscape, though he designed figures well, and his pencil equalled his design, light, and flowing with great depth of colour, bolder in the masses and the dash of bushy foliage than Caracci’s, but perhaps tc-o green. The gallery Colon n a, at Rome, has many of his views, which remained chiefly in Italy, less known on this side of the Alps than those of Poussin and Claude. He understood architecture, and has engraved in aqita fortis forty-two landscapes in an excellent manner, five of which are after Titian. Grimaldi was amiable in his manners, as well as skilful in his profession: he was generous without profusion, respectful to the great without meanness, and charitable to the poor. The following instance of his benevolence may serve to characterise the man. A Sicilian gentleman, who had retired from Messina with his daughter, during the troubles of that country, was reduced to the misery of wanting bread. As he lived over-against him, Grimaldi was soon informed of it; and in the dusk of the evening, knocking at the Sicilian’s door, without making himself known, tossed in money and retired. The thing happening more than once, raised the Sicilian’s curiosity to know his benefactor; who, finding him out, by hiding himself behind the door, fell down on his knees to thank the hand that had relieved him: Grimaldi remained confused, offered him his house, and continued his friend till his death. He died of a dropsy at Rome in 1G60, and left a considerable fortune among six children; of which the youngest, named Alexander, was a pretty good painter.

, a learned cardinal, was born at Venice in 1460. His father being procurator of St. Mark, and afterwards doge of the city, the son was soon brought into public notice, and employed by the state in important offices. In 1493 he was raised to the purple by pope Alexander VI. having previously acquired great fame on account of the piety which he displayed towards his father, who was commander of a fleet, and being defeated by the Turks, was imprisoned and treated with great rigour. The son offered to take his place, which being refused, he attended him in prison, and rendered him all the service in his power. Grimani was also an eminent patron of the fine arts: he collected a choice and valuable library, consisting of eight thousand volumes in all languages, which, at his decease, in 1523, he bequeathed to the canons regular of St. Salvadore, in Venice. It was afterwards increased by the addition of many valuable works by the cardinal patriarch Marino Grimani, and was preserved until nearly the end of the seventeenth century, when it was unfortunately destroyed by fire. Dominick Grimani also made a fine collection of statues, and other remains of antiquity. In 1509, he was visited by Erasmus, who relates the particulars of. his reception, in one of his letters, with interesting minuteness, and afterwards dedicated to him his “Paraphrasis in hlpistol. Pauli ad Romanes.” On another occasion we find Erasmus soliciting cardinal Grimani for a copy of Origen’s commentary on the Psalms, a translation of which he had been urged to undertake by Warham, archbishop of Canterbury. Grimani is said to have transiated irom the Greek some homilies of Chrysostom.

