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

What Headley might have produced, had he lived to persevere in the line of study in which he had engaged, may he easily conjectured from the “Select Beauties of Ancient English Poetry,” which he published in 1787, 2 vols. 8vo. It may be said to have given a new direction to the public taste, and to have pointed out to poetical antiquaries those objects of research which they have since pursued with equal avidity and success. These volumes soon became popular, and certainly possess various claims to attention, whether we consider the taste and judgment with which the selection was made, or the neatness, point, and felicitous discrimination of character with which the biographical sketches are universally marked. Previous to the appearance of this work, Mr. Headley had published a small volume of original poems, and is said to have contributed some papers to the “Olla Podrida,” and to a less known periodical paper, entitled “The Lucubrations of Abel Slug,” of which a few numbers only were printed.

, an enterprising English navigator, was born in 1745; he was the son of Mr. Hearne, secretary to the water-works, London-bridge, a very sensible man, and of a respectable family in Somersetshire; he died of a fever in his fortieth year, and left Mrs. Hearne with this son, then but three years of age, and a daughter two years older. Mrs. H. finding her income too small to admit her living in town as she had been accustomed, retired to Bimmister, in Dorsetshire (her native place), where she lived as a gentlewoman, and was much respected. It was her wish to give her children as good an education as the place afforded, and accordingly she sent her son to school at a very early period: but his dislike to reading and writing was so great, that he made very little progress in either. His masters, indeed, spared neither threats nor persuasion to induce him to learn, but their arguments were thrown away on one who seemed predetermined never to become a learned man; he had, however, a very quick apprehension, and in his childish sports shewed unusual activity and ingenuity; he was particularly fond of drawing; and though he never had the least instruction in the art, copied with great delicacy and correctness even from nature. Mrs. Hearne’s friends, finding her son had no taste for study, advised tier fixing on some business, and proposed such as they judged most suitable for him; but he declared himself utterly averse to trade, and begged he might be sent to sea. His mother very reluctantly complied with his request, took him to Portsmouth, and remained with him till he sailed. His captain (now lord Hood) promised to take care of him, and gave him every indulgence his youth required. He was then but eleven years of age. They had a warm engagement soon after he entered, and took several prizes: the captain told him he should have his share; but he begged, in a very affectionate manner, it might be given to his mother, and she would know best what to do with it. He was a midshipman several years under the same commander; but on the conclusion of the war, having no hopes of preferment, he left the navy, and entered into the service of the Hudson’s Bay company, as mate of one of their sloops. He was, however, soon distinguished from his associates by his ingenuity, industry, and a wish to undertake some hazardous enterprize by which mankind might be benefited. This was represented to the company, and they immediately applied to him as a proper person to be sent on an expedition they had long had in view, viz. to find out the north-west passage: he gladly accepted the proposal, and how far he succeeded is shewn to the public in his Journal. On his return he was advanced to a more lucrative post, and in a few years was made commander in chief, in which situation he remained till 1782, when the French unexpectedly landed at Prince of Wales’ s Fort, took possession of it, and after having given the governor leave to secure his own property, seized the stock of furs, &c. &c. and blew up the fort. At the company’s request Mr. H. went out the year following, saw it rebuilt, and the new governor settled in his habitation (which they took care to fortify a little better than formerly), and returned to England in 1787. He had saved a few thousands, the fruits of many years’ industry, and might, had he been blessed with prudence, have enjoyed many years of ease and plenty; but he had lived so long where money was of no use, that he seemed insensible of its value here, and lent it with little or no security to those he was scarcely acquainted with by name; sincere and undesigning himself, he was by no means a match for the duplicity of others. His disposition, as may be judged by his writing, was naturally humane; what he wanted in learning and polite accomplishments, he made up in native simplicity; and was so strictly scrupulous with regard to the property of others, that he was heard to say, a few davs before his death, “he could lay his hand on his heart and say, he had never wronged any man of sixpence.”

Such are the outlines of Mr. Hearne’s character; who, if he had some failings, had many virtues to counterbalance them, of which charity was not the least. He died of the dropsy, November 1792, aged forty-seven. In 1797 appeared his “Journey from the Prince of Wales’s Fort, in Hudson’s Bay, to the Northern Ocean; undertaken by order of the Hudson’s Bay Company, for the discovery of Copper-mines, a North-west passage, &c. in the years 1769, 1770, 1771, 1772,” a volume which forms a very valuable addition to the discoveries of our enterprizing countrymen.

, an eminent English antiquary, and indefatigable collector and editor of books and manuscripts, was the son of George Hearne, parish-clerk of White Waltham, Berkshire, by Edith, daughter of Thomas Wise. He was born at Littlefteld-green in the above parish, in 1678, and baptised July 11th of that year. He appears to have been born with a taste for those researches which formed afterwards the business of his life; and even when he had but attained a knowledge of the alphabet, was seen continually poring over the old tomb-stones in the church-yard. As to education, he had very little. His father, who kept a writing-school, and who, as parishclerk, was also a kind of amanuensis to the illiterate part of his neighbours, could teach him English and writing, in both which he made considerable proficiency; but he had other children, and, instead of being able to place Thomas at any superior school, was obliged to let him earn his subsistence as a day-labourer. His natural abilities, however, appeared through this disadvantage, and his being a better reader and writer than could have been expected from his scanty opportunities, recommended him to the kind attention of an early patron, whom he calls “that pious and learned gentleman Francis Cherry, esq.” By this gentleman, in whose house he was for some time a menial servant, he was placed at the free-school of Bray in Berkshire, in the beginning of 1693, and rewarded his care by such diligent application, as to acquire an accurate knowledge of Greek and Latin. He was on this account much respected both by the master and his fellow-scholars, who were accustomed to consult him in their little difficulties, and used to listen to his information respecting English history, which his original taste had led him to study as he found opportunity.

His patron, Mr. Cherry, pleased with the happy effects of his care, determined to take our young antiquary into his house, and maintain him as his son. In this it is said he partly followed the advice of the learned Mr. Dodwell, who then lived in the neighbourhood, and had probably watched the progress of Hearne’s education. He was accordingly taken into Mr. Cherry’s house about Easter 1695, and his studies in classical learning promoted by this gentleman, or by Mr. Dodwell, both taking that trouble with him, which, from his diligence and apt memory, they foresaw would not be lost. With the same benevolent views, Mr. Cherry sent him to Oxford, where, in Michaelmas term of the above year, he was entered of Edmundhall, but returned immediately after his matriculation, and pursued his studies both at Mr. Cherry’s, and at the school of Bray.

In Easter term 1696, he came to reside at Edmund-hall, a society which had probably been recommended to Mr. Cherry by Dr. White Kennet, who was at that time viceprincipal, and also rector of Shottesbrooke, which he received from Mr. Cherry. The learned Dr. John Mill was at this time principal. Both his tutor, Dr. Kennet, and his principal, Dr. Mill, appear to have soon discovered the bent of his studies; and Dr. Mill, who was then employed“on the appendix to his edition of the Greek Testament, finding young Hearne an apt reader of Mss. employed him in the laborious task of collation. It was also at the doctor’s request, that when he was about three years standing, he went to Eton to compare a ms. of Tatian and Athenagoras in that college library. The variations he discovered were afterwards made use of by Mr. Worth in his edition of Tatian, in 1700, and by Dechair in his edition of Athenagoras, 1706; but Mr. Hearne complains, and with some justice, that neither mentioned the person who collated the Mss. Hearne' s own copy of the variations is now in the Bodleian. About this time Mr. Cherry sent for him to Shottesbrooke, and employed him in transcribing sir Henry Spelman’s” History of Sacrilege,“which was soon after printed at London. Mr. Dodwell also appears to have employed him in transcribing two copies of his” Paraenesis." At Edmund Hall Dr. Grabe availed himself of his useful talents in transcribing and collating various old manuscripts.

Irr act term 1699, he took his bachelor’s degree, soon after which a proposal was made to him by Dr. Kennet to go to Maryland, as one of Dr. Bray’s missionaries. What particular fitness Dr. Kennet discovered in Hearne for a situation of this kind we know not. He says, indeed, that he mentioned him as “a man of a pious, sober, and studious inclination,” but we are much mistaken if Hearne’s habits were not at this time irreconcileahle with the functions of a missionary; and accordingly we find Dr. Kennet endeavouring to render the office palatable, by informing our antiquary, that besides the stipend, &c. he was to have a library worth 50l. was to be librarian to the whole province, and visitor of all the public libraries.

Hearne, as may be expected, had no inclination to accept this offer, and exchange the libraries of Oxford for those of Maryland; and his refusal appears to have been sanctioned by some, although not all, of his best friends. Having now obtained access to the Bodleian library, he visited that noble repository every day, and his visits were so long, and his knowledge of books so visibly increasing, that in 1701, when Dr. Hudson was chosen librarian, he applied for leave to employ him as an assistant, and soon, found him a very useful one. Having by this official appointment obtained a wider range, he began by examining the state of Dr. Hyde’s catalogue, published in 1674, and finding it, from the gradual increase of the library, very defective, he endeavoured to supply what was wanting in. an interleaved copy, and afterwards transcribed his additions into two volumes, which he entitled “Appendix Catalog! librorum impressorum Bibl. Bod.” This was intended to have been printed by itself, but it was afterwards incorporated with Hyde’s catalogue. The same service Mr. Hearne afterwards performed for the catalogue of Mss. and of coins.

In act term 1703, he took his master’s degree, and was offered a chaplainship of Corpus college by Dr. Turner, the president, provided he could keep his place in the library; but Dr Hudson objecting to this, he declined it, as he did, for the same reason, a chaplainship of All Souls. He had been made janitor of the library, and in 1712 succeeded to the place of second keeper, with which he was allowed to hold his office of janitor; and, as he says, it was “by virtue of these two offices being united that he still kept the keys of the library, &c.” In 1713 an offer was made to him of the place of librarian to the royal society and keeper of their museum, which he declined, “his circumstances not permitting him to leave Oxford.” It is less accountable why he should at this time decline the honour of being made a fellow of this society. The offer, however, shows that the society thought him worthy of it, and that, with all his peculiarities, he had at this time attained considerable reputation in the learned world.

In January 1714-15, he was elected architypographus, and esquire beadle of civil law in the university of Oxford, which post he held, together with that of under-librarian, till November following; but then, finding they were not tenable together, he resigned the beadleship, and very soon after the other place also, by reason of the oaths to government, with which he could not conscientiously comply. He continued a nonjuror to the last, much at the expence of his worldly interest; for, on that account he refused several preferments which would have been of great advantage and very agreeable to him. So many indeed were the offers made, that his motives for refusal must have been urgent and conscientious. His enemies took some pains to bring a charge of inconsistency against him, by publishing <; A Vindication of those who take the Oath of Allegiance to his present majesty.“This he wrote when a very young man, in king William’s reign, but, as he very justly remarks, it proves no more than that he had viewed the question in another light, and surely must be accounted sincere, when we find him refusing so many profitable situations. In the latter part of his life he appears to have resided in Edmund-hall, preparing and publishing his various works, but not, as will be noticed in our catalogue of them, without interruption from what he thought the candid declaration of his political sentiments clashing with those of the university, and of the nation at large. This, in one or two instances, occasioned serious prosecutions, and considering himself as an injured man, he was not sparing in his censures of some of his most learned contemporaries, who, in their turns, were equally disrespectful in their notices of him. With these disputes the present age has little to do, and it owes too much to the industry of Hearne to trace his failings with anxious care, or treat them with the animosity that might have been natural in his own times. How useful his industry was, may be estimated from the number of valuable pieces which he hid in public or private repositories, of no utility even to the possessors of them, for want of persons who have perseverance enough to travel through the drudgery, or spirit enough to hazard the expence of printing them. By a life of the greatest regularity and ceconomy, Hearne was enabled in a great measure to prevent this injury to literature: and his endeavours were assisted by the encouragement of many noble and opulent patrons. It might therefore be matter of surprize, though no reflection upon his character, that a sum amounting to upwards of 1000l. was found in his room after his decease. His death, which happened June 10, 1735, was occasioned by a severe cold and a succeeding fever, which, being improperly treated, terminated in a violent flux. He was buried in the church yard of St. Peter’s in the East, where is erected over his remains a stone with an inscription written by himself:” Here lyeth the body of Thomas Hearne, M. A. who studied and preserved Antiquities. He died June 10, 1735, aged 55 years. Deut. xxxii. 7. * Remember the clays of old, consider the years of many generations; ask thy father, and he will shew thee, thy elders, and they will tell thee.' Job viii. 8, 9, 10. “Enquire I pray thee,' &c.” -This stone was repaired by Dr. Rawlinson in 1754. As the value of Hearne' s labours have been much underrated, and indeed grossly misrepresented, in the Biog. Britannica, and its servile copyists, we shall make no apology for adding the sentiments of his Oxford biographer, Mr. Huddesford: “Since that kind of study pursued by Mr. Hearne is more general now than it was in his time, to praise and speak well of him will of consequence be more safe, as it will be better received. His chief excellence, so often celebrated, but to the misfortune of learning so little imitated, was unwearied industry, which began almost with his life, and continued in full vigour till within a few weeks of his death. By means of this industry, and of a good disposition, he raised himself from the lowest state of dependence to a station of ease and honour. When his worth was in some sort acknowledged, by the offer of the best offices the university had to bestow, he manifested uncommon integrity in declining those offers, because the acceptance of them appeared to him inconsistent with the principles which he had adopted. If there was a singularity in his exterior behaviour or manner which was the jest of the man of wit and polite life, he secretly enjoyed the approbation, favour, and correspondence of the” greatest men of the age. Succeeding times have given testimony to his abilities, which the age in which he lived so lightly esteemed. It is, at least, not flattery, to consider him as a pattern to all whose duty it is, as well as inclination, to unite much learning and erudition, with the greatest plainness and simplicity of manners."

Much of Hearne’s personal history, opinions, and peculiarities, might be derived, if a piece of minute biography were undertaken, from his correspondence, and particularly from his manuscript diary, of which there are 150 small paper books in the Bodleian. Some information gleaned from these has lately been given to the public in that valuable and curious work, “Letters written by eminent persons, &c.” printed in 3 vols. 8vo, 1813, to which we have often to own our obligations. It appears that Hearne’s anxiety to recover manuscripts became in him a species of religious enthusiasm, and that he was accustomed to return thanks in his prayers for success of this kind . It is more to be regretted that his perpetual recurrence to Jacobite sentiments, in his prefaces, where they were surely out of place, created him many enemies, kept him at perpetual variance with his neighbours in the university, and promoted an irritability of temper, and a querulous disposition, which made him unhappy. For social enjoyments he was not well qualified. His manners were originally clownish and simple, and little improved by his intercourse with the world.

Hearne left his ms collections by will to Dr. William. Bedford, of whom Dr. Rawlinson purchased them for an hundred guineas, and at his death bequeathed them with his own Mss. to the Bodleian library. Among other injurious reports at the time of Hearne’s death, one was, that he died a Roman catholic, an imputation on the nonjurors not very uncommon at that time, but which, as to Hearne, has been fully disproved in a letter printed by Mr. Huddesford in his life. Hearne had no more of popery than antiquaries in general, who can never forgive the injuries done to libraries at the time of the reformation.

His publications were, 1. “An Index to L'Estrange’s translation of Josephus,” 1702, fol. 2. “Reliquiae Bodleianae, or some genuine remains of sir Thomas Bodley, &c.” 1703. 3. “Plinii Fpistolae et Paneg\ricus, &c.” 1703. 4. “Eutropius.' Messala Corvinus. Julius Obsequens, &c.” 1703. 5. “Indices tres locupletissimi in Cyrilli opera,” Ox. 1733. 6. “Ductor Historicus,” 2 vols. They did not come out together; a second edition of the first was published in 1705, and the second volume was published in 1704. Our author was not solely concerned in this work, some parts of it being written by another hand, as was the preface. He had made great collections for a third volume, but laid aside this design upon the appearance of the English translation of Puffendorf’s introduction, which begins where the second volume of the “Ductor Historicus” ends, and continues the history to the present times. 7. “Index to Dr. Edvards’s Preservative against Socinianism,” 1740, 4to. 8. “Index to Clarendon’s History of the Rebellion,” fol. 1704. This “little work,” or opella, he informs us, he undertook at the request of dean Aldrich. 9. An edition of “Justin,” 1705, a very good one, compiled from four Mss. but not equal in value to his “Eutropius.” 10. “Livy,” 1708, 6 vols. 8vo, a very accurate edition, which, in the opinion of Dr. Harwocd, does honour to Hearne, It has of late risen very much in price. 11. “A Letter containing an account of some Antiquities between Windsor and Oxford, with a list of the several pictures in the school gallery adjoining to the Bodleian library,” printed in 1708, in the “Monthly Miscellany, or Memoirs for the Curious;” and reprinted at the end of the fifth volume of Leland’s “Itinerary,” but without the list of the pictures; for which, however, there being a demand, he reprinted 100 copies of the whole in 1725. 12. “The Life of Alfred the Great, by sir John Spelman, from the original ms. in the Bodleian library, 1710” 13. “The Itinerary of John Leland the antiquary, intermixed with divers curious discourses, written by the editor and others, 1710,” 9 vols. A new edition was printed in 1744. 14. “Henrici Dodwell de Parma Equestri Wood ward iana dissertatio,” 1713. Some expressions in his preface to this brought upon him a serious loss, as the work was prohibited until he had cancelled the offensive parts. Of this some no* ice has already been taken in our account of Dodwell. 15. “Lelandi de rebus Bntannicis collectanea,” 17 15, 6 vols. 16. “Acta Apostolorum, Grasco Latine, literis majusculis. E codice Laudiano, &c. 1715.” 17. “Joannis Rossi antiquarii Warwicensis historia regum Anglue, 1716.” It was printed again with the second edition of Leland’s “Itinerary,” and now goes along with that work. 18. “Titi Livii Foro-Juliensis vita Henrici V. regis Anglire. Accedit sylloge epistolarum a variis Angliae principibus scriptarum, 1716.” 19. “Aluredi Beverlacensis annales; sive historia de gestis regum Brittannin, &c. 1716.” 20. “Gulielmi Roperi vita D. Thomse Mori equitis aurati, lingua Anglicana coutexta,” 1716. 21. “Gulielmi Camdeni Annales rerum Anglicarum et Hibernicarum, regnante Elizabetha,” 1717, 3 vols. 22. “Gulielmi Neubrigensis historia sive chronica rerum Anglicarum,” 1719. 23. “Thomas Sprotti Chronica, &c.” 1719. 24. “A Collection of curious Discourses written by eminent antiquaries upon several heads in our English antiquities,” 1720. 25. “Textus RorTensis,' &c.” 1720. 26. “Roberti de Avesbury historia de mirabiliKus gestis Edwardi III. &c. Appendicem etiam subnexuit, in qua inter alia continentur Letters of king Henry VIII. to Anne Boleyne,” 1720. 27. “Johannis de Fordun Scotichronicon genumum, una cum ejusdem supplemento ac continuatione,” 1722. 28. “The History and Antiquities of Glastonbury, &c.” 1722. 29. “Hemingi Chartularium ecclesis; Wigorniensis, &c.” 1723. 30. “Robert of Gloucester’s Chronicle,” 1724, &c. in 2 vols. 31. “Peter Langtoft’s Chronicle, as illustrated and improved by Robert of Brune, from the death of Cadwaladon to the end of king Edward the Ist’s reign, c.” 1720, 2 vols. 32. ' Johannis, confratris et monachi Glustoniensis, chronica: sive historia de rebus Glastoniensibus, &c.“1726. 33.” Adami de Domerham. historic de rebus gestis Glastoniensibus, &c.“1727, 2 vols. 34.” Thomas de Elmham vita et gesta Henrici V. Anglorum regis,“&c. 1727. 35.” Liber niger Scaccarii, &c.“1728, 2 vols. 36.” Historia vitae et regni Richardi II. Anglioe regis, a monacho quodam de Evesham consignata,“1729. 37.” Thomae Caii vindiciae antiquitatisacademiseOxoniensis, &c.“1730, 2 vols. 38.” Walteri Hemingforde, canonici de Gisseburne, historia de rebus gestis Edvardi I. II. III. &c.“1731, 2 vols. 39.” Duo rerurn Anglicarum scriptores veteres, videlicet, Thomas Otterbourne et Johannes Wethamstade, ab oriine gentis Britannicae usque ad -Edvardum IV. &c.“1733, 2 vols. 40.” Chronicon sive annaies prioratus du Dunstable, &c.“1733. 41.” Benedictus, abbas Petroburgensis, de vita et gestis Henrici II. Richardi I. &c." 1735, 2 vols.

Such are the general titles of Hearne’s works, but it must be understood that almost every one of these volumes contains various articles relating to antiquities and biography, perfectly distinct, and indeed generally nowise connected with the principal subject; many of which have been acknowledged the most useful of his productions. It cannot be denied, however, th:it he would have been more generally useful had he now and then questioned the importance of what he was about to publish; but with Hearne an old ms. seemed to possess an infallible claim to public attention merely because it was old and unknown. Nobody, says Mr. Gough, will condemn him for the pains he took to preserve Leland’s pieces; but Ross’s compendium contains very little that is interesting, and Alfred of Bevcrley, if genuine, is legendary. Hearne himself seems almost ashamed of Sprott’s Chronicle, to which, however, he has tacked a valuable anonymous fragment relating to the first eight years of Edward IVth’s teign. Avesbury and Elmham’s relations of Edward III. and Henry V. are accurately and methodically put too ether. Livius Koro-juliensis’s life of this last prince is an elegant abridgment of Elmham’s too pompous work. Healing’s Chartulary and the “Textus Roffensis” are valuable collections of the most ancient monuments of their respective churches. Robert of Gloucester’s Chronicle takes precedence of all English poets. The two monks of Glastonbury are historians of their own house, of which its English history by an anonymous later hand gives a tolerable account. Death, adds Mr. Gough, prevented Hearne from encumbering our libraries with a meagre history of England, or additions, to Martin Polanus’s Annals, ascribed to one John Murelynch, a monk of Glassenbury, and another from Brute or Ina to Edward I. by John Bever, a monk of Westminster, borrowed from the “Flores Historiarum.” His friend Thomas Baker, the Cambridge antiquary, “often cautioned him against fatiguing himself too much, and overloading his constitution; but he was not to be advised, and so died a martyr to antiquities.” It appears from some of his correspondence, that even in his own time his works rose very much in price, and it is well known that of late years they have been among the most expensive articles brought to market, the best of them being now beyond the reach of common purchasers. A few years ago, Mr. Bagster, of the Strand, with a spirit of liberality and enterprize, published one or two of them in an elegant and accurate manner, as the prelude to a reprint of the whole series; but it is to be regretted that this scheme was soon obliged to be abandoned for want of encouragement.

, a lawyer of eminence of the last century, and recorder of Exeter, was a celebrated scholar and an author. He wrote, 1. “An Essay towards a demonstrative proof of the Divine Existence, Unity, and Attributes; to which is premised, a short defence of the argument commonly called a priori,” 17iO. This pamphlet was dedicated to Dr. Oliver of Bath, and is to be ranked amongst the ablest defences of Dr. Clarke’s, or rather Mr. Howe’s, hypothesis; for it appears to be taken from Howe’s “Living Temple.” 2. “The case of the county of Devon with respect to the consequences of the new Excise Duty on Cyder and Perry. Published by the direction of the committee appointed at a general meeting of that county to superintend the application for the repeal of that duty,” 1763, 4to. To this representation of the circumstances peculiar to Devonshire, the repeal of the act is greatly to be ascribed; and very honourable notice was taken of it at a general meeting or the county. 3. “Notre sive Lectiones ad Tragicorum Graecorum veterum, JEschyli, &c.” 1752, 4to a work which places the author’s learning and critical skill in a very conspicuous light a principal object of which was to restore the metre of the Greek tragic poets. It is highly valued by all sound critics of our own and foreign countries. He also furnished the notes on the Eton Greek tragedies. The same solidity of judgment distinguished the author’s last production, 4. “A Revisal of Shakspeare’s Text, wherein the alterations introduced into it by the more modern editors and critics are particularly considered,” 1765, 8vo. It appears from the list of Oxford graduates, that he was created D. C. L. by diploma, March 31, 1762. He died Sept. 13, 1766. The brother of this author, Mr. Thomas Heath, an alderman of Exeter, published “An Essay towards a new Version of Job,” &c. in 1755. This gentleman was father to John Heath, esq. one of the judges of the common pleas.

, an English historian, was born 1629, in London, where his father, who was the king’s cutler, lived. He was educated at Westminster-school, and was elected to Christ Church, Oxford, in 1646. In 1648 he was ejected thence by the parliament-visitors, for his adherence to the royal cause lived upon his patrimony till it was almost spent and then married, which prevented his return to Christ Church at the restoration, where he might have qualified himself for one of the learned professions. To maintain his family he now commenced author, and corrector of the press. He died of a consumption and dropsy, at London, in August 1664, and left several children to the parish. He published, 1. “A brief Chronicle of the late intestine War in the three kingdoms of England, Scotland, and Ireland, &c.” 1661, 8vo, afterwards enlarged by the author, and completed from 1637 to 1663, in four parts, 1663, in a thick 8vo; a work which, on account of the numerous portraits, rather than its intrinsic value, bears a very high price. To this edition was again added a continuation from 1663 to 1675 by John Philips, nephew by the mother to Milton, 1676, folio. 2. “Elegy upon Dr. Thomas Fuller,” 1661. 3. “The glories and magnificent triumphs of the blessed Restoration of king Charles II. &c. 1662,” 8vo. 4. “Flagellum or, the Life and Death, Birth and Burial, of Oliver Cromwell, the late usurper,” 1663, of which a third edition came out with additions in 1665, 8vo. 5. “Elegy on Dr. Sanderson, bishop of Lincoln,” 1662. 6. “A new book of loyal English Martyrs and Confessors, who have endured the pains and terrors of death, arraignment, &c. for the maintenance of the just and legal government of these kingdoms both in church and state,” 1663, 12mo. 7. “Brief but exact Survey of the Affairs of the United Netherlands, &.c.” 12mo. Heath, as a historian, is entitled to little praise on account of style or argument, but his works contain many lesser particulars illustrative of the characters and manners of the times, which are interesting to a curious inquirer. In the meanest historian there will always be found some facts, of which there will be no cause to doubt the truth, and which yet will not be found in the best; and Heath, who perhaps had nothing but pamphlets and newspapers to compile from, frequently relates facts that throw light upon the history of those times, which Clarendon, though he drew every thing from the most authentic records, has omitted.

, an ingenious English divine, and miscellaneous writer, descended of an ancient Derbyshire family, whose property was injured during the civil wars, was born Dec. 16, 1721, at Barrow upon Soar, in Leicestershire. His father was then curate of that place, but afterwards had the vicarage of Sileby in that county, and the rectory of Morton in Derbyshire. He died in 1765. His mother was a daughter of Simon Ockley, Arabic professor at Cambridge. He passed the first fourteen years at home with his father, who taught him Greek and Latin, but in April 1736, sent him to the public school of Chesterfield, where he continued five years under the rev. William Burrow, a learned man, and a very skilful teacher. In April 1741 r he was admitted sizar of Jesus college, Cambridge, and in Jan. 1745, took his degree of A. B. and soon after entered intered into holy orders. In March 1748 he undertook the cure of St. Margaret’s, Leicester, and the year after waspresented to the small vicarage of Barkby, in the neighbourhood, which, with his curacy (worth 50l. yearly) he says made him “well to live.” In July 1748, he took his master’s degree, and at the same time withdrew his name from college, having in view a marriage with miss Margaret Mompesson, a Nottinghamshire la;iy of good family, which tie accomplished in August 1750, and whose fortune, in his estimation, made him independent. This lady died April 12, 1790.

In 1746 he published, at Cambridge, a small Latin work entitled “Historia Astronomic, sive de ortu et progrt ssu astronomic,” 8vo, a juvenile, but ingenious performance, and which seems to have made up for some little want of mathematical fame when he took his master’s degree. On this last occasion he distinguished himself most in the classics, and appears to have little disposition to mathematical and physical attainments. In 1752, while the Middietonian controversy on the Miraculous power, &c. was still raging, although Dr. Middleton himself was dead, he published two pieces, one entitled “Cursory animadversions upon the Controversy in general;” the other, “Remarks upon a Charge by Dr. Chapman.” Iii 1753 he published “A Letter to the rev. Thomas Fothergill, A. M. fellow of Queen’s college, Oxford, relating to his Sermon preached before that university, Jan. 30, 1753, upon the reasonableness and uses of commemorating king Charles’s Martyrdom,” which Mr. Heathcote endeavoured to show was neither reasonable nor useful.

These were published without his name, but his pamphlets on the Middietonian controversy attracted the notice of Dr. War-burton, who discovered the author, and sending him his compliments, offered him the place of assistant preacher at Lincoln’s Inn, with the stipend of half a guinea for each sermon. This was little, but he accepted it, as affording him an opportunity of living in London, and cultivating learned society. He accordingly removed to town in June 1753, and became one of a club of literati who met once a week, as he says, “to talk learnedly for three or four hours.” The members were Drs. Jortin, Birch, and Maty, Mr. Welstein, Mr. De Missy, and one or two more.

On the appearance of lord Bolingbroke’s works, he published in 1755, “A Sketch of lord Bollngbroke’s philosophy,” the object of which was to vindicate the moral attributes of the Deity. In the latter end of the same year, came out, “The use of Reason asserted in matters of Religion, in answer to a Sermon preached by Dr Patten at Oxford, July 13, 1755,” whom he act used of being a Hutchinsonian; and, the year after, a Defence of this against Dr. Patten, who had replied. Dr. Home also, a friend to Dr. Patten, animadverted on Mr. Ht athcote’s pamphlet: but it seems not to have been long before all their sentiments concurred; at least, the Hutchinsonians could not blame Mr. Heathcote more than he blamed himself. “When,” says he, “the heat of controversy was over, I could not look into them (the pamphlets) myself, without disgust and pain. The spleen of Middleton, and the petulancy of Warburton, had too much infected me.” This candid acknowledgment, however, seems to justify Mr. Jones’s language in his life of bishop Home. “A Mr. Heathcote, a very intemperate and unmanly writer, published a pamphlet against Dr. Patten, laying himself open, both in the matter and the manner of it, to the criticisms of Dr. Patten, who will appear to have been greatly his superior as a scholar and a divine, to any candid reader who shall review that controversy. Dr. Patten could not with any propriety be said to have written on the Hutchinsonian plan; but Mr. Heathcote found it convenient to charge him with it, &c.” Warburton, too, who had complimented Mr. Heathcote to his face, speaks of him in a letter to Dr. Hurd (in 1757) as one whose “matter is rational, but superficial and thin spread.” He adds, “he will prove as great a scribbler as Comber. They are both sensible, and both have reading. The difference is, that the one has so much vivacity as to make him ridiculous; the other so little as to be unentertaining. Comber’s excessive vanity may be matched by H.'s pride; which I think is a much worse quality.” In this censure the reader may perceive somewhat that will recoil upon the writer, but Heathcote, we see, lived to acknowledge what was amiss, which Warburton did not.

In 1763-4-5, Mr. Heathcote preached the Boy lean lectures, twenty-four in number, at St. James’s, Westminster, by the appointment of the trustees, archbishop Seeker and the duke of Devonshire. He published, however, only two of them, in 1763; on the “Being of a God,” which soon passed into a second edition. In 1765, on the death of his father, he succeeded to the vicarage of Sileby, and in 1766 was presented to the rectory of Sawtry-All-Saints, in Huntingdonshire 5 and in 1768 to a prebend in the collegiate church of Southwell. “These,” he says, “in so short a compass, may look pompous; but their clear annual income, when curates were paid, and all expences deducted, did uot amount to more than 150l.” In 1771 he published “The Ireuarch, or Justice of the Peace’s Manna!,” a performance which, witii some singularities of opinion, was accounted both sensible and seasonable. He was now in the commission of the peace. A second edition of this work appeared in 1774, with a long dedication, to lord Mansfield, with a view to oppose the invectives levelled against that illustrious character in a time of political turbulence; and in 1781 he published a third edition, to which he gave his name.

To the preceding list of Dr. Heathcote’s works, we may add that, at the request of Mr. Whiston, he wrote the life of Dr. Thomas Burnet, the learned master of the Charterhouse, prefixed to the edition of his works printed in 175y and in 1761, on the recommendation of Dr. Jortin, was engaged as one of the writers in the ftrst edition of this Dictionary, and contributed also some articles for the second, printed in 1784. In 1767 he published “A Letter to the hon. Horace Walpole, concerning the dispute between Mr. Hume and Mr, Rousseau,” 12mo, which in some of the Reviews wu*> supposed to be by Mr. Walpole himself. He also published an te Assize Sermon,*' and a pamphlet called “Memoirs of the late contested election for the county of Leicester,” 1775. His “Irenarch,” and the dedication and notes, he scattered up and down, but without alteration, in a miscellaneous work, published in 1786, entitled “Sylva, or the Wood;' 1 an entertaining collection of anecdotes, &c. which was reprinted in 1783; and in 1789, he had begun anothervolume of miscellanies, including some of his separate pieces, and memoirs of himself, of which last we have availed ourselves in the preceding sketch, from Mr. Nichols’s” Literary Anecdotes."

, a celebrated physician and philologer of Leipsic, was born at Neuenhoff in the diocese of Neustadt, in 1702. In 1719, he went to the university of Jena, but, not finding a subsistence there, removed to Leipsic. He piassed the greater part of his life in the latter university, and finally died there in 1756. Besides his academical and physiological tracts, he published, in 1739, 1, “Carmen de usu partinm,” or Physiologia metrica, in 8vd. 2. “De homine sano et ajgroto Carmen, sistens Physiologiam, Pathologiam, Hygienen, Therapiam, materiam medicam, cum pnefatione deantiqua medicina,” Leipsic, 1753, 8vo. 3. “Oratio de Antiquitatibus Romanis per Africam repertis,” 1733, 4to. 4. “Museum Richterianum,” &c. Leips. 1743. And, 5. A posthumous work, entitled “Palasologia therapirc,” Halae, 1779, 8vo. This author had also an elder brother, John Christian Hebenstreit, who was a celebrated divine, and profoundly versed in the Hebrew language. Ernesti has published an eulogium of each, in his “OpuscuhiOratoria.”