, a poet of considerable rank in his time, was a native of Huntingdonshire, and received the first part of his academical education at Christ’s college in Cambridge, where he became B. A. in 1539 or 1540. Removing to Oxford in 1542, he was elected fellow of Merton college; but, about 1547, having opened a rhetorical lecture in the refectory of Christ church, then newly founded, he was transplanted to that society, which gave the greatest encouragement to such students as were distinguished for their proficiency in criticism and philology. The same year he wrote a Latin tragedy, which probably was acted in the college, entitled “Archipropheta, sive Joannes Baptista,” dedicated to the dean, Richard Cox, and printed Colon. 1548, 8vo. In 1548, he explained all the four books of Virgil’s Georgics in a regular prose Latin paraphrase, in the public hall of his college, which was printed at London in 1591, 8vo. He wrote also explanatory commentaries, or lectures, on the <c Andria“of Terence, the Epistles of Horace, and many pieces of Cicero, perhaps for the same auditory. He translated Tully’s Offices into English, which he dedicated to the learned Thirlby, bishop of Ely, printed at London, 1553, 8vo, and reprinted in 1574 and 1596. He also made translations from some of the Greek classics; but these, Mr. Warton thinks, were never published; among others was the” Cyropaedia.“Bale mentions some plays and poems, but not with sufficient precision to enable us to know whether they were in Latin or English. It is allowed, however, that he was the second English poet after lord Surrey who wrote in blank verse, and added to Surrey’s style new strength, elegance, and modulation. In the disposition and conduct of his cadences, says our poetical historian, he often approaches to the legitimate structure of the improved blank verse, although he is not quite free from those dissonancies and asperities, which in his time adhered to the general character and state of English diction. Both Mr. Warton and Mr. Ellis have given specimens of his poetry from” The Songes written by N. G.“annexed to the” Songes and Soanettes of uncertain Auctours“in TottelPs edition of lord Surrey’s Poems (reprinted in the late edition of the English poets). As a writer of verses in rhyme, Mr. Warton thinks that Grimbold yields to none of his contemporaries, for a masterly choice of chaste expression, and the concise elegancies of didactic versification; and adds that some of the couplets in his” Praise of Measure-keeping,“or moderation, have all the smartness which mark the modern style of sententious poetry, and would have done honour to Pope’s ethic epistles. It is supposed that he died about 1563. Wood and Tanner, and after them, Warton, are decidedly of opinion that he is the same person, called by Strype” one Grimbold," who was chaplain to bishop Ridley, and who was employed by that prelate while in prison, to translate into English Laurentius Valla’s book against the fiction of Constantine’s Donation, with some other popular Latin pieces against the papists. In Mary’s reign, it is said that he was imprisoned for heresy, and saved his life by recantation. This may be true of the Grimbold mentioned by Strype, but we doubt whether he be the same with our poet, who is mentioned in high terms by Bale, on account of his zeal for the reformed doctrines, without a syllable of his apostacy, which Bale must have known, and would not have concealed.

, a celebrated lawyer, and master of the rolls in the seventeenth century, descended from a very ancient family, was born at Brad fieldball, near Manningtree, in Essex, about 1594. Where he had his early education is not known, but he studied law in Lincoln’s-inn, and practised with considerable success. In August 1638 he was chosen recorder of Colchester, and representative for that place in the parliament which met at Westminster April 13, 1640, and again in the parliament which met Nov. 3 of the same year. The measures he at first supported were those of the party which finally overthrew the government, and although he argued chiefly against such abuses as might have been reformed by a better understanding between the conflicting parties, yet his violence against the court, and particularly a bitter speech he made against archbishop Laud, seem to prove that he was too much swayed by the popular clamour of the times, and too readily became one of the committees for the redress of grievances, real or imaginary, as well as for bringing those to punishment who were most obnoxious to the people. In 1642 he was made one of the lieutenants of the county of Essex, in pursuance of the parliament’s ordinance for the militia, and in August the same year, came down to Colchester and proclaimed sir John Lucas a traitor, for intending to assist the king. When he came, however, to penetrate more deeply into the designs of the reformers, he began to withdraw his countenance from them, and when in 1647 he was appointed one of the commissioners to treat with the king at Newport, in the isle of Wight, his majesty had every reason to be pleased with his candour and moderation. On his return to parliament, he argued for accepting the king’s concessions, and being at the same time one of the commissioners for disbanding the army, was, among others, forcibly excluded from the house by a party of soldiers. After the murder of the king, he went abroad for some time, but in 1656 we find him elected to Cromwell’s parliament as one of the sixteen, representatives for the county of Essex, but not approved by the council, against whose decision he signed a spirited re* monstrance. In February 1659-60 he was chosen one of the new council of state, in whom the executive power was lodged by the remains of the long parliament that restored Charles II.; and a few months after, he was also chosen speaker of the house of commons in what was called the “Healing parliament” which met April 25, 1660. In May following, he waited on the king at Breda, and on his majesty’s arrival, and the settlement of the government, was appointed master of the roils Nov. 3, 1660, which office he filled for nearly twenty-four years with great ability and integrity. He was aiso appointed in the same year chief steward of the borough or St. AlbanV, and recorder of Harwich, and from the restoration to the time or his death, continued to represent Colchester in parliament. For several years he entertained Dr. Gilbert Burntt, afterwards bishop of Salisbury, as his chaplain, or preacher at the rolls; and much assisted him in his “History of the Reformation.” Burnet in his “Own Times” has given an affectionate and probably faithful character of sir Harbottle, who appears to have been a man of real worth, piety, and moderation in his latter days. Sir Harbottle died Dec. 31, 1683, aged about ninety, and was buried in the chancel of St. Michael’s church, St. Alban’s. He was twice married, first to Mary, daughter of sir George Croke, an edition of whose “Reports” he published, 3 vols. folio; and secondly to Anne, daughter of sir Nathaniel Bacon, of Culford-hall, in Suffolk. Other particulars of his family may be seen in our authorities.