, a learned and amiable English clergyman, the second son of Thomas Heber, &sq. of Marton-hall in the deanery of Craven, one of the oldest families in that district of Yorkshire, was born at Marton, Sept. 4, 1728, O. S. He had his school education under the rev. Mr. Wilkinson at Skipton, and the rev. Thomas Hunter at Blackburn, Lancashire, afterwards vicar of Weaverham, Cheshire, author of “Observations on Tacitus,” and other works of credit. From Blackburn he ‘removed to the freeschool at Manchester, and on March 4, 1746--7, was entered a commoner of Brazen-nose college; where his elder’ brother, Richard Heber, was at that time a gentleman commoner. In October 1752, his father died, and his mother in the month of March following. He was admitted to the degree of M. A. July 5, 1753, and chosen fellow of the college November 15 following, having previously in that year been ordained deacon by bishop Trevor, Match 18, and priest by bishop Hoadly, Nov. 1, to qualify himself for the fellowship founded in 1533 by William Clifton, subdean of York, for which he was a candidate. He had private pupils when he was only B. A. and was afterwards in much esteem as a public tutor, particularly of gentlemen commoners, having at one time more than twenty of that rank under his care. In July 1766, his brother died, and, as he left no male issue, Mr. Heber succeeded to a considerable estate at Hodnet in Shropshire, which was bequeathed in 1752 to his mother, Elizabeth Heber, by Henrietta, only surviving daughter and heiress of sir Thomas Vernon of Hodnet, bart. who chose for her heir the daughter, in preference to the son, of her niece Elizabeth wife of Richard Atherton, esq. ancestor of Henrietta wife of Thomas lord Liftbrd. Dec. 5, 1766, he was inducted into the rectory of Chelsea, the presentation to which had, several years before, been purchased for him by his brother and another kind relative. He resigned his fellowship July 1, 1767. Finding the rectorial house at Chelsea bad and unfinished, he in part rebuilt and greatly improved the whole, without asking for dilapidations, as the widow of his predecessor, Sloane Elsmere, D. D. was not left in affluent circumstances. In 1770, he exchanged Chelsea for the Upper Mediety of Malpas, Cheshire, into which he was inducted, July 25, on the presentation of William. Drake, esq. of Ainersham, Bucks; whose eldest son, the late William Drake, esq. had been one of his pupils in Brazen-nose college. In the long incumbency, and latterly non-residence, of his predecessor, the honourable and rev. Henry Moore, D. D. chaplain to queen Anue, and son of the earl of Drogheda, who was instituted to Malpas, Nov. 26, 1713, the parsonage was become ruinous. Mr. Heber therefore built an excellent new house, on a new site, which commands an extensive view of Flintshire and Denbighshire, and some other counties.

On the death of lord James Beauclerc, who held the rectory of Hodnet in commendam with the bishopric of Hereford, Mr. Heber was instituted to that living, of which he was patron, holding it with Malpas, from which it is distant about fourteen miles. In March 1303, he succeeded to the family estate in Yorkshire by the death of his brothers widow, Mrs. Heber of Weston, Northamptonshire, who held it in jointure. In the summer of that year, retaining still the vigour and faculties of younger days, he was present at a very interesting sight, when his second son, Mr. Reginald Heber, who two years before obtained the chancellor’s prize at Oxford for Latin verse, by his very spirited and classical “Carmen Sceculare,” spoke, with unbounded applause, a second prize poem, the admirable verses on-“Palestine,” since published, Mr. Heber died Jan. 10, 1804. In April 1773, he married Mary, third daughter and co-heiress of Martin Baylie, M. A. rector of Kelsall and Wrentbam in Suffolk. She died Jan. 30, 1774, leaving an infant son, Richard Heber, esq. afterwards M. A. of Brazen-nose college, 1797, a gentleman well known in the literary world, as the judicious collector of one of the most extensive private libraries in the kingdom, and whose liberality in assisting men of literature with its valuable contents, has been often publicly acknowledged, and cannot be too highly commended. InJuly 1782, Mr. Reginald Heber married Mary, eldest daughter of Cuthbert Allanson, D. D. of Brazen-nose, rector of Wath in Yorkshire, who was for some years before his death chaplain to the house of commons. By this lady he left a daughter Mary, and two sons, Reginald and Thomas Cuthbert, commoners of Brazen-nose college. Mr. Heber, the father, although a man of taste and learning, published little. He has, however, some elegant English verses addressed to the king, on his accession to the throne, among the Oxford poems on that occasion, in 1761. The following year he published, but without his name, tf An Elegy written among the Tombs in Westminster Abbey," printed for Dodsley which was afterwards inserted, without his knowledge, in Pearch’s continuation of Dodsley’s Poems. The lines are moral, plaintive, and religious.

, an eminent physician and very accomplished scholar, was born in London in 1710, and received the early part of his education in that city. At the close of 1724, he was sent to St. John’s college, Cambridge, where he proceeded A. B. in 1728, and M. A. in 1732. In 1730 he obtained a fellowship, and directed his attention to the study of medicine, which he pursued, partly at Cambridge, and partly in London. Having taken his degree of M. D. in 1739, he practised physic in the university for about ten years. During that time he read every year a course of lectures on the Materia.Medica, and made for that purpose a valuable collection of specimens, which he presented to St. John’s college in 1750, to which society, about ten years after, he presented soirre astronomical instruments. In 1746 he became a fellow of the royal college of physicians, and two years afterwards leaving Cambridge, he settled in London, and was elected into the royal society in 1749. He very soon got into great business, which he followed with unremitting attention above thirty years, till it seemed prudent to withdraw a little from the fatigues of his profession. He therefore purchased a house at Windsor, to which he used ever afterwards to retire during some of the summer months; but returned to London in the winter, and still continued to visit the sick for many years.

In 1766 he recommended to the college of physicians the first design of the “Medical Transactions,” in which he proposed to collect together such observations as might have occurred to any of their body, and were likely to illustrate the history or cure of diseases. The plan was soon adopted, and three volumes have successively been laid before the public, in 1768, 1772, and 1785. Among the useful communications contained in these volumes, the papers of Dr. Heberden himself are most prominent in number and value. His account of a fatal disorder of the chest, which he denominated Angim pectoris, first called the attention of physicians to it, as an idiopathic disease: and the numerous cases of it, which have since been promulgated, evince its frequency and importance. In this work, also, Dr. Heberden first gave an accurate descrip*. tion of the chicken-pox, pointing out its diagnostic symptoms with precision, chieHy with a view to prevent the very easy mistake of confounding it with a mild small-pox. Dr. Heberden communicated some other papers to the royal society, which were printed in its Transactions.

In 1778, the royal society of medicine in Paris chose him into the number of their associates. He declined all professional business several years before his death, which did not take place until May 17, 1801, when he was in his ninety-first year.

To this character, part of a sketch of his life prefixed to his “Commentaries, published in 1802, much might be added. No physician, indeed, was ever more highly or more deservedly respected. His various and extensive learning, his modesty in the use of it, his freedom from jealousy or envy, his independent spirit, his simple yet dignified manners, and his exemplary discharge of all the relative duties, are topics on which all who knew him delight to dwell. Mr. Cole, who bestows very high praise on him, an article in which that gentleman was in general penurious, gives us the following anecdote of Dr. Heberden, which corresponds with the above account of his reverence for religion.” Understanding that Dr. Con. Middleton had composed a book on the ‘ Inefficacy of Prayer,’ he called upon his widow soon after the Dr.‘s death, and asked her if she was not in possession of such a tract? She answered that she was; he then asked her, if any bookseller had been in treaty with her for it? She said that a bookseller had offered her 50l. for it. He then demanded, if there was a duplicate ’ No' upon that he requested to see it, and she immediately brgught it, and put it into his hands. The Dr. holding it in one hand, and giving it a slight perusal, threw it into the fire, and with the other hand gave her a 50l. note.“This anecdote Mr. Cole had from Dr. Newton, bishop of Bristol. It is certain that Dr. Middleton’s widow bequeathed her husband’s remaining Mss. to Dr. Heberden, from which, in, 1761, he obliged the learned world with a curious tract, entitled” Dissertations de servili Medicorum conditione Appendix,“&c. with a short but elegant advertisement of his own. In 1763, a most valuable edition of the” Supplices Mulieres“of Euripides, with the notes of Mr. Markland, was printed entirely at the expence of Dr. Heberden; and, in 1763, the same very learned commentator presented his notes on the two Jphigenix,” Doctissimo, & quod longe prastantius est, humanissimo viro Wilhelmo Heberden, M. D. arbitratu ejus vel cremandtE, vel in publicum emittendae post obiturn scriptoris,“&c. He wrote the epitaph in Dorking church on Mr. Markland, who had” bequeathed to him all his books and papers. One of these, a copy of Mill’s Greek Testament in folio, the margin filled with notes, was kindly lent by Dr. Heberden, “with that liberal attention to promote the cause of virtue and religion which was one of his many well-known excellences,” to the publisher of the last edition of Mr. Bowyer’s “Conjectures on the New Testament, 1782,” 4to. To Dr. Heberden Mr. Bowyer also bequeathed his “little, cabinet of coins, a few books specifically, and any others, which the doctor might chuse to accept.” To Dr. H.'s other publications, we may add his “Αντιθηριακα, an Essay on Mithridatium and Theriaca,” 1745, 3vo. He was also a writer in the “Athenian Letters,” and in his early life contributed some notes to Grey’s “Hudibras,” as acknowledged by that editor in his preface.

, a German protestant divine, was born at Halle in Saxony in 1696, and hecame minister of Essan in East Friezeland, where he died in 1748. He wrote several treatises in the German language, and some in Latin, the most esteemed of which are his “Com mentatio de secta Scribarum,” and “Antiquitas Haraeorum inter Judaeos in Poloniue et Turcici Imp. regionibus. florentis sectrc,” &c.

, by some said to be a brother of the preceding, was born in the latter part of the seventeenth century at Juterbach, and educated at Wittemberg. In 1711 he was appointed rector of the college of Luccau, where he died in 1721. His principal works are on matters of biography and antiquities; particularly “Germania sacra et literaria,” 1717, 8vo; “De Hcnrico Guelfo Leone commentarius,” 1715, 4to; “Vita Joannis Tezeli;” “Memoria Joannis Lucani,” &.c.

, a French physician of singular merit and skill, hut a strong partizan of the use of warm water and of Weeding, for which reason he was ridiculed by Le Sage in his Gil Bias, under the name of Dr. Sangrado, was born at Abbeville, in 1661, and practised first in that city, then at Port-royal, and lastly at Paris. He was not properly san grado, for he took the degree of doctor in 1697; and in 1698 had more business than he could attend. Though attached to the most simple mode of life, he was obliged to keep his carriage, in which he studied with as much attention as in his closet. In 1712, he was appointed dean of the faculty of medicine, and superintended the publication of a sort of dispensary, called, “The New Code of Pharmacy,” which was published some time afterwards. Hecquet was no less zealous in religious matters than studious in his own profession, and is said never to have prescribed in doubtful cases, without having a previous recourse to prayer. He lived in the most abstemious manner, and in 1727 retired to a convent of Carmelites in Paris, where he continued accessible only to the poor, to whom he was a friend, a comforter, and a father. He died April 11, 1737, at the age of seventy-six. He was interred in the church of the Carmelites, where is a monument with a Latin inscription by Rollin. This able physician published several works, nene of them devoid of merit. They are thus enumerated: 1. “On the indecency of men-midwives, and the obligation of women to nurse their own children,” 1728, 12mo. The reasons he adduces on these subjects are both moral and physical. 2. “A Treatise on the Dispensations allowed in Lent,” 1705, and 1715, 2 vols. 12mo. His own abstemious system inclined him very little to allow the necessity of any indulgence; and it is said that when he visited any of his wealthy patients, he went into the kitchen, and embraced the cooks and officers of that department, acknowledging that they were the best friends the faculty had. 3. “On Digestion, and the Disorders of the Stomach,” in 2 vols. 12mo. 4. “Treatise on the Plague,” 12mo. 5. “Novus Medicine conspectus,” 2 vols. 12mo. 6. “Theological Medicine,” 7 vols, 12mo. 7. “Natural Medicine,” ditto. 8. “De purganda Mediciftl a curarum sordibus,” 12mo. 9. “Observations on Bleeding in the Foot,” 12mo. 10. “The Virtues of common Water,” 2 vols. 12mo. This is the work in which he chiefly supports the doctrines ridiculed by Lft Sage. 1 I. “The abuse of Purgatives,” 12mo. 12. “The roguery of Medicine),” in tlm-e parts, 12:no. 13. “The Medicine, Surgery, and Pharmacy of the Poor,” 3 vols. 12mo; the best edition is in 1742. 1 *. “The Natural History of Convulsions,” in which he very sagaciously referred the origin of those disorders to roguery in some, a depraved imagination in others, or the consequence of some secret malady. The life of this illustrious physician has been written at large by M. le Fevre de St. Marc, and is no less edifying to Christians than instructive to medical students.

, at first an advocate, afterwards an ecclesiastic, and abbé of Auhignac and Meimac, was born at Paris in 1604. Cardinal Richelieu, whose nephew he educated, bestowed on him his two abbeys, and the protection of that minister gave him consequence both as a man of the world and as an author. He figured by turns as a grammarian, a classical scholar, a poet, an antiquary, a preacher, and a writer of romances; but he was most known by his book entitled “Pratique du Theatre,” and by the quarrels in which his haughty and presumptuous temper engaged him, with some of the most eminent authors of his time. The great Corneille was one of these, whose disgust first arose from the entire omission of his name in the celebrated book above mentioned. He was also embroiled, on different accounts, with madame Scuderi, Menage, and Richelet. The warmth of his temper exceeded rhat of his imagination, which was considerable; and yet he lived at court a good deal in the style of a philosopher, rising early to his studies, soliciting no favours, and associating chiefly with a few friends, as unambitious as himself, he describes himself as of a slender constitution, not capable of taking much exercise, or even of applying very intensely to study, without suffering from it in his health; yet not attached to any kind of play. “It is,” ays he, “too fatiguing for the feebleness of my body, or too indolent for the activity of my mind.” The abbé d'Aubignac lived to the age of seventy-two, and died at xnours in 1676. His works are, 1. “Pratique du Theatre,” Amsterdam, 1717, two vols. 8vo; also in a 4to edition published at Paris; a book of considerable learning, but little calculated to inspire or form a genius. 2. “Zenobie,” a tragedy, in prose, composed according to the rules laid down in his “Pratique,” and a complete proof of the total inefficacy of rules to produce an interesting drama, being the most dull and fatiguing performance that was ever represented. The prince of Condé said, on the subject of this tragedy, “We give great credit to the abbé d'Aubignac for having so exactly followed the rules of Aristotle, but owe no thanks to the rules of Aristotle for having made the abbé produce so vile a tragedy.” He wrote a few other other tragedies also, which are worse, if possible, than Zenobia. 3. “Macaride; or the Queen of the Fortunate Islands,” a novel, Paris, 1666, 2 vok 8vo. 4. “Conseils d'Ariste à Celimene, 12mo. 5.” Histoire da terns, ou Relation du Royaume de Coqueterie,“12mo, 6.” Terence justifié,“inserted in some editions of his” Pratique.“7.” Apologie de Spectacles," a work of no value. A curious book on satyrs, brutes, and monsters, has been attributed to him; but, though the author’s name was Hedelin, he does not appear to have been the same.

, of Haiti, or Grossen-hayn, in Misnia, was born in 1675. His first publication was an edition of Empedocles “de Sphsera,” xvith his own notes, and the Latin version of Septimius Florens, in 1711, Dresden, 4to. He then published a “Notitia Auctorum,” 1714, 8va. His celebrated “Greek Lexicon” was published, first at Leipsic, in 1722, 8vo, and has been republished here with many additions, by Young, Patrick, and Morell. It was also much improved by Ernesti, and republished at Leipsic in 1767. Hedench published other lexicons on different subjects, and died in 1748. Erncsti says of him, that he was a good man, and very laborious, but not a profound scholar in Greek, nor well qualified for compiling a lexicon for the illustration of Greek authors.

, a civilian and statesman of some note, was educated both at Magdalen-hall and college, Oxford, where he commenced M. A. May 31, 1673, and LL. D. June 26, 1675. Engaging in the profession of the civil law, he acquired considerable eminence, and in March 1686 was appointed chancellor and vicar-general of Rochester, by a patent, for life, probably upon the resignation of sir William Trumball, who was going as ambassador to the Ottoman court. This promotion was soon after followed by his acquisition of the mastership of the faculties, and the dignity of judge of the high court of admiralty, of which sir Richard Raines was dispossessed, and on whose demise some years afterwards, he became judge of the prerogative court of Canterbury. His progress in political life was equally successful, for he received the honour of knighthood, and served in parliament for Orford in Suffolk in 1698, for Malmsbury in Wilts in 1701 and 1702; for Calne, in 1702; and for two Cornish boroughs from 1705 to 1713. He was advanced to be one of the principal secretaries of state, Nov. 5, 1700, under king William, and again, May 2, I 1 ) 02, under queen Anne. It was he that drew up the much-debated act of abjuration in 1701. In parliament, it is said, he voted with the whigs or tories, as his interest prompted, but his attachment was to the tories, who procured his promotion to the office of secretary of state. The whigs, however, prevailed on queen Anne to dismiss him from tliat trust in 1706, with a proviso that he should be judge of the prerogative court on the death of sir Richard Raines, which, we have already said, he lived to enjoy, although for a short time. He died at Richmond, June 10, 1714.

, one of the early reformers, was born in 14l>5, at Etlinggen, in the marquisate of Baden; and educated at Friburg, where he took his master of arts degree. Thence he went to Basil, studied divinity, and commenced doctor of philosophy and divinity about 1520. Having imbibed the principles of the reformed religion, he inculcated it with great success, as preacher in the church at Mentz, until the violence of persecution obliged him to go to Strasburgh in 1523, where, under the sanction of the senate, he co-operated with Capito and Bucer in the reformation. Here he married in 1533 In 1543 Herman, bishop of Cologn, wishing to promote the cause in his diocese, invited Bucer and Hedio, who were very successful, until driven away by the emperor and the Spaniards. Hedio made his escape with much difficulty, and returned to Strasburgh, where he composed most of his works, and where he died Oct. 17, 1552. His original works, enumerated by Melchior Adam, are theological, historical, and philological; besides which, he was editor of some parts of the Fathers.

, a celebrated botanist, was born Oct. 8, 17 So, at Cronstadt, in Transylvania, where his fatbi-r was one of the magistrates. After the first rudiments of domestic education at home, he studied for four years at the public school of his native town. On the death of his father in 1747, he went for further improvement to the university of Presburg in Hungary, where he remained two years, and then proceeded toZittau in Upper Lusatia. In 1752 he removed to Leipsic, where his diligence and talents, as well as his personal character, procured him the favour and friendship of the celebrated Ludwig in particular, by whose lectures of various kinds, as well as those of Hebenstreit, Boehmer, and others, he rapidly and abundantly profited. In 1756, he was taken into the house of professor Bose, to assist him in the demonstration of plants-in his botanical lectures, as well as in the care of patients at the infirmary; and it is supposed that this engagement was full as advantageous to the master as to the pupil. Having at length finished his studies, he was defcirons of settling as a physician in Ills native place, but was prevented by an exclusive law in favour of such as are educated in some Austrian school. In 1759 he took his degree of doctor of physic at Leipsic, and was induced to establish himself at Chemnitz. He was now so far master of his own time, that he found himself able to alleviate the labours of his profession by almost daily attention to his favourite studies. His morning hours in summer, from five till breakfast-time, were spent in the fields and woods, and his evenings in the investigation of what he had collected, or else in the care of a little garden of his own. To pursue with success his inquiries, he found it necessary, at forty years of age, to learn drawing, which enabled him to publish some of the most curious and authentic botanical figures. The first and greatest fruit of Hedwig’s labours, was the determination of the mule and female Mowers of mosses, the theory of which was h'rst clearly detailed by him. He also first beheld the bladder-like anther, of the Liuneeaii Biyum pulvinaliun, discharging its pollen, on the 17th of January, 177O. He was already satisfied that what Linnteus, misled by Dillenius against his own previous opinion, had taken for anthers, were in fact the capsules of mosses, and produced real (seed. A history of his discoveries was published in a German periodical work at Leipsic in 1779. In 1782 appeared his valuable “Fuiuiamentum Historise Nuturalis Muscorum Frondosorum,” a baudsome Latin quarto, in two parts, with 20 coloured microscopical plates. The earliest account given of Hedwig’s opinions in England, was from the communications of the late professor J. Sibthorp, who had just then visited him, to Dr. Smith, in 1786, and is annexed to a translation of Limiaeus’s “Dissertation on the Sexes of Plants,” published that year. Hedwig lost his first wife in 1776, and again married a very accomplished lady the following year, who was, like the former, a native of Leipsic. By her persuasion he removed to Leipsic in 1781, and the following year the work above mentioned was there published. The same subject is happily followed up in his “Theoria generationis et fructificationis plant arum cryptogamicarum Linnaet,” published at Petersburgh in 1784. This work gained its author the prize from that academy in 1783, of 100 gold ducats. In it the fructification and germination of mosses is further illustrated, and a view is also taken of the fructification of the other cryptogam ic families, the author being very naturally desirous of extending his discoveries throughout that obscure tribe of plants. A new and encreased edition of this work appeared in 1798.

The literary fame of Hedwig, und his medical practice, were now every day increasing. He was made physician to the town guards, and professor of physic and of botany at Leipsic. The latter appointment, in which he succeeded Dr. Pohl removed to Dresden in 1789, was accompanied with a house, and the superintendance of the public garden. In 1791 the senate appointed him physician to the school of St. Thomas. The duties of all these various stations might be supposed to have fully occupied his time, yet he still found leisure ta attend to new communications from his friends. Many nondescript mosses were sent him from Pennsylvania by the rev. Dr. Muhienberg, and many West-Indian ones by Dr. Swartz. A fine collection of new or rare ferns, in full fructification, was forwarded to him by sir Joseph Banks, at the suggestion of Dr. Smith, in hopes that he might be induced to take up their examination; it not being then known in this country, that he was already intent on the subject, and preparing his essay for the Petersburgh academy. The fruits of these communications were not given to the world in his life-time. But the former ones contributed, with other matter, to a posthumous work, pablished by his able pupil Dr. Schwaegrichen, entitled “Species Muscorum,” in 4to, with 77 coloured plates; and the latter to some subsequent works of his son; but his great work is his “Cryptogamia” 1787—1797, 4 Vols. fol. the figures in which are given with a fidelity rarely to be seen. Hedwig died Feb. 17, 1799. As an observer and faithful describer, he cannot be ranked too high; as a vegetable physiologist, if not always infallible, he stands in the first order; and his knowledge was enhanced by modesty, candour, affability, the strictest probity, and the most elevated piety. His scientific character in other respects is well delineated in our authority.

, a German divine, and one of the propagators of the reformation, was born at Nuremberg in 1521. He was educated in the principles of the reformed religion by his father, and happened to be at school at Ulm, when Erasmus’s Colloquies were prohibited, as containing too many reflections on the papists; but Heerbrand continued to read them privately, and imbibed their spirit. After a classical education at Ulm, his father sent him to Witteniberg in 1538, to hear Luther and Melanctbon, Bugenhagius, and other divines; and in 1540 he commenced M. A. After five years* study here, he was ordained deacon at Tubingen, where he prosecuted his studies, and where in 1547 he married. The year following, as he objected to the Interim, he was banished from Tubingen, but was soon recalled, and made pastor of Herenberg. In 1550 he took his degree of D. D. and this being about the time of the council of Trent, he endeavoured to make himself master of the controversy between the Roman catholic and reformed church, by a careful study of the Fathers. In 1559 he was invited by Charles, marquis of Baden, to assist in the reformation in his dominions; and while here he prescribed a form for the ordination of ministers. Very soon after, he was chosen divinitvprofessor at Tubingen, and expounded the Pentateuch in his lectures, and preached statedly. In this city, likewise, he wrote his answer to Peter Soto, “De Ecclesia, pa'.ribus, et conciliis,” which was afterwards printed. In 1557 he was chosen successively rector and chancellor of the university, and pastor and superintendant of the church. Having rejected some valuable offers to remove to other universities, he fixed his final residence at Tubingen, where prince Christopher giving him some land, he built a house; and when old age obliged him to remit his labours, a stipend was allowed him. He died at Tubingen, of a lethargic complaint in 1600. He was a man of great learning, and happil > adapted to the times in which he lived and appears to have been consulted in difficult emergencies by many of the German princes and noblemen. Of his works, which are numerous, both in German and Latin, the principal are, “Compendium Theologian,” and Hiany theological dissertations and lives.

, a painter of considerable fame, when there were few who deserved it, was born at Ghent, in 1534, the son of John de Heere, the best statuary of his time; and Anne Smyters, who had the reputation of being a most surprising pain tress of landscapes in miniature. Van Mander gives almost an incredible account of one performance of that female artist. From such parents De Heere had a fair prospect of gaining every necessary part of instruction; and having under their direction learned to design and handle the pencil with ease and freedom, he was placed as a disciple with Francis Fioris. With that master he improved very expeditiously, and on quitting his school travelled to France, where he was employed for some years by the queen-mother, in drawing designs for tapestry. At his return to his native city, he painted a great number of portraits with applause; and was remarkable for having so retentive a memory, that if he save any person but once, he could paint his likeness as strong as if he had his model before his eyes. On the shutters of the altar-piece in the church of St. Peter at Ghent, he painted the Descent of the Holy Ghost on the Apostles, in which the draperies are extremely admired; and in the church of St. John he painted an altar-piece representing the Resurrection.

His manner was stiff, resembling that of his master; but m the colouring of the heads of his portraits there appears a great deal of nature and clearness; and he is very commendable for his high finishing, as welt as for giving a fullness to his draperies. This artist resided for several years in England, where many of his portraits of the nobility are still preserved, and much esteemed, such as lady Jane Grey, lord Darnley husband of Mary queen of Scotland, Frances duchess of Suffolk, &c. and at Longleate there is a large picture of a gentleman, his wife and family, consisting of eight persons. Soon after he came to England, he painted a naked man with different-coloured clothes lying besides him, and a pair of sheers in his-hand, as a satire on our fickleness in fashion it is illustrative of a verse by Andrew de Borde, who in his “Introduction to Knowledge,” has prefixed to the first chapter a naked man with these lines:

, a native of Groningen, was one of the most elegant Latin poets that part of Europe has produced for a century past. Of his early life we have no memorials. In 1760 he went to Italy, and became acquainted with the most eminent scholars of that period, and seems to have joined the cultivation of the modern Italian, with that of the ancient classical taste, which he had before imbibed, and of which be gave an excellent specimen in his work “De Valetudine Literatorum,” Leyden, 1749, 8vo, and again more decidedly in his “Satyra de moribus Parhisiorumet FrUiae,” 1750, 4to; “De Oflicio mectici poema, dedicated to cardinal Quirini,” Groningen, 1752, 8vo; “Iter Veiietum,” which he published at Venice, when on his tour in 1760, and which displays the feeling, tajte, and sentiment of a refined scholar. At Rome he was elected a member of the Arcadi, and under the name which he assumed in compliance with the usual practice of that society, he published in the above-mentioned year “Marii Curulli Groningensia satyræ,” 8vo. In this his satire is free and poignant, yet without merciless severity, and his Latin uncommonly pure. In 1764, after his return home, he published his “Notabilia,” 2 books, and two more under the same title in 1770, containing many anecdotes of the Italian literati, and notices of his own history and opinions. His other publications are, “Anni rustici Januarius,” Groningen, 1767; and “Aves Frisicse,” Rotterdam, 1787, in which he describes in Ovidian style, and with a happy imitation of that poet, ten different birds; the lark, the crossbill, the inagpy, &c. The notes to this poem evince a great knowledge of natural history, and many facts respecting these birds which are not generally known. Heerkens was a physician, but of his character or practice in that profession we have no information. The Diet. Hist, mentions is death as having taken place in 1780, which must be wrong, as in the last-mentioned publication he promises a continuation. It does not appear that he was dead in 1803, when Saxius published his last volume.

, an ecclesiastical historian of the second century, lived before or near the time of Justin Martyr. He came to Home about the year 157, while Anicetus was bishop there, and continued in that capital till the year 185, in friendship and communion with Anicetus, and with Soter and Eleutherus, his two successors in office, and is accounted to have been sound in the orthodox faith respecting the divinity of Christ. He is thought to have died about the year 180. He wrote an ecclesiastical history from the commencement of the Christian aera to his own time, of which a few fragments only have been preserved by Eusebius. As to five books of the Jewish war which have been ascribed to him, and which are in the “Bibl. Patrum,” as well as separately printed at Cologn, in 1559, 8vo, they are generally allowed to have been the production of some later author.

, a learned protestant divine, professor of theology at Leyden, was born August 10, 1597, at Frakenthal, in the palatinate. He acquired great reputation by his sermons and writings; was the intimate friend of Descartes, and died at Leyden, October 15, 1678, leaving several children. Heidanus was author of a “System of Divinity,” 1686, 2 vols. 4to, and other valuable works; among them, “An Examination of the Remonstrant’s Catechism,” 4to, “De origine Erroris,” &c.

, a protestant divine of Switzerland, was born at Ursevellon, a village near Zurich, July 1, 1633. He was first a teacher of Hebrew and philosophy at Heidelberg, then of divinity and ecclesiastical history at Steinfurt; and lastly, of morality and divinity at Zurich, where he died Jan. 18, 1698. He published, 1. “Exercitationes selectee de Historia sacra Patriarcharum,” in 2 vols. 4to, the first of which appeared at Amsterdam in 1667, the latter in 1671. 2. “De ratione studiorum opuscula aurea,” &c. Zurich, 1670, 12mo. 3. “Tumulus Tridentini Concilii,” Zurich, 1690, 4to. 4. “Historia Papatfts,” Amst. 1698, 4to. There is also ascribed to him, 5. A tract “De peregrinationibus religiosis,” in 1670, 8vo. And, 6. “A System of Divinity,” 1700, folio.

, a very singular adventurer, was the son of a clergyman, and a native of Zurich, in Switzerland, where he married, but left his country in consequence of an intrigue. Having had an opportunity of visiting the principal cities of Europe, he acquired a taste for elegant and refined pleasures, which by degrees qualified him for the management of public amusements. In 1708, when he was near fifty years old, he came to England on a negotiation from the Swiss at Zurich; but failing in his embassy, he entered as a private soldier in the guards for protection. By his sprightly engaging conversation, and insinuating address, he soon became a favourite with our young people of fashion, from whom he obtained the appellation of “the Swiss count,” by which name he is noticed in the “Tatler.” He had the address to procure a subscription, with which in 1709 he was enabled to furnish out the opera of “Thomyris,” which was written in English, and performed at the queen’s theatre in the Haymarket, with such success, that he g ined by this performance alone 500 guineas. The judicious remarks he made on several detects in the conduct of our operas in general, and the hints he threw out for improving those entertainments, soon established his character as a theatrical critic. Appeals were made to his judgment; and some very magnificent and elegant decorations, introduced upon the stage in consequence of his advice, gave such satisfaction to George II. who was fond of operas, that his majesty was pleased from that time to countenance him, and he soon obtained the chief management of the opera-house in the Haymarket. He then undertook to improve another species’of diversion, not less agreeable to the king, the masquerades, and over these he always presided at the king’s theatre. He was likewise appointed master of the revels. The nobility now caressed htm so much, and had such an opinion of his taste, that all splendid and elegant entertainments given by them upon particular occasions, and all private assemblies by subscription, were submitted to his direction, for which he was liberally rewarded.

From the emoluments of these several employments, he gained a regular and considerable income; amounting, it is said, in some years to 5000l. which he spent with much liberality, particularly in the maintenance of perhaps somewhat too luxurious a table; so that it may be said he raised an income, but never a fortune. His charity was so great, that after a successful masquerade he has been known to give away several hundred pounds at a time. u You know poor objects of distress better than I do,“he would frequently say to the father of the gentleman who furnished this anecdote,” Be so kind as to give away this money for me." This well-known liberality, perhaps, contributed much to his carrying on that diversion with so little opposition as he met with.

That he was a good judge of music, appears from his opera; but this is all that is known pf his mental abilities*;

Something betwixt a Heidegger and parts, and, as was said of Petrouiu*,

As to his person, though he was tall and well-made, it was not very pleasing, from an unusual hardness of features. But he was the first to joke upon his own ugliness and he once laid a. wager with the earl of Chesterfield,that within a certain given time his lordship woukl not be able to produce so hideous a face in all Londort. After strict search, a woman was found, whose features were at first sight thought stronger than Heidegger’s; but, upon clapping her head-dress upon himself, he was universally allowed to have won the wager. Jolly, a well-known taylor, carrying his bill to a noble duke; his grace, for evasion, said, “1 never will pay you till you bring me an uglier fellow than yourself!” Jolly bowed and retired, wrote a letter, and sent it by a servant to Heidegger, saying, “his grace wished to see him the next morning on particular business.” Heidegger attended, and Jolly was tjiere to meet him; and in consequence, as soon as Heidegger’s visit was over, Jolly received the cash.