, archbishop of Canterbury, was born in 15 ID, at Hinsingham, a small village in Cumberland. After a suitable inundation of learning at school, he was sent to Magdalen-college, in' Cambridge, but removed thence to Christ’s, and afterwards to Pembrokehall; where, having taken his first degree in arts, he wa chosen fellow in 1538, and commenced M. A. in 1541, having served the office of junior bursar of his college the preceding year. In 1548 he was appointed senior proctor of the university, and is said to have often sat as assessor to the vice-chancellor in his courts. In 1549 he became president [vice-master] of his college; and being now B. D. was unanimously chosen lady Margaret’s public preacher at Cambridge; as he was also one of the four disputants in a theological extraordinary act, performed that year for the entertainment of king Edward’s visitors.

Thus distinguished in the university, his merit was observed by Hid ley, bishop of London, who made him his chaplain in 1550; perhaps by the recommendation of Bucer, the king’s professor of divinity at Cambridge, who soon after his removal to London, in a letter to that prelate, styles our divine “a person eminent for his learning and piety.” And thus a door being opened to him into church -preferments, he rose by quick advances. tiis patron the bishop was so much pleased with him, that he designed for him the prebend of Cantrilles, in St. Paul’s church, and wrote to the council (some of whom had procured it for furnishing the king’s stables) for leave to give this living, as he says, “to his well deserving chaplain, who was without preferment, and to whom he would grant it with all his heart, that so he might have him continually with him and in his diocese to preach,” adding, that “he was known to be both of virtue, honesty, discretion, wisdom, and learning.” What effect this application had does not appear, but the praecentor’s place becoming vacant soon after, his lordship on August 24, 1551, collated him to that office, which was of much greater value, and likewise procured him to be made one of his majesty’s chaplains, with the usual salary of 40l. in December of the same year. On July 2, 1552, he obtained a stall in Westminster-abbey; which, however, he resigned to Dr. Bonner, whom he afterwards succeeded in the bishopric of London. In the mean time, there being a design on the death of Dr. Tonstall, to divide the rich see of Durham into two, Grindal was nominated lor one of these, and would have obtained it, had not one of the courtiers got the whole bishopric dissolved, and settled as a temporal estate upon himself.

In 1553, he fled from the persecution under queen Mary into Germany; and, residing at Strasbourg, made himself master of the German tongue, in order to preach in the churches there; in the disputes at Francfort about a new model of government and form of worship, which was to be different from the last liturgy of king Edward, he sided with Cox and others against Knox and his followers. Returning to England on the accession of Elizabeth, in 1558, he was employed among others, in drawing up the new liturgy to be presented to the queen’s first parliament; and was also one of the eight protestant divines, chosen to hold a public dispute with the popish prelates about that time. His talent for preaching was likewise very serviceable, and he was generally appointed to that duty on all public occasions. On May 15, 1559, he preached at St. Paul’s at the first reading of the common-prayer before the privy-council, nobility, lord mayor, and aldermen. About the same time he was appointed one of the commissioners in the north, o the royal visitation for restoring the supremacy of the crown, and the protestant faith and worship. This visitation extended also to Cambridge, xvhere Dr. John Young being removed for refusing the oath of supremacy, from the mastership of Pembroke-hall, Grindal was chosen by the fellows to succeed him in 1559. This office, however, he accepted with reluctance, and finding that he could not reside, he resigned it in May 1562, if not before; yet so highly was he beloved by the society, that the three succeeding masters were chosen by his recommendation.