The late facetious duke of Montagu (the memorable contriver of the bottle-conjuror at the theatre in the Haymarket) gave an entertainment at the Devfl tavern, Templebar, to several of the nobility and gentry, to whom he imparted his plot. Heidegger was invited, and a few hours after dinner was made drunk, and laid insensible upon a bed. A profound sleep ensued; when the late Mrs. Salmon’s daughter was introduced, who took a mould from his face in plaster of Paris. From this a. mask was made, and a few days before the next masquerade (at which the king promised to be present, with the countess of Yarmouth) the duke made application to Heidegger’s valet de chambre, to know what suit of clothes he was likely to wear; and then procuring a similar dress, and a person of the same staturehe gave him his instructions. On the evening of the masquerade, as soon as his majesty was seated (who was always known by the conductor of the entertainment and the officers of the court, though concealed by his dress from the company), Heidegger, as usual, ordered the music to play “God save the King;” but his back was no sooner turned, than the false Heidegger ordered them to strike up “Charly over the Water.” The whole company were instantly thunderstruck, and all the courtiers not in the plot were thrown into a stupid consternation. Heidegger flew to the music-gallery, stamped and raved, and accused the mumusicians of drunkenness, or of being set on by some secret enemy to ruin him. The king and the countess laughed so immoderately, that they hazarded a discovery. While Heidegger stayed in the gallery, “God save the King” was the tune; but when, after setting matters to rights, he retired to one of the dancing-rooms, to observe if decorum was kept by the company, the counterfeit stepping forward, and placing himself upon the floor of the theatre, just in front of the music gallery, called out in a most audible voice, imitating Heidegger, and asked them if he had not just told them to play “Charly over the Water?” A pause ensued; the musicians, who knew his character, in their turn thought him either drunk or mad; but, as he continued his vociferation, “Charly” was played again. At this repetition of the supposed affront, some of the officers of the guards, who always attended upon these occasions, were for ascending the gallery, and kicking the musicians out; but the late duke of Cumberland, who could hardly contain himself, interposed. The company were thrown into great confusion. “Shame! Shame!” resounded from all parts, and Heidegger once more flew in a violent rage to that part of the theatre facing the gallery. Here the duke of Montagu, artfully addressing himself to him, told him “the king was in a violent passion; that his best way was to go instantly and make an apology, for certainly the musicians were mad, and afterwards to discharge them.” Almost at the same instant hq ordered the false Heidegger to do the same. The scene now became truly comic in the circle before the king. Heidegger had no sooner made a genteel apology for the insolence of his musicians, but the false Heidegger advanced, and in a plaintive tone cried out, “Indeed, Sire, it was not my fault, but that devil’s in my likeness.” Poor Heidegger turned round, stared, staggered, grew pale, and could not utter a word. The duke then humanely whispered in his ear the sum of his plot, and the counterfeit was ordered to take off his mask. Here ended the frolic; but Heidegger swore he would never attend any public amusement, if that witch the wax-work woman did not break the mould, and melt down the mask before his face.

Being once at supper with a large company, when a question was debated, which nation of Europe had the greatest ingenuity; to the surprise of all present, he claimed that character for the Swiss, and appealed to himself for the truth of it. “I was born a Swiss,” said he, “and came to England without a farthing, where I have found means to gain 5000l. a year, and to spend it. Now I defy the most able Englishman to go to Switzerland, and, either to gain that income, or to spend it there.” He died Sept. 4, 1749, at the advanced age of ninety years, at his house a: Richmond, in Surrey, where he was buried. He left behind him one natural daughter, miss Pappet, who was married Sept. 2, 1750, to captain (afterwards admiral sir Peter) Denis. Part of this lady’s fortune was a house at the north-west corner of Queen -square, Ormond -street, which sir Peter afterwards sold to the late Dr. Campbell, and purchased a seat in Kent, pleasantly situated near Westram, then called Valence, but now (by its present proprietor, the earl of Hillsborough) Hill Park.

, a German lawyer, was born at Eisemberg in 1681, and trained in the study of philosophy and law. He became professor of philosophy at Hall, in 1710, and of law in. 1721, with the title of counsellor. In 1724 he was invited to Franeker; and three years after, the king of Prussia influenced him to accept the law-professorship at Franc fort upon the Oder. Here he continued till 1733, when the same prince almost forced him to resume the chair at Hall, where he remained till his death, in 1741, although he had strong invitations from Denmark, Holland, &c. His principal works (for they are numerous) are, 1. “Antiquitatum Romanorum Jurisprudentiam illustrantium syntagma;” the best edition of which is the fifth, published at Lewarden, in 1777. 2. “Elementa Juris Civilis secundum ordinem Institutionum & Pandectarum,” 2 vols. 8vo. 3. “Elementa Philosophic Rationalis & Moralis, quibus pnemissa historia Philosophical' This is reckoned a good abridgment of logic and morality. 4.” Historia Juris Civilis, Romani ac Germanici.“5.” Elementa Juris Naturae & Gentium,“which was translated into English by Dr. Turnbull. 6, ”Fundamenta styli cultioris;“a work of his youth, but much approved, and often reprinted, with notes by Gesner and others, Also several academic dissertations upon various subjects. His works were published collectively at Geneva in 1744, and form 8 vols. in 4to. His brother, John Michael, deacon of the church of St. Peter and St. Paul at Goslar, who died in 1722, wrote many works of reputation in his country, among which is his” Account of the Antiquities of Goslar and the neighbouring places;" and his view of the ancient and modern Greek church.

, a child greatly celebrated for the wonderfully premature developemerit of his talents, but whose history will require strong faith, was born at Lubeck, Feb. 6, 1721, and died mere June 27, 1725, after having displayed the most amazing proofs of intellectual powers. He could talk at ten months old, and scarcely had completed the first year of his life, when he already knew and recited the principal facts contained in the five books of Moses, with a number of verses on the creation; at thirteen months he knew the history of the Old Testament, and the New at fourteen in his thirtieth month, the history of the nations of antiquity, geography, anatomy, the use of maps, and nearly 8000 Latin words. Before the end of his third year, he was well acquainted with the history of Denmark, and the genealogy of the crowned heads of Europe; in his fourth year he had learned the doctrines of divinity, with their proofs from the Bible; ecclesiastical history; the institutes; 200 hymns, with their tunes; 80 psalms; entire chapters of the Old and New Testament; 1500 verses and sentences from ancient Latin classics; almost the* whole Orbis Pictus of Comenius, whence he had derived all his knowledge of the Latin language arithmetic; the history of the European empires and kingdoms; could point out in the maps whatever place he was asked for, or passed by in his journeys, and recite all the ancient and modern historical anecdotes relating to it. His stupendous memory caught and retained every word he was told; his ever active imagination used whatever he saw or heard, instantly to apply some examples or sentences from the Bible, geography, profane or ecclesiastical history, the “Orbis Pictus,” or from ancient classics. At the court of Denmark he delivered twelve speeches without once faltering; and underwent public examinations on a variety of subjects, especially the bistory of Denmark. He spoke German, Latin, French, and Low Dutch, and was exceedingly good-natured and well-behaved, but of a most tender and delicate bodily constitution; never ate any solid food, but chiefly subsisted on nurses milk, not being weaned till within a very few months of his death, at which time he was not quite four years old. There is a dissertation on this child, published by M. Martini at Lubeck, in 1730, where the author attempts to assign the natural causes for the astonishing capacity of this great man in embryo, who was just shewn to the world, and snatched away. This was addressed to M. Christ, de Schoeneich, the child’s tutor, who had published an account of him, and is given entire in vol. V. of “The Republic of Letters.” Schoeneich’s account was republished so lately as 1778 or 1779 in German.

, a celebrated scholar and critic, professor of politics and history at Leyden, and librarian of the university there, was born at Ghent, in Flanders, May 1SO, of an illustrious family, who had possessed the first places in the magistracy of that town. He was frequently removed in the younger part of his life. He began his studies at the Hague, and afterwards went with his parents into Zealand, where he was instructed in polite literature and philosophy. He soon learned the outlines of morality and politics, but did not relish logic, and had an unconquerable aversion to the niceties of grammar. He discovered early a strong propensity to poetry, and began to make verses before he knew any thing of prosody or the rules of art. He composed a regular elegy at ten years of age, upon the death of a play-fellow; and there are several epigrams and little poems of his, written when he was not above twelve, which shew a great deal of genius and facility. He is represented, however, as having been somewhat indolent, and not likely to make any progress in Greek Und Latin learning; on which account his father sent him, at fourteen years of age, to study the law in the university of Franeker. But from that time, as if he had been influenced by a spirit of contradK*:on, nothing would please him but classics; and he applies inmself there to Greek and Latin authors, as obstinately as he had rejected them in Zealand. He afterwards removed to Leyden, where he became a pupil of Joseph Scaliger; and was obliged to the encouragement and care of that great man for the perfection to which he afterwards arrived in literature, and which at the beginning of his life there was so little reason to expect. He published an edition of “Silius Italicus,” in 1600, professedly taken from an ancient ms. and added notes of his own, which he called “Crepundia Siliana,” to shew that they were written when he was extremely young. This edition was reprinted at Cambridge, 1646, 12mo. Heinsius was made Greek professor at eighteen, and afterwards succeeded Scaliger in the professorship of politics and history. When he was chosen librarian to the university, he pronounced a Latin oration, afterwards published, in which he described the duties of a librarian, and the good order and condition in which a library should be kept. Being a great admirer of the moral doctrine of the stoics, he wrote an elegant oration in praise of the stoic philosophy. He died Feb. 25, 1655, after having distinguished himself as a critic by his labours upon Silius Italicus, Theocritus, Hesiod, Seneca, Homer, Hesychius, Theophrastus, Clemens Alexandrinus, Ovid, Livy, Terence, Horace, Prudentius, Maximus Tyrius, &c. He published two treatises “De Satira Horatiana,” which Balzac affirms to be masterpieces. He also wrote poems in various languages, which, have been often printed, and always admired. He was the author of several prose works, some of which were of the humourous and satirical cast; as “Laus Asini,” “Laus Pediculi,” &c.

The learned have all joined in their praises of Heinsius. Gerard Vossius says that he was a very great man; and calls him the ornament of the muses and the graces. Casaubon admires him equally for his parts and learning. Pareus calls him the Varro of his age. Barthius ranks him with the first writers. Bochart pronounces him a truly great and learned man and Selden speaks of him as “tarn severiorum quam amceniorum literarum sol” a light to guide us in our gay as well as severe pursuits in letters. Some, however, have thought that, he was not so well formed for criticism; and Le Clerc, in his account of the Amsterdam edition of Bentley’s “Horace,” says that though doubtless a learned man, who had spent his life in the study of criticism, yet if we may judge by his Horace, he was by no means happy in his conjectures; but he speaks much more advantageously of his son Nicolas Heinsius; and agreed, with the rest of the world, that though not so learned a man as his father, he had a better taste for criticism. Daniel Heinsius was, however, highly honoured abroad as well as at home; and received uncommon marks of respect from foreign potentates. Gustavus Adolphus, king of Sweden, gave him a place among his counsellors of state: the republic of Venice made him a knight of their order of St. Mark: and pope Urban VIII. was such an admirer of his fine talents and consummate learning, that he made him great offers if he would come to Rome; “to rescue that city from barbarism,” as the pontiff is said to have expressed himself.

, son of the preceding, and more eminent both in the literary and the political world, was born at Leyden, July 1620, and at first educated under his father’s inspection. In early life he formed an intimacy with his learned contemporaries John Frederick Gronovius, Vincent Fabricius, and Isaac Vossius. The latter accommodated him with the Mss. of Ovid, which were in the library of his grandfather, John Gerard Vossius, and his attention to this author terminated at last in an excellent edition of his works, highly praised by Ernesti and Harles, which he published in 1661, 3 vols. 8vo. In 1641, when he was about twenty-one years of age, he came over to England, and spent three months at Oxford, examining some Mss. of Ovid and Claudian in the Bodleian library. He returned the following year to Leyden, and thence to Spa, on account of his health, but in this tour visited the libraries and the learned of Brabant. About 1647 he went to Paris, where he remained a year and a half, and published his Latin poems. He also employed himself in collating some manuscripts in the library of Messrs. Dupin. From Paris he went to Italy, and both at Florence and Rome examined with great care the literary treasures in the grand duke’s library, and in the Vatican. Happening unfortunately to be at Naples during a civic revolt, he lost part of his papers, and among others his collation of Martial. In 1648 he published at Padua his elegies, in which he celebrates Italy and Rome, but speaks somewhat disrespectfully of his own country, for which he was afterwards blamed. He meant to have visited Swisserland on his return, but his father’s age and infirmities making him. desirous of his company, he returned home. He had refused a professor’s chair at Bologna, because the terms were that he should embrace the Roman catholic religion. In 1649, hearing that Christina, queen of Sweden, had desired to see his poems, he published a new edition dedicated to her, which procured him an invitation to Stockholm, where he was very graciously received by her majesty. In 1651 he made another tour to Italy, and the following year being in Florence, was received a member of the academies of Delia Crusca and the Apathisti. A considerable part of his object in this tour was to purchase manuscripts and medals for queen Christina; but, being now greatly in advance for these purchases, without having received any money from Stockholm, he found it necessary to return and make a personal application. In the mean time Christina had abdicated the throne, and Heinsius, who had spent 3000 florins in her purchases, presented petition after petition to no effect. Promises indeed he had in abundance he was to have a grant of lands in Pomerania, a canonry at Hamburgh, a vicariate at Bremen the title of secretary, and four thousand crowns to defray the expences he had been at; but none of these was fulfilled.

While in this situation, he received the glad tidings that the States of Holland had appointed him their resident at the Swedish court, with a salary of 4000 florins. This appointment took place Oct. 7, 1654. The following year his father died, which obliged him to return to Holland. In 1656 he was made secretary to the city of Amsterdam, which he was obliged to resign two years after in consequence of being prosecuted by a young woman for a breach of promise of marriage, under the faith of which she had lived with him and borne him two children. This affair seems very little to Heinsius’s credit, for he was not only cast in the suit, but the sentence was afterwards confirmed in 1662 by the supreme court of Holland, to which he had appealed.

In the mean time, in 1660, he was again appointed resident at the court of Stockholm, Where he rerhained until 1667. In 1669 he was appointed deputy extraordinary at the court of Moscovy. After holding this post about two years, and executing some other political commissions for the States, he retired to a country residence in 1675, first near Utrecht, and afterwards at Vianen. It was when in this latter place that Peter Francius addressed to him a Latin poem, “Ad Nic. Heinsinm, de secessu suo Vianensi.” In 1681, while at the Hague, whither he went on account of the marriage of 'his niece, he difcd Oct. 7. His body was carried to Leyden, and interred in the same grave with that of his father, in the church of St. Peter.

, a celebrated physician, surgeon, anatomist, and botanist, was born at Frankfort on the Maine, in 1683. He was educated in several German universities, and in 1706 spent some time in the study of anatomy and surgery at Amsterdam under Ruysch, then so famous for his dissections and anatomical preparations. In the following year he went to serve as a surgeon in the Dutch camp in Brabant; devoting the subsequent winter to further improvement, under Boerhaave and his eminent colleagues, who at that time attracted students from all parts to the university of Leyden, where Heister took his degree. Returning afterwards to the camp, he was, in 1709, appointed physician -general to the Dutch military hospital. The experience he thus acquired, raised him to a distinguished rank in the theory and practice of surgery, especially as he had a genius for mechanics, and was by that means enabled to bring about great improvements in the instrumental branch of his art. In 1710 he became professor of anatomy and surgery at Altorf, in the little canton of Uri, and rendered himself celebrated by his lectures and writings. Ten years afterwards a more advantageous situation offered itself to him at Helmstad, where he became physician, with the title of Aulic counsellor, as usual, to the duke of Brunswick, as well as professor of medicine, and afterwards of surgery and botany, in that university. Here he continued till his death, which happened in 1758, at the age of seventy-five. The czar Peter invited him to Russia, but he was too comfortably situated in Germany, where the favour of several sovereigns already shone upon him at an early period, to accept the invitation.

Heister continued from time to time to publish a number of books relating to anatomy and surgery, to several of which he supplied figures drawn by his own hand. Among these, his most distinguished work is the “Compendium Anatomieuai,” an octavo volume, first printed in 1717, whidi became quite a classical book, superseding all that had been previously in use in the schools. It went through numerous editions, with successive additions and improvements, and was translated into most of the modern languages. His “Institutions of Surgery,” also published inGerman in 1718, was soon translated into Latin, and most of the modern languages of Europe, and went through numerous editions. He wrote also some works on the theory and practice of medicine, in which his opinions are formed on the mechanical principles of the Boerhaavian school; and a valuable practical work of Heister’s, a collection of medical, surgical, and anatomical observations, in quarto, is well known in this country by an English translation.