In July the same year, he was nominated to the bishopric of London, vacant by the deposition of Bonner. The juncture was very critical, and the fate of the church revenues depended upon the event. An act of parliament had lately passed, whereby her majesty was empowered to exchange the ancient episcopal manors and lordships for tithes and impropriations; a measure extremely regretted by these first bishops, who scrupled whether they should comply in a point so injurious to the revenue of their respective sees, which must suffer considerably by these exchanges; and which too would cut off all hope of restoring the tithes, so long unjustly detained from the respective churches, for the maintenance of the incumbents. In this important point our new-nominated bishop consulted Peter Martyr in a letter dated August of this year; nor did he accept of the bishopric till he had re* ceived an opinion in favour of it from that divine, who said that the queen might provide for her bishops and clergy in such manner as she thought proper, that being none of GrindaPs concern. He also communicated to that divine his scruples concerning the habits and some customs then used in the church, on both which Martyr gave him the advice of a sensible and moderate man who regarded more weighty matters. Before this answer could be received, Grindal was consecrated Dec. 1, but the exchange of lands with the queen not being fully settled, he could not compound for his first fruits, and consequently he was hindered from exercising his episcopal function, and was obliged to have the queen’s express authority for that purpose. We may here remark that Cox bishop of Ely, Barlow of Chichester, and Scory of Hereford, were consecrated at the same time by archbishop Parker, with whom they all joined in a petition to her majesty to stop these exchanges, and they offered her as an equivalent, 1000 marks a year during their lives. In 1560, he was made one of the ecclesiastical commissioners, in pursuance of an act of parliament to inspect into the manners of the clergy, and regulate all matters of the church; and the same year he joined with Cox and Parker, in a private letter to the queen, persuading her to marry. In 1561, he held his primary visitation. In 1563 he assisted the archbishop of Canterbury, together with some civilians, in preparing a book of statutes for Christ church, Oxford, which as yet had none fixed. This year he was also very serviceable, in procuring the^ English merchants, who were ill used at Antwerp and ether parts of the Spanish Netherlands, and who had been very kind to the English exiles in the late reign, a new settiemeut Embden, in East-Frieslaml; and the same year, at the request of sir William Cecil, secretary of state, he wrote animadversions upjn a treatise entitled “Christiani Hominis Norma,” &c. “The Rule of a Christian Man,” the author of which, one Justus Velsius, a Dutch enthusiast, had impudently, in some letters to the queen, used menaces to her majesty; hut being at last cited before the ecclesiastical commission, was charged to depart the kingdom.