Heister seems early to have had a taste for botany, and to have collected plants, as Haller observes, in his various journeys. This taste enabled him to (ill the botanical chair at Helmstad with credit and satisfaction, and he paid great attention to the garden there, which he much enriched. His first botanical publication, “De Coilectione Simplicium,” was the inaugural dissertation. of one of his pupils named Rabe, printed in 1722; and had he written nothing else, his botanical labours should have been consigned to oblivion; but his subsequent works rank him as an original writer, and he might have acquired more fame had he been favoured with leisure to look deeper, and not been warped by preconceived ideas. In 1732 ha published a dissertation on the “Use of the Leaves” in founding genera of plants, preferring those parts for a natural arrangement, on account of the obscurity and difficulty attending those of the flower. In August 1741, our author came forth as the professed adversary of Linnæus, in the inaugural dissertation of one of his pupils named Goeckel, entitled tl Meditationes et Animadversiones in novum Systema Botanicum sexuale LinniEi;“but the arguments by which the learned professor and his pupil attempt to prove the position they assume, that the” method of Linnæus is extremely difficult, very doubtful, and uncertain,“are not very cogent. Another dissertation of Heister’s, published in Oct. 1741,” de Nominum Piantarum Mutaiione utili ac noxia,“is a more diffuse and elaborate attack on the nomenclature of the great Swedish teacher, whom, however, he terms” a most diligent and most valuable botanist.“Nor does it appear that he was instigated to these attacks by any personal enmity, nor by any more extraordinary flow of bile than was usual among controversialists, of that day at least. Whatever he pursued, he pursued with ardour, and perhaps as he advanced in age, seated in professional state, he grew more pertinacious in his opinions. Hence his subsequent attacks on Linnæus are marked with more vehemence, but proportionably, as usual, with less reason. In 1748, notwithstanding his dislike to the Linnsean principles, he published a” Systema Piantarum Generale ex fructificatione, cui annectuntur regulaj ejusdem, de Nominibus Piantarum, a celeb. Linnaei longe diversae." This system is allied to that of Boerhaave, and though it takes into consideration many particulars of general habit or structure, is not more natural than the professedly artificial system of Linnæus.

, by birth an Englishman, arrived at the singular distinction of being admired in France as a writer in the French language. He was born in Gloucestershire about 1740. He began his career in the army, and served in Jamaica till the peace of 1763. A desire of seeing the most remarkable parts of Europe, now carried him into Italy, where he was so captivated with the beauty of the climate, and the innumerable objects of liberal curiosity which presented themselves, that he continued there several years. About 1770, having satisfied his curiosity in Italy, he turned his thoughts to France, and went to Paris. There also he studied the state of the arts, and was particularly attentive to the theatre. At length he began to write for the Italian comedy, which had principally attracted his notice, and wrote with considerable success. The pieces for that theatre are written chiefly in French, with French titles, and only one or two characters in Italian. He wrote, l. “Le Jugement de Midas,” on the contest between French and Italian music, which was much applauded. But his 2. “Amant jaloux,” had still more success. 3. His third piece, “Les Evenemens imprevus,” met with some exceptions, on which he modestly withdrew it, and after making the corrections suggested, brought it forward again, and had the pleasure to find it much approved. The comedies of this writer, are full of plot, the action lively and interesting: his versification is not esteemed by the French to be of consummate perfection, nor his prose always pure; yet his dialogue constantly pleased, and was allowed to have the merit of nature and sound composition. Mr. Hele died at Paris, of a consumptive disorder, in December 1750 and it may possibly be long before another Englishman will be so distinguished as a writer in the French language. We take this account from French authors, who write his name d'Hele, perhaps it was properly Hale or Dale.

, the empress, mother of Constantine, and one of the saints of the Romish communion, who gives name to many of our churches, owed her elevation to the charms of her person. She was of obscure origin, born at the little village of Drepanum in Bithynia, where the first situation in which we hear of her was that of hostess of an inn. Constantius Chlorus became enamoured of her probably there, and married her; but, on being associated with Dioclesian in the empire, divorced her to marry Theodora, daughter of Maximilian Hercules. The accession of her son to the empire drew her again from obscurity; she obtained the title of Augusta, and was received at court with ali the honours due to the mother of an emperor. Her many virtues riveted the affection of her son to her, and, when he became a Christian, she also was converted; yet she did not scruple to admonish him when she disapproved his conduct. When she was aear eighty years old she planned and executed a journey to the Holy Land, where she is said to have assisted at the discovery of the true cross of Christ, reported by the Romanists to have been accompanied by many miracles. Jn the year 328, soon after this discovery, she died at the age of eighty. Helena, wherever she went, left proofs of a truly Christian liberality; she relieved the poor, orphans, and widows; built churches, and in all respests shewed herself worthy of the confidence of her son, who supported her in these pious efforts by an unlimited permission to draw upon his treasures. At her death he paid her the highest honours, had her body sent to Rome to be deposited in the tomb of the emperors, and raised her native village to the rank of a city, with the new name of Helenopolis. She proved her prudence and political wisdom by the influence she always retained over her son, and by the care she took to prevent all interference of the half-brothers of Constantine, sons of Cons tan ti us Chlorus and Theodora; who, being brought into notice after her death, by the injudicious liberality of the emperor, were massacred by their nephews as soon as they succeeded their father in the empire.

, a native of Emesa in Phoenicia, and bishop of Tricca in Thessaly, flourished in the reigns of Theodosius and Arcaclius towards the end of the fourth century. In his youth he wrote a romance, by which he is now better known than by his subsequent bishopric of; Tricca. It is entitled “Ethiopics,” and relates the amours of Theagenes and Chariclea, in ten books. The learned Huetius is of opinion that HcUodorus was among the romance-writers what Homer was among the poets, the source and model of an infinite number of imitations, all inferior to their original. The first edition of the Ethiopics was printed at Basil, 1533, with a dedication to the senate of Nuremberg, prefixed by Vincentius Opsopseus, who informs us that a soldier preserved the ms. when the library of Buda was plundered. Bourdeiot’s learned notes upon this romance were printed at Paris in 1619, with Heliodorus’s Greek original, and a Latin translation, which had been published by Stanislaus Warszewicki, a Polish knight, (with the Greek) at Basil, in 1551. An excellent English translation of this romance was published by Mr. Payne in 2 vols. 12mo, in 1792. A notion has prevailed that a provincial synod, being sensible how dangerous the reading of Heliodorus’ s Ethiopics was, to which the author’s rank was supposed to add great authority, required of the bishop that he should either burn the book, or resign his dignity; and that the bishop chose the latter. But this story is thought to be entirely fabulous; as depending only upon the single testimony of Nicephorus, an ecclesiastical historian of great credulity and little judgment; and it is somewhat difficult to suppose that Socrates should omit so memorable a circumstance when speaking of Heliodorus as the author of “a love-tale in his youth, which he entitled Ethiopics.” Valesius, in his notes upon this passage, starts another difficulty, for while he rejects the account of Nicephorus as a mere fable, he seems inclined to think, that the romance itself was not written by Heliodorus bishop of Tricca; but in this opinion he has not been followed. Opsopaeus and Melancthon have supposed that this romance was in reality a true history; but Fabricius thinks this as incredible as that Heliodorus, according to others, wrote it originally in the Ethiopic tongue. Some again have asserted, that Heliodorus was not a Christian, from his saying at the end of his book, that he was a Phoenician, born in the city of Emesa, and of the race of the sun; since, they say, it would be madness in a Christian, and much more in a bishop, to declare that he was descended from that luminary; but such language, in a young man, can scarcely admit the inference.

, a learned astronomer, and member of most of the learned societies of Europe, was born in 1720, at Chemnitz, in Hungary, and first educated at Neusol. Having in 1738 entered the society of the Jesuits, he was sent by them to the college of Vienna, where, during his philosophical studies, he displayed a genius for mechanics, and employed his leisure hours in constructing water-clocks, terrestrial and celestial globes, and other machines. In 1744 and 1745 he studied mathematics, now become his favourite pursuit, under the celebrated Froelich, and not only assisted Franz, the astronomer of the Jesuits’ observatory, in his labours, but also in arranging the museum for experimental philosophy. At the same time he published a new edition of Crevellius’s “Arithmetica numeralis et literalis,” as a text-book. In 1746 and 1747 he taught Greek and Latin in the catholic school of Leutschau, in Hungary, and returning to Vienna in the latter year, was employed as the instructor in the mathematics, and the art of assaying, of several young men destined for offices in the Hungarian mines. In 1750 he published, “Adjumentum memoriae manuale Chronologicogenealogico-historicum,” which has since been translated into various languages, and of which an enlarged edition appeared in 1774. In 1751 and 1752 he obtained the priesthood, completed his academical degrees, and was appointed professor of mathematics at Clausenburg. Here he published his “Elementa Arithmetical 1 for the use of his pupils, and had prepared other works, when he was, in Sept. 175”2, invited to Vienna, and appointed astronomer and director of the new observatory, in the building of which he assisted, and made it one of the first in Europe, both as to construction and apparatus. From 1757 to 1767 he devoted himself entirely to astronomical observations and calculations for the “Ephemerides,” each volume of which, published annually, contained evident proofs of his assiduity. About the same time he published a small work, entitled “An Introduction towards the useful employment of Artificial Magnets.”

A circumstance now occurred which contributed not a little to increase his fame. The transit of Venus over the sun’s disk, announced for June 3, 1769, was considered as a phenomenon, which, if observed in different parts of the globe, would furnish data for determining the true distance of the sun and planets from the earth; and some of the ablest astronomers were selected to proceed for this purpose to Cajaneborg in Finland, to Otaheite, to California, and to Hudson’s Bay. Hell had also the honour of being chosen to participate in this undertaking; and, although he had previously refused two offers of the kind, accepted that of Christian VII. king of Denmark, to observe the transit in an island in the Frozen Ocean, near Wardoehuus, at the Northern extremity of Europe. Having set out in April 1768, with J. Sajnovies, a member of the same order, as his assistant, he arrived at the place of his destination October 11. He now constructed an observatory, and began his observations, which extended to a great many other phenomena than that which was the chief object of his journey; but in this last he was successful beyond all expectation, the serenity of the sky being so much in his favour. As the results, however, of the astronomers sent out to different parts to make their observations, did not agree, Hell was involved in a literary contest, particularly with Lalande.

In June 1769 he set out on his return, and arrived safely at Copenhagen, where he was honoured with every mark of respect by the king, and he and his assistant were admitted members of the academies of Copenhagen, Drontheim, and Norway. During his residence at Copenhagen, which lasted seven months, he communicated, besides other things, to the academy of sciences, the observations he had made of the transit, which were published, and afterwards reprinted in the Ephemerides for 1771. In May 1770 he returned to Vienna, and collected and arranged the fruits of his journej', which he meant to publish under the title of “Expeditio literaria ad Polum Arcticum;” but the suppression of the order of the Jesuits, which gave him great concern, and the dispersion of some of his literary coadjutors, are supposed to have prevented him from completing this undertaking. He was also unsuccessful in endeavouring to establish an academy of sciences, which, according to his plan, was to be under the direction of the Jesuits. He superintended, however, the building of a new observatory at Erlau, in Hungary, at the expence of the bishop, count Charles of Esterhazy, and undertook two journeys thither to direct the operations, and to arrange a valuable collection of instruments which had been sent to him from England. In the month of March 1792, he was attacked by an inflammation of the lungs, which producing a suppuration, put an end to his lite in a few weeks. He is to be ranked with those who have rendered essential service to the science of astronomy. The “Ephemerides Astronomical ad meridianum Vindobonensem,” begun in 1767, aucl continued till his death, forms a valuable astronomical calendar, which contains a great many interesting papers. In other branches of knowledge, and particularly theology, he was a firm adherent to the principles he had been taught in his youth, and which he strenuously defended. He always entertained hopes of the revival of the order of the Jesuits. He possessed a benevolent heart, and was always ready to assist the distressed; in particular he endeavoured to relieve the sufferings of the poor, and with this noble view expended almost the whole of his property.

, of Mitylene, was an ancient Greek historian, born in the year A. C. 496, twelve years before the birth of Herodotus. He wrote a history of “the earliest Kings of various Nations, and the Founders of Cities;” which is mentioned by several ancient authors, but is not extant. He lived to the age of eighty-five. There was another Hellanicus of much later times, who was a Milesian, but very little is known of either.

, a French chemist, was born in 1686, and destined by his friends for the profession of theology, but the accidentally meeting with a book of chemistry, determined him to make that science the principal pursuit of his life. From 1718 to 1732, he was employed as the compiler of the “Gazette de France.” He translated Schlutter’s work on the “Fusions of Ores, and on Founderies,” and published it in 1750 1753, 2 vols. 4to, with his own notes and remarks. He published a work, entitled “L'Art de la Teinture des Laines et EtofTes de Laines,” 1750, 12 mo, which is reckoned a very valuable treatise, and is the first in which chemical principles are applied to the practice of the art. He furnished many articles to the “Memoirs of the Academy of Sciences,” and some to the royal society of London, of which he was elected a fellow in 1740. He died at Paris in 1766.

, a Dutch protestant divine, and one of the early promoters of the reformed religion in that country, was born at Utrecht in 1551. He had attained so much reputation with his fellow citizens, that in 1579 they unanimously chose him their pastor. The same year, as all obstacles to the establishment of the reformation were not yet overcome, they appointed him one of a deputation sent to our queen Elizabeth, to request that in the treaty of peace with Spain, she should stipulate for the free exercise of the protestant religion in the United Provinces. In 1582, he was the first who preached that religion openly in the cathedral of Utrecht, notwithstanding the opposition given by the chapter. He afterwards refused the theological chair in the university of Leyden, but accepted the pastoral cvffice at Amsterdam in 1602, which he held until his death, Aug. 29, 1608. All his contemporaries, the protestant divines, speak highly of his talents, character, and services. He did not write much; except an “Analysis of the Psalms,” printed after his death, at Amst. 1641, 4to, and a controversial work against Coster the Jesuit, entitled “Gladius Goliathi,” much commended by Voetius.

, commonly called Van Helmont, from a borough and castle of that name in Brabant, was a person of quality, and a man of great learning, especially in physic and natural philosophy; and born at Brussels in 1577. The particulars of his life, as given in the two introductory chapters to his works, give a just notion of the man.

“In the year 1580,” says he, " a most miserable one to the Low Countries, my father died. I, the youngest and least esteemed of all my brothers and sisters, was bred a scholar; and in the year 1594, which was to me the 17th, had finished the course of philosophy. Upon seeing none admitted to examinations at Louvain, but in a gown, and masked with a hood, as though the garment did promise learning, I began to perceive, that the taking degrees in arts was a piece of mere mockery; and wondered at the simplicity of young men, in fancying that they had learned any thing from their doting professors. I entered, therefore, into a serious and honest examination of myself, that I might know by my own judgment, how much I was a philosopher, and whether I had really acquired truth and knowledge: but found myself altogether destitute, save that I had learned to wrangle artificially. Then came I first to perceive, that I knew nothing, or at least that which was not worth knowing. Natural philosophy seemed to promise something of knowledge, to which therefore I joined the study of astronomy. I applied myself also to logic and the mathematics, by way of recreation, when I was wearied with other studies; and made myself a master of Euclid’s Elements, as I did also of Copernicus’s theory ‘ De revolutionibus orbium ccelestium:’ but all these things were of no account with me, because they contained Jittle truth and certainty, little but a parade of science falsely so called. Finding after all, therefore, that nothing was sound, nothing true, I refused the title of master of arts, though I had finished my course; unwilling, that professors should play the fool with me, in declaring me a master of the seven arts, when I was conscious to myself that I knew nothing.

"A wealthy canonry was promised me then, so that I might, if I pleased, turn myself to divinity but saint Bernard affrighted me from it, saying, that I should eat the sins of the people. 7 I begged therefore of the Lord Jesus, that he would vouchsafe to call me to that profession in which 1 might please him most. The Jesuits began at that time to teach philosophy at Louvain, and one of the professors expounded the disquisitions and secrets of magic. Both these lectures I greedily received; but instead of grain, I reaped only stubble, and fantastic conceits void of sense. In the mean time, lest an hour should pass without some benefit, I run through some writings of the stoics, those of Seneca, and especially of Epictetus, who pleased me exceedingly. I seemed, in moral philosophy, to have found the quintessence of truth, and did verily believe, that through stoicism I advanced in Christian perfection; but 1 discovered afterwards in a dream, that stoicism was an empty and swollen bubble, and that by this study, under the appearance of moderation, I became, indeed, most self-sufficient and haughty. Lastly, 1 turned over Mathiolus and Dioscorides; thinking with myself nothjng equally necessary for mortal man to know and admire, as the wisdom and goodness of God in vegetables; to the end that he might not only crop the fruit for food, but also minister of the same to his other necessities. My curiosity being now raised upon this branch of study, I inquired, whether there were any book, which delivered the maxims and rule of medicine for I then supposed, that medicine was not altogether a mere gift, but might ]be taught, and delivered by discipline, like other arts and sciences: at least I thought, if medicine was a good gift coming down from the Father of lights, that it might have, as an human science, its theorems and authors, into whom, as into Bazaleel and Aholiab, the spirit of the Lord had infused the knowledge of all diseases and their causes, and also the knowledge of the properties of things. I inquired, I say, whether no writer had described the qualities, properties, applications, and proportions of vegetables, from the hyssop even to the cedar of Libanus? A certain professor of medicine answered me, that none of these things were to be looked for either in Galen or Avicen. I was very ready to believe this, from the many fruitless searches I hau made in books for truth and knowledge before; however, following my natural bent, which lay to the study of nature, I read the institutions of Fuchsius and Fernelius; in whom I knew I had surveyed the whole science of medicine, as it were in an epitome. Is this, said I, smiling to myself, the knowledge of healing Is the whole history of natural properties thus shut up in elementary qualities Therefore I read the works of Galen twice of Hippocrates once, whose aphorisms I almost got by heart; all Avicen, as well as the Greeks, Arabians, and moderns, to the tune of 600 authors. I read them seriously and attentively through; and took down, as I went along, whatever seemed curious and worthy of attention; when at length, reading over my common-place book, I was grieved at the pains I had bestowed, and the years I had spent, in throwing together such a mass of stufc Therefore I straightway left off all books whatever, all formal discourses, and empty promises of the schools; firmly believing every good and perfect gift to come down from the Father of lights, more particularly that of medicine.