On April 15, 1564, he took the degree of D. D. at Cambridge, and the same year executed the queen’s express command, for exacting uniformity in the clergy; but proceeded so tenderly and slowly, that the archbishop thought fit to excite and quicken him; whence the puritans supposed him inclined to their party. However, he brought several nonconformists to comply; to which end he pub* Jished a letter of Henry Bullinger, minister of Zurich, in Switzerland, to prove the lawfulness of compliance, which had a very good effect. The same year, October 3, on the celebration of the emperor Ferdinand’s funeral, he preached a sermon at St. Paul’s, afterwards printed, from which Strype has given extracts. In 1567 he executed the queen’s orders in proceeding against the prohibited and unlicensed preachers; but was so treated by some with reproaches and rude language, that it abated much of his favourable inclinations towards them, which was felt and resented on their part. Even although some years afterwards he both procured the liberty of some separatists who had been imprisoned according to law, and indulged their ministers with a licence to preach on their promising not to act against the laws, yet they immediately abused that liberty, and when he proceeded against them for it, they had the boldness to lodge a complaint in the privy council representing his dealings with them. The archbishop, touched with their ingratitude, joined with the council in opinion that such men ought to be severely punished as a warning to others. Grimial was also threatened with a premunire by some of his clergy for raising a contribution upon them the preceding year for the persecuted Protestants abroad, without the queen’s licence. But this did not discourage him, and having procured a commission from her majesty to visit the Savoy, the hospital appointed for the relief and entertainment of poor travellers, he deprived the master, who had almost ruined the charity by his abuses and mismanagement. This was the last piece of service he performed for his diocese, being on May I, 1570, translated to the see of York. He owed this promotion to secretary Cecil and archbishop Parker, who liked his removal from London, as not being resolute enough for the government there. The same year he wrote a letter to his patron Cecil, that Cartwright the famous nonconformist might be silenced; and in 1571, at his metropolitical visitation, he shewed a hearty zeal, by his injunctions, for the^discipline and good government of the church. In 1572 he petitioned the queen to renew the ecclesiastical commission. In 157* he held one for the purpose of proceeding against papists, whose number daily diminished in his diocese, which he was particularly careful to provide with learned preachers, as being in his opinion the best method of attaining that end. He rejected therefore such as came for institution to livings if they were found deficient in learning, and in this policy he was encouraged by the queen, to whom it was highly agreeable. In other respects he had frequently to contend with the avarice of the courtiers, some of whom, would have greatly impoverished the church, if he and Other prelates had not opposed them.

His patron, Cecil, then lord treasurer, recommended him to the first chair in the church, which became vacant by the death of archbishop Parker. Accordingly he was translated to the see of Canterbury, in which he was confirmed, February 15, 1575. On May 6, 1576, he began his metropolitical visitation, and took measures for the better regulation of his courts; but the same year fell under her majesty’s displeasure, upon account of the favour he shewed to what was called the exercise of prophesying.

These prophesyings had been used for some time, the rules of which were, that the ministers of a particular division at a set time met together at some church, and there each in their order explained, according to their abilities, some portion of scripture allotted to them before; this done, a moderator made his observations on what had been said, and determined the true sense of the place, a certain time being fixed for dispatching the whole. The advantage was the improvement of the clergy, who hereby coiisiderabiy profited in the knowledge of the scripture; but this mischief ensued, that at length confusions and disturbances took place at those meetings, by an ostentation of superior parts in some, by advancing heterodox opinions, and by the intrusion of some of the silenced se* paratists, who took this opportunity of declaiming against the liturgy and hierarchy, and even speaking against states and particular persons. The people also, of whom there was always a great conflux as hearers, fell to arguing and disputing much about religion, and sometimes a layman would take upon himself to speak. In short, the exercises degenerated into factions.

Grindal laboured to redress these irregularities by setting down rules and orclers for the management of these exercises; however, the queen still disapproved of them, as seeing probably how very apt they were to be abused. She did not like that the laity should neglect their secular affairs by repairing to those meetings, which she thought might fill their heads with notions, and so occasion dissentions and disputes, and perhaps seditions in the state. And the archbishop being at court, she particularly declared herself offended at the number of preachers as well as the exercises, and ordered him to redress both; urging, that it was good for the church to have few preachers, that three or four might suffice for a county, and that the reading of the Homilies to the people was sufficient. She therefore required him to abridge the number of preachers, and put down the religious exercises. This did not a little afflict him. He thought^ and very properly, the queen infringed upon his office, to whom, next to herself, the highest trust of the church of England was committed; especially as this command was peremptory, and made without at alladvising with him, and that in a matter so directly concerning religion: he wrote a letter to her majesty, declaring, that his conscience would not suffer him to comply with her commands.

This refusal was dated December 20, 1576. The queen therefore having given him sufficient time to consider well his resolution, and he continuing inflexible, she sent letters next year to the bishops, to forbid all exercises and prophesyings, and to silence all preachers and teachers not lawfully called, of which there were no small number; and in June the archbishop was sequestered from his office, and confined to his house by an order of the court of starchamber. In November the lord-treasurer wrote to him about making his submission, with which he not thinking fit to comply, his sequestration was continued; and iri January there were thoughts of depriving him, which* how-­ever, were laid aside. June 1579, his confinement was either taken off, or else he had leave to retire to his house at Croydon; for we find him there consecrating the bishop of Exeter in that year, and the bishops of Winchester, and Lichfield and Coventry, the year following. This part of his function was exercised by a particular commission from the queen, who in council appointed two civilians to manage the other affairs of his see, the two of his nomination being set aside. Yet sometimes he had special commands from the queen and council to act in person, and issued out orders in his own name; and in general was as active as he could be, and vigilant in the care of his diocese as occasion offered. In 1580, for instance, when there happened a violent earthquake, our archbishop having issued an order for prayer and humiliation, composed a prayer for families throughout his diocese, which was allowed by the council, who in a letter to him commended his great zeal, and required him to enjoin the observation of his new order of prayer in all other dioceses. The council also referred to him the decision of a dispute that happened the same year at Merton college, Oxford, of which he was visitor, as archbishop; and soon after he was employed by the lord treasurer in a controversy between the university and town of Cambridge.

This year (1580), a convocation met at St. Paul’s, at which, though he could not appear, yet he had a principal share in the transactions of it. He drew up an expedient for preserving the authority of the spiritual courts in the point of excommunications; he laid before them also a new form of penance to be observed for the future, better calculated than the former to produce a proper effect on offenders. It was moved in this convocation, that no business should be entered upon, nor any subsidy granted, till he was restored, and although the motion was negatived, yet they unanimously presented a petition in his favour to her majesty, which they thought was a more respectful proceeding. This, however, proved ineffectual, nor was he restored until after he made his submission, in which, among other things, to clear himself of the charge of a refiactory disobedience in the matter of the exercises, he proved that in his own bishopric, and other peculiar jurisdictions, he never suffered the practice after the time of her majesty’s command.

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

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

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

Besides what have already been noticed, Grindal assisted Fox in his Marty rology, in which is printed a composition of his entitled a “Dialogue between Custom and Truth,” written in a very clear manner, in refutation o the doctrine ^of the corporal presence in the sacrament. He lived and died unmarried, yet does not seem to have amassed much wealth amidst all his preferments. At his death, however, he became a considerable benefactor to learning. He left 30/, per annum for the maintenance of a free grammar-school at St. Begh’s, in Cumberland, near the place of his birth and for the building, &c. of it 366l. 13s. 4d', various sums to several colleges at Cambridge, and cups, pictures, &c. to various friends. It may be worth noticing, that Grindal, who, by the way, is the Algrind of Spenser, first brought the tamarisk to England, so useful in medicine, when he returned from his exile.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Views and prospects"

Mr. Grose married Catherine, daughter of Mr. Jordan, of Canterbury, by whom he had two sons and five daughters; 1. Francis Grose, of Croydon-Crook in Surrey, esq. a colonel in the army, governor in 1790 of New South Wales; 2. Onslow Grose, esq. captain of the pioneer corps on the Madras establishment, who died very lately in India; and four daughters, one of whom married to Anketel Singleton, esq. lieutenant-governor of Landguard-Fort, in Essex.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

At this early age he ventured to form plans which required very great learning, bnt which he executed with such perfection, that the republic of letters were struck with astonishment. These, however, were not published till after his return from France. He had a strong inclination to see that country, and an opportunity offered at this time of gratifying it. The States-general came to a resolution of sending, on an embassy to Henry IV. in 1598, count Justin of Nassau, and the grand pensioner Barnevelt: and Grotius put himself into the train of those ambassadors, for the latter of whom he had a particular esteem*. His own reputation having preceded him in France,

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

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

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

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

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

* The business of this officer is to and secretary to the States; and