“I have attentively surveyed some foreign nations; but I found the same sluggishness, in implicitly following” the steps of their forefathers, and ignorance among them all. I then became persuaded, that the art of healing was a mere imposture, originally set on foot by the Greeks for filthy lucre’s sake; till afterwards the Holy Scriptures informed me better. I considered, that the plague, which then raged at Louvain, was a most miserable disease, in which every one forsook the sick; and faithless helpers, distrustful of their own art, fled more swiftly than the unlearned common people, and homely pretenders to cure it. I proposed to myself to dedicate one salutation to the miserable infected; and although then no medicine was made known to me but trivial ones, yet God preserved my innocency from so cruel an enemy. I was not indeed sent for, but went of my own accord; and that not so much to help them, which I despaired of doing, as for the sake of learning. All that saw me, seemed to be refreshed with hope and joy; and I myself, being fraught with hope, was persuaded, that, by the mere free gift of God, 1 should sometimes obtain a mastery in the science. After ten years’ travel and studies from my degree in the art of medicine taken at Louvain, being then married, I withdrew myself, in 1609, to Vilvord, that, being the less troubled by applications, I might proceed diligently in viewing the kingdoms of vegetables, animals, and minerals. I employed myself some years in chemical operations. I searched into the works of Paracelsus; and at first admired and honoured the man, but at last was convinced, that nothing but difficulty, obscurity, and error, was to be found in him. Thus tired out with search after search, and concluding the art of medicine to be all deceit and uncertainty, I said with a sorrowful heart, ‘ Good God how long wilt thou be angry with mortal man, who hitherto has not disclosed one truth, in healing, to thy schools How long wilt thou deny truth to a people confessing thee, needful in these days, more than in times past Is the sacrifice of Molech pleasing to thee wilt thou have the lives of the poor, widows, and fatherless children, consecrated to thyself; under the most miserable torture of incurable diseases How is it, therefore, that thou ceasest not to destroy so many families through the uncertainty and ignorance of physicians’ Then I fell on my face, and said, ’ Oh, Lord, pardon me, if favour towards my neighbour hath snatched me away beyond my bounds. Pardon, pardon, O Lord, my indiscreet charity for thou art the radical good of goodness itself. Thou hast known my sighs and that I confess myself to be, to know, to be worth, to be able to do, to have, nothing and that I am poor, naked, empty, vain. Give, O Lord, give knowledge to thy creature, that he may affectionately know thy creatures; himself first, other things besides himself, all things, and more than all things, to be ultimately in thee.' “After I had thus earnestly prayed, I fell into a dream; in which, in the sight or view of truth, I saw the whole universe, as it were, some chaos or confused thing without form, which was almost a mere nothing. And from thence I drew the conceiving of one word, which did signify to me this following: ‘ Behold thou, and what things thou seest, are nothing. Whatever thou dost urge, is less than nothing itself in the sight of the Most High. He knoweth all the bounds of things to be done; thou at least may apply thyself to thy own safety.’ In this conception there was an inward precept, that I should be made a physician; and that, some time or other, Raphael himself should be given unto me. Forthwith therefore, and for thirty whole years after, and their nights following in order, 1 laboured always to my cost, and often in danger of my life, that I might obtain the knowledge of vegetables and minerals, and of their natures and properties also. Meanwhile, I exercised myself in prayer, in reading, in a narrow search of things, in sifting my errors, and in writing down what I daily experienced. At length I knew with Solomon, that t had for the most part hitherto perplexed my spirit in vain; and I said, Vain is the knowledge of all things under the sun, vain are the searchings of the curious. Whom the Lord Jesus shall call unto wisdom, he, and no other, shall come; yea, he that hath come to the top, shall as yet be able to do very little, unless the bountiful favour of the Lord shall shine upon him. Lo, thus have I waxed ripe of age, being become a man; and now also an old man, unprofitable, and unacceptable to God, to whom be all honour.”

From this curious account, given in the preceding editions of this Dictionary, and which we are unwilling to displace, it will be seen that Van Helmont had a strong portion of enthusiasm; but he was not the madman which some of his contemporaries imagined. For a period of thirty years he pursued his researches into the products of nature, with such perseverance, as to leave few of the known animal, vegetable, and mineral bodies unexamined. In the course of these investigations, he necessarily fell upon the discovery of several of the products of decomposition, and of new combination, which chemistry affords: among these he seems to have been the first to notice the spirit of hartshorn, the spirit of sulphur per campanam, as it was called, and the aerial part of the spa-waters, which he first denominated gas (from the German geist, ghost, or spirit), and several other substances. Among these were many articles possessing considerable influence upon the living body, which, being contrasted with the inertness of the simples of the Galenical practice, roused and confirmed his former opinions against the doctrines of that school; which he now attacked with great ardour and strength of argument, and which he contributed to overthrow. But partly in imitation of Paracelsus, whom he greatly admired, and partly from an attempt to generalize the confused mass of new facts, which he had acquired, he attempted to reduce the whole system of medicine to the principles of chemistry, and substituted a jargon as unintelligible, and hypotheses as gratuitous, as those which he had attempted to refute. He published from time to time a variety of works, by which he obtained considerable reputation. The elector of Cologne, who was himself attached to chemical inquiries, held him in great esteem; and he received from the emperor Rodolph II. and uis two successors, invitations to the court of Vienna; but he preferred his laboratory and cabinet to these proffered honours. He died on the 30th of December, 1644, in the sixty-eighth year of his age.

His first work was entitled <( De Magnetica Vulnerum Naturali et Legitima Curatione, contra Johannem Roberti Soc. Jesu Theologum,“Paris, 1621, 8vo. His next publication was relative to the waters of the Spa,” De Spadanis Fontibus,“Liege, 1624, 8vo. Next followed, after a long interval,” Febrium Doctrina inaudita,“Antwerp, 1642, 12mo and” Opuscula Medica inaudita, l.De Lithiasi; 2. De Febribus; a. De Humoribus Galeni 4. De Peste,“Cologne, 1644, 8vo. On his death he requested his son to collect his papers, as well the incomplete as the finished ones, and to publish them in the way which he thought the best. They were sent to the printer, without correction, and without any regard to connection or arrangement, and published at Amsterdam in 1648, in 4to, under the title of” Ortus Medicinae, id est, initia PhysiciB inaudita, progressus Medicinal Novus in Morborum ultionem ad Vitam longam.“Under the title of” Opera omnia," these works have been reprinted at various times and places, and in various languages the most correct edition is that of Amsterdam, in 1652, by Elzevir. They are now consulted only as curiosities; but he certainly anticipated, in obscure glimpses, as it were, several of the important discoveries, as well as the hypotheses of later times his Arch&us is now the vis medico,­trix nature of Hoffmann and Cullen; his doctrine of ferments was adopted by Silvius and his followers; and he greatly cleared the way to chemical discoveries.

, son of the preceding, was born in 1618, and like his father, became celebrated for his knowledge, and his paradoxes was very skilful in physic and chemistry, and was esteemed a man of universal learning, and acquainted with most trades and arts. He was even suspected of having found the philosopher’s stone, because he lived at an apparently great expence with a small income; but was much esteemed and respected at Amsterdam. After living many years with the prince of Sultzbach, who was a great patron of the learned, he set out for Berlin, by desire of the queen of Prussia, and died at Cologn in 1699. His works are, “Alphabeti vere naturalis Hebraic! delineatio;” “Cogitationes super quatuor priora capita Geneseos,” Amsterdam, 1697, 8vo “De attributis divinis” “De Inferno,” &c. He believed the Metempsycosis, and maintained many other paradoxes.

, doctor of physic, professor of that science and of natural philosophy in the university of Dublin, was author of a celebrated course of twenty-three lectures on natural philosophy, published after his death, in an octavo volume, by Dr. Bryan Robinson. These lectures were long in high estimation, passed through several editions, and are only superseded now from the necessity of keeping pace in such works with the progress of discoveries. They are clear and plain, though scientific. The author was intimate with Swift, and corresponded with him in his humourous way. He died Aug. 1, 1738, of an obstruction in the bowels, for which quicksilver having been in vain tried, he ordered that his body should be opened, when the cause of his death was ascertained to be three large excrescences, resembling the substance of the liver, which had accumulated in the bowels.

, a Dutch artist, was born at Haerlem in 1613, and became one of the best portrait painters of his time. He sometimes attempted history, and displayed taste and nature in the landscapes which he introduced, but his chief merit is in his portraits, which he designed in an agreeable style, with a light, free touch, and a mellow pencil. His most capital performance is in the town-hall of Amsterdam; it represents a company of trained bands, about thirty figures in whole length. Of its merit our readers may entertain a high idea when they are told that sir Joshua Reynolds has given it as his opinion that it is perhaps the first picture of portraits in the world, comprehending more of those qualities which make a perfect portrait, than any other sir Joshua had ever seen. They are correctly drawn, both head and figures, and well coloured; and have great variety of action, characters, and countenances, and those so truly and lively expressive of what they are about, that ttie spectator has nothing to wish for. This artist died in 1670.

, a physician, was born of a noble family in the principality of Atihalt,about 1625. He obtained at an early age a considerable reputation for his knowledge of medicine and chemistry; and having settled in Holland about 1649, he practised at the Hague with so much success, that he was appointed first physician to the States-general, and to the prince of Orange, he died August 20, 1709. His works serve, however, rather to prove his devotion to the absurdities of the alchemists, physiognomists, and such visionaries of his time, than his advancement in true science; and therefore it may be sufficient to refer for their titles to our authorities His son Adrian [Helveticus], who was born in 1656, journeyed to Paris, without any design of fixing there, and only to see that new world, and sell some medicines, but accident detained him very unexpectedly. The dysentery then prevailed in that city-, and all who applied to him are said to have been infallibly cured. His success was celebrated; and Louis XIV. ordered him to publish the remedy which produced such certain and surprising effects. He declared it to be Ipecacuanha, and received 1000 louis-d'ors for the discovery. He settled in Paris, became physician to the duke of Orleans, and was also made inspector-general of the military hospitals. He died in 1721, leaving some works behind him, of little value; the principal of which is, “Traité des Maladies de plus frequentes, & des Remedies specifiques pour les guerir,” 2 vols. 8vo.

, son of the above, was born in 1685, and rose to be a practitioner of eminence. He was first physician to the queen, counsellor of state, and greatly esteemed by the town as well as court. He was, like his father, inspector-general of the military hospitals. He was a member of the academy of sciences at Paris, of the royal society in London, and of the academies of Berlin, Florence, and Bologna. He cured Louis XV. of a dangerous disorder, which attacked him at the age of seven years, and obtained afterwards the entire confidence of the queen also. Whenever he attended as a physician, he was regarded as a friend, such was the goodness and benevolence of his character. He was particularly attentive to the poor. He died July 17, 1755. He was the author of, 1 “Idee Generale de J'economie animale, 1722,” 8vo. 2. “Principia Physico-Medica, in tyronum Medicinae gratiam conscripta,” 2 vols. 8vo. This latter work, though drawn up for pupils, may yet be serviceable to masters. He also published some papers in the Memoirs of the academy of sciences for 1718, 1719, and 1721.

, the most remarkable of this family, was born at Paris in 1715, and was son of the preceding Helvetius. He studied under the famous father Pon'e in the college of Louis the Great, and his tutor, discovering in his compositions remarkable proofs of genius, was particularly attentive to his education. An early association with the wits of his time gave him the desire to become an author, but his principles unfortunately became tainted with false philosophy. He did not publish any thing till 1758, when he produced his celebrated book “DeTEsprit,” which appeared first in one volume 4to, and afterwards in three volumes, 12mo. This work was very justly condemned by the parliament of Paris, as confining the faculties of man to animal sensibility, and removing at once the restraints of vice and the encouragements to virtue. Attacked in various ways at home, on account of these principles, he visited England in 1764, and the next year went into Prussia, where he was received with honourable attention by the king. When he returned into France, he led a retired and domestic life on his estate at Vore. Attached to his wife and family, and strongly inclined to benevolence, he lived there more happily than at Paris, where, as he said, he “was obliged to encounter the mortifying spectacle of misery that he could not relieve.” To Marivaux, and M. Saurin, of the French academy, he allowed pensions, that, for a private benefactor, were considerable, merely on the score of merit; which he was anxious to search out and to assist. Yet, with all this benevolence of disposition, he was strict in the care of his game, and in the exaction of his feudal rights. He was maltre-d'hotel to the queen, and, for a time, a farmer-general, but quitted that lucrative post to enjoy his studies. When he found that he had bestowed his bounty upon unworthy persons, or was reproached with it, he said, “If I was king, I would correct them; but I am only rich, and they are poor, my business therefore is to aid them.” Nature had been kind to Helvetius; she had given him a fine person, genius, and a constitution which promised long life. This last, however, he did not attain, for he was attacked by the gout in his head and stomach, under which complaint he languished some little time, and died in December 1771. His works were, 1. the treatise “De l'Esprit,” “on the Mind,” already mentioned: of* which various opinions have been entertained, It certainly is one of those which endeavour to degrade the nature of man too nearly to that of mere animals; and even Voltaire, who called the author at one time a true philosopher, has said that it is filled with common-place truths, delivered with great parade, but without method, and disgraced by stories very unworthy of a philosophical production. The ideas of virtue and vice, according to this book, depend chiefly upon climate. 2. “Le Bonheur,” or “Happiness,” a poem in six cantos; published after his death, in 1772, with some fragments of epistles. His poetical style is still more affected than his prose, and though he produces some fine verses, he is more frequently stiff and forced. His poem on happiness is a declamation, in which he makes that great object depend, not on virtue, but on the cultivation of letters and the arts. 3. “De l'Homme,” 2 vols. 8vo, another philosophical work, not less bold than the first. A favourite paradox, produced in this book, under a variety of different forms, is, “that all men are born with equal talents, and owe their genius solely to education.” This book is even more dangerous than that on the mind, because the style is clearer, and the author writes with less reserve. He* speaks sometimes of the enemies of what he called philosophy, with an asperity that ill accords with the general mildness of his character.

The origin of the philosophical career of Helvetius is, by La Harpe, traced to a cause of a very singular nature, and not perhaps very credible. While yet young, and coveting every species of enjoyment within the reach of his age, his accomplishments, and his wealth, he beheld in a public garden a man who had none of these advantages, and to whom a circle of women were doing honour. This wasMaupertuis, just returned from his voyage towards the pole, and who had acquired a temporary reputation in the sciences. Helvetius was struck with the consideration which the reputation of a man of letters was able to ensure. He had hitherto succeeded easily in all that he had attempted. He had danced to admiration at the opera, under the mask of Juvilliers, one of the first dancers of the time. He had already made attempts in poetry; he had submitted his verses to Voltaire, and the lettered veteran had politely intimated that this was his proper line. He then directed his attention to philosophy, and connected himself with its chiefs, particularly with Diderot.

Diderot is supposed to have furnished some leading ideas to Helv<-t.ius for his work on the Mind. As his hypothesis, says l.a Harpe, every where terminates in materialism, it is probable that the basis of it was furnished to a man of the world, of course little conversant with these matters, by a man of letters by profession, an apostle of atheism, who loved nothing better than to make disciples.

, professor of the Greek and eastern languages, and of divinity, in the university of Giessen, was born Dec. 26, 1581, at Sprendlingen, a little town near Francfort, where his father was minister. He went throb gh his studies in Marpurg, where he took his degree of M. A. in 1599, having taken his bachelor’s in 1595. He was an early genius composed a prodigiousnumber of Greek verses at fifteen years old and was capable of teaching Greek, Hebrew, and even philosophy, before he was twenty. The Hebrew he spoke as fluently as if it had been his native language. He thoroughly read the Greek authors; and even studied physic for some time, though he had devoted himself to the ministry. In 1605, he was chosen to teach Greek and Hebrew, in the college which the landgrave had recently established at Giessen;, and which the year after was converted into an university by the emperor, who endowed it with privileges. Having discharged for five years the several duties of his employment with great reputation, he was appointed divinity professor in 1610. In 1611, a church was offered him in Moravia, and a professorship at Hamburgh with a considerable stipend: but he refused both. In 1613, he took the degree of D. D. at the command of the landgrave; who sent him to Francfort, that he might view the library of the Jews, who had been lately driven away by popular tumults. Helvicus, fond of reading the rabbins, bought several of their books on that occasion. He died in the flower of his age, Sept. 10, 1616; and his loss was bewailed by the German poets of the Augsburg confession. A collection was made of his poems, which were printed with his funeral sermon and some other pieces, under the title of “Cippus Memorialis,” by the care of Winckleman, who had been his colleague.

He was reputed to have had a most skilful and methodical way of teaching languages. He was a good grammarian and published several grammars, as Latin, Greek, Hebrew, Chaldee, Syriac but they were only abridgements. His Hebrew and Latin Lexicons were also, by way of essay, calculated for youth. He was likewise an able chronologer. His chronological tables have gone through several editions, and been greatly esteemed, though they are not, as it is difficult to conceive they should be, quite free from errors. He published them in 1609, under the title of “Theatrum Historicum, sive Chronologise Systema Novum, Sec.” and brought them down from the beginning of the world to 1612; but they were afterwards revised and continued by John Baithasar Schuppius, son-in-law to the author, and professor of eloquence and history in the university of Marpurg; and this is the only one of his works whose use has not been entirely superseded.

, perhaps Elliot, properly, as he was of British extraction, was born in Jan. 1660, and became in 1633 a religious of the order of Picpus near Paris, which is a branch of that of St. Francis, and was raised to several offices in his order. His fame is founded on a large work, the toil of twenty -three years, in eight volumes 4to, “A History of Monastic Orders, religious and military, and of secular congregations of both sexes,” &c. &c. which he began to print in 1714. The four last volumes were edited by father Louis, the provincial of his order, with the assistance of Maximilian Bullot. Helyot died at Picpus, near Paris, Jan. 5, 1716. His work is full of learned research, and more correct than any thing on that subject which had then appeared. He was a man of exemplary piety, and a neat, though not elegant, or natural writer.

, a very learned man, born at the Hague, was a fine poet and orator; and to be compared, says Gronovius, in his “Orat. funeb. J. Golii,” with the Roman Atticus for his probity, tranquillity of life, and absolute disregard of honours and public employments. He went to Rome, and spent six years in the palace of cardinal Cesi. He wrote there' a panegyric on pope Clement VIII. which was so graciously received, that he was offered the post of librarian to the Vatican, or a very good benefice; and preferring the latter, was made a canon in the cathedral at Antwerp. Lipsius had a great esteem for him, as appears from his letters. He was Grotius’s friend also, and published verses to congratulate him on his deliverance from confinement. He was uncle by the mother’s side to James Golius, the learned professor at Leyden, who gained so vast a reputation by his profound knowledge in the Oriental languages: but Golius, who was a zealous protestant, could never forgive his having converted his brother Peter to popery. Hemelar applied himself much more to the study of polite literature and to the science of medals, than to theology. “He published,” says Gronovius, " extremely useful commentaries upon the medals of the Roman emperors, from the time of Julius Caesar down to Justinian, taken from the cabinets of Charles Arschot and Nicholas Rocoxius; wherein he concisely and accurately explains by marks, figures, &c. whatever is exquisite, elegant, and suitable or agreeable to the history of those times, and the genius of the monarchs, whether the medals in question be of gold, silver, or brass, whether cast or struck in that immortal city. It is a kind of storehouse of medals; and nevertheless in this work, from which any other person would have expected prodigious reputation, our author has been so modest as to conceal his name.' 7 This work of Hemelar’s, which is in Latin, is not easily to be met with, yet it has been twice printed iirst at Antwerp, in 1615, at the en.I of a work of James De Bie and secondly, in 1627, 4to which Clement has described as a very rare edition Bayle mentions a third edition of 1654, folio, but the work which he mistakes for a third edition, was only a collection of engravings of Roman coins described by Gevartius, in which are some from Hemelar’s work. The other works of this canon are some Latin poems and orations. He died in 1640. He is sometimes called Hamelar.

, a regular canon of Gisborough-abbey, near Cleveland in Yorkshire, flourished in the fourteenth century, in the reign of Edward III. He had much learning, and much industry. History was his particular study; and he compiled a history which begins from the Norman conquest, and continues to the reign of king Edward the lid. from 1066 to 1308. The work is written with great care and exactness, and in a style good enough considering the time. Gale, who has published it in his “Veteres Scriptores,” with an account of the author, enumerates five copies of his history, two at Trinity college, Cambridge, one at the Heralds’ office, one in the Cotton lilrary, and one which he had himself. This author died at Gisborough in 1347. Hearne published an edition in 2 vols. 8vo, Oxford, 1731, now one of the most rare and valuable of his works.

, an eminent painter, was a peasant’s son, and born at a village of that Dame in Holland, in 1498. In his youth he was extremely dull, and nothing was expected from him; but afterwards he became a correct painter, easy and fruitful in his inventions. He was the disciple and imitator of Schoreal. He went to Home, and intended to stay there a long time; but at the end of three years, returned to his own country, settled at Haerlem, and lived there the remainder of his days. Most of his works were engraved. Vasari, who gives a particular account of them, and commends them, says, Michael Angelo was so pleased with one of the prints, that he had a mind to colour it. Mr. Fuseli thinks that he invented with more fertility than taste or propriety; “his design is ostentatious without style, and his forms long without elegance. He rather grouped than composed, and seems to have been unacquainted with chiaroscuro. His costume is always arbitrary, and often barbarous, and in the admission of ornaments and the disposition of his scenery, he oftener consulted the materials which he had compiled at Rome, than fitness of place, or the demands of his subject.” He died in 1574.

, another painter, perhaps c-f the family with the former, exhibited much fancy in the subjects he chose for his pencil, but with vigour of execution. He was born at Haerlem in 1645, and was a disciple of Peter Grebber, whose manner he left for that of Brouwer. In his own time his compositions were much esteemed, because of their gross humour, and the whimsical imagination that reigned in them; but they are not now so much prized. His delight was in painting fanciful, wild, and uncommon scenes of his own composing; such as the nocturnal intercourse of witches, devils, and spectres; enchantments, temptations of St. Anthony, interiors of alehouses with drunken men, monldes in the actions of men and women, &c. &c. all which he wrought with great freedom of touch and intelligence of drawing. His colour likewise, though not always pure, was in general rich and agreeable. He quitted his own country to settle in London, where he died in 1704. It was customary with him to paint his own portrait in his drolls, and which was not of the most engaging kind; and he wrought by means of a looking-glass his characters from his own face. There was another Egbert Hemskirk, called by distinction the Old, who painted subjects of the like kind with more success.

, or Malleolus, which has the same meaning as Hemmerlin in German, was born at Zurich in 1389, of a considerable family; and having entered the church, was made canon of Zurich in 1412. He afterwards took his doctor’s degree at Bologna, and in 1428 was appointed chanter of the church of Zurich. In 1454 the bishop of Constance put him in prison, on a suspicion of corresponding with the enemies of itts country; what became of him afterwards, or when he died, we have not been able to discover; but two works of his in folio, and in black letter, are much sought by collectors of curiosities: 1. “Opuscula varia scilicet de nobilitate et rusticitate dialogus,” &c. without date. 2, “Variae oblectationis oriuscula; nempe contra valido^ mend.icantes Beghardos et Beghinos,” &c. Basil, 1497, folio. They arc written with a coarse kind of humour.

, or Hemsterhusius, one of the most famous critics of his country, the son of Francis Hemsterhuis, a physician, was born at Groningen, Feb. 1, 1635. After obtaining the rudiments of literature from proper masters, and from his father, he became a member of his native university in his fourteenth year, 1698. He there studied for some years, and then removed to Leyden, for the sake of attending the lectures of the famous James Perizonius on ancient history. He was here so much noticed by the governors of the university, that it was expected he would succeed James Gronovius as professor of Greek. Havercamp, however, on the vacancy, was appointed, through the intrigues, as Ruhnkenius asserts, of some who feared they might be eclipsed by young Hemsterhuis; who in 1705, at the age of nineteen, was called to Amsterdam, and appointed professor of mathematics and philosophy. In the former of these branches he had been a favourite scholar of the famous John Bernouilli. In 1717, he removed to Franeker, on being chosen to succeed Lambert Bos as professor of Greek; to which place, in 1738, was added the professorship of history. In 1740 he removed to Leyden to accept the same two professorships in that university. It appears that he was married, because his father-in-law, J. Wild, is mentioned; he died April 7, 1766, having enjoyed to the last the use of all his faculties. He published, 1. “The three last books of Julius Pollux’s Onomasticon,” to complete the edition of which, seven books had been finished by Lederlin. This was published at Amsterdam in 1706. On the appearance of this work, he received a letter from Bentley, highly praising him for the service he had there rendered to his author. But this very letter was nearly the cause of driving him entirely from the study of Greek criticism: for in it Bentley transmitted his own conjectures on the true readings of the passages cited by Pollux from comic writers, with particular view to the restoration of the metre. Hemsterhuis had himself attempted the same, but, when he read the criticisms of Bentley, and saw their astonishing justness and acuteness, he was so hurt at the inferiority of his own, that he resolved, for the time, never again to open a Greek book. In a month or two this timidity went off, and he returned to these studies with redoubled vigour, determined to take Bentley for his model, and to' qualify himself, if possible, to rival one whom he so greatly admired. 2. “Select Colloquies of Lucian, and his Timon,” Amst. 1708. 3. “The Plutus of Aristophanes, with the Scholia,” various readings and notes, Harlingen, 1744, 8vo. 4. “Part of an edition of Lucian,” as far as the 521st page of the first volume; it appeared in 1743 in four volumes quarto, the remaining parts being edited by J. M. Gesner and Reitzius. The extreme slowness of his proceeding is much complained of by Gesner and others, and was the reason why he made no further progress. 5. % “Notes and emendations on Xenophon Ephesius,” inserted in the 36 volumes of the te Miscellanea Critica“of Amsterdam, with the signature T. S. H. S. 6.” Some observations upon Chrysostom’s Homily on the Epistle to Philemon,“subjoined to Raphelius’s Annotations on the New Testament. 7.” Inaugural Speeches on various occasions.“8. There are also letters from him to J. Matth. Gesner and others; and he gave considerable aid to J. St. Bernard, in publishing the ' Eclogae Thomae Magistri,” at Leyden, in 1757. His “Philosophical Works” were published at Paris in 1792, 2 vols. 8vo, but he was a better critic -than philosopher. Ruhnkenius holds up Hemsterhusius as a model of a perfect critic, and indeed, according to his account, the extent and variety of his knowledge, and the acuteness of his judgment, were very extraordinary.

, a voluminous Spanish author, and accounted one of the most learned men of his country in the seventeenth century, was born in 1611. He entered, when he was ahout fifteen years of age, into the order of the Jesuits at Salamanca, and spent the greatest part of his life in that university, where afterwards he was admitted to the degree of doctor of divinity, and appointed rector. He obtained a very high reputation by the solutions which he gave to persons who came from all parts to consult him in cases of conscience. He died in 1704, at the great age of ninety-three, and continued to perform the duties of professor till within three years of that time. His works consist of eleven folio volumes, in Latin. Nine of them are composed of treatises on philosophical, theological, and controversial subjects; the others are devoted to an account of the antiquities of Biscay, and furnish the reader with much curious and interesting matter; they are entitled “Biscaya Illustrata.” The part “de Cantabrias antiquitatibus” is a work of merit. He was author of many smaller pieces not inserted in. this collection.

, an eminent French writer, and president in parliament, was born at Paris, Feb. 8, 1685. His great grandfather, Remi Henault, used to be of Lewis XIII.' s party at tennis, and that prince called him “The Baron,” because of a fief which he possessed near Triel. He had three sons, officers of horse, who were all killed at the siege of Casal. John Remi, his father, an esquire, and lord of Moussy, counsellor to the king, and secretary to the council, kept up the honour of the family, and becoming farmer-general, made his fortune. He was honoured with the confidence of the count de Pontchartrain; and, being of a poetical turn, had some share in the criticisms which appeared against Racine’s tragedies. He married the daughter of a rich merchant at Calais, and one of her brothers being president of that town, entertained the queen of England on her landing there in 1689. Another brother, counsellor in the parliament of Metz, and secretary to the duke of Berry, was associated with Mr. Crozat in the armaments, and, dying unmarried, left a great fortune to his sister. Young Renault early discovered a sprightly, benevolent disposition, and his penetration and aptness soon distinguished itself by the success of his studies. Claude de Lisle, father of the celebrated geographer, gave him the same lessons in geography and history which he had before given to the duke of Orleans, afterwards regent. These instructions have been printed in seven volumes, under the title of “Abridgment of Universal History.”

On quitting college, Henault entered the congregation of the oratory, where he soon attached himself to the study of eloquence and, on the death of the abbé Rene, reformer of LaTrappe, he undertook to pronounce his panegyric, which not meeting the approbation of father Massilon, he quitted the oratory after two years, and his father bought for him, of marshal Villeroi, the lieutenance des chasses, and the government of Corbeil. At the marshal’s he formed connections and even intimate friendships with many of the nobility, and passed the early part of his life in agreeable amusements, and in the liveliest company, without having his religious sentiments tainted. He associated with the wits till the dispute between Rousseau and De la Motte soon gave him a disgust for these trifling societies. In 1707 he gained the prize of eloquence at the French academy; and another, next year, at the academy des jeux Floraux. About this time, M. Reaumur, who was his relation, came to Paris, and took lessons in geometry under the same master, Guinee. Henault introduced him to the abbe Bignon, and this was the first step of his illustrious course. In 1713 he brought a tragedy on the stage, under the disguised name of Fuselier. As he was known to the public only by some slighter pieces, “Cornelia the Vestal” met with no better success. He therefore locked it up, without printing. In his old age his passion for these subjects revived, and Mr. Horace Walpole being at Paris* in 1768, and having formed a friendship with him as one of the amiable men of his nation, obtained this piece, and had it printed at his press at Strawberry-hill. In 1751 Mr. Henault, under a borrowed name, brought out a second tragedy, entitled “Marius,” which was well received and printed. The French biographers, however, doubt whether this was not really by M. Catix, whose name it bore.

The agitation which all France felt by Law’s system, and the consequent sending of the parliament into exile, was a trial to the wise policy of the president Henault. His friendship for the first president, De Mesmes, led him to second the views of that great magistrate: he took part inall the negociations, and was animated purely by the public good, without any private advantage. On the death of the cardinal du Bois, in 1723, he succeeded in his place at the French academy. Cardinal Fleury recommended him to succeed himself as director, and he pronounced the eloge of M. de Malezieux.

History was his favourite study not a bare collection of dates, but a knowledge of the laws and manners of nations to obtain which he drew instruction from private conversations, a method he so strongly recommends in his preface. After having thus discussed the most important points of public law, he undertook to collect and publish the result of his inquiries, and he is deservedly accounted the first framer of chronological abridgements; in which, without stopping at detached facts, he attends only to those which form a chain of events that perfect or alter the government and character of a nation, and traces only the springs which exalt or humble a nation, extending or contracting the space it occupies in the world. His work has had the fortune of those literary phenomena, where novelty and merit united excite minds eager after glory, and fire the ardour of young writers to press after a guide whom few can overtake. The first edition of the work, the result of forty years’ reading, appeared in 1744, under the auspices of the chancellor Daguesseau, with the modest title. of “An Essay.” The success it met with surprised the author. He made continual improvements in it, and it has gone through nine editions, and been translated into Italian, English, and German, and even into Chinese. As the best writers are not secure from criticism, and are indeed the only ones that deserve it, the author read to the academy of belles lettres a defence of his abridgement.

In 1755 Henault was chosen an honorary member of the academy of belles lettres, having been before elected into the academies of Nanci, Berlin, and Stockholm. The queen also appointed him superintendant of her house. His natural spnghtliness relieved her from the serious attendance on his private morning lectures. The company of persons most distinguished by their wit and birth, a table more celebrated for the choiceof the guests than its delicacies, the little comedies suggested by wit, and executed by reflection, united at his house all the pleasures of an agreeable literary life. All the members of this ingenious society contributed to render it pleasing, and the president was not inferior to any. He composed three comedies, “La Petite Maison;” “Le Jaloux de Soimeme,” and “Le Ileveil d'Epimenide.” The subject of the last was the Cretan philosopher, who is pretended to have slept twenty-seven years. The queen was particularly pleased with this piece.

He was now in such favour witji her majesty, that, on the place of superintendant becoming vacant by the death of M. Bernard de Conbert, master of requests, and the sum he had paid for it being lost to his family, Henault solicited it in favour of several persons, till at last the queen bestowed it on himself, and consented that he should divide the profits with his predecessor’s widow. On the queen’s death he held the same place under the dauphiness. A delicate constitution made him liable to much illness, which, however, did not interrupt the serenity of his mind. He made several journeys to the waters of Plombieres: in one of these he visited the deposed king Stanislaus at Luneville; and in another accompanied his friend the marquis de Pauliny, ambassador to Switzerland.

In 1763 Henault drew near his end. One morning, after a quiet night, he felt an oppression, which the faculty pronounced a suffocating cough. His confessor being sent to him, he formed his resolution without alarm. He mentioned afterwards, that he recollected having then said to himself, “What do I regret” and called to mind that saying of madame de Sevigne, “I leave here only dying creatures.” He received the sacraments. It was believed the next night would be his last; but by noon the next day he was out of danger. “Now,” said he, “I know what death is. It will not be new to me any more.” He never forgot it during the following seven years of his life, which, like all the rest, were gentle and calm. Full of gratitude for the favours of Providence, resigned to its decrees, offering to the Author of his being a pure and sincere devotion; he felt his infirmities without complaining, and perceived a gradual decay with unabated firmness. He died Dec. 24, 1771, in his 86th year. He married, in 1714, a daughter of M. le Bas de Montargis, keeper of the royal treasure, &c. who died in 1728, without leaving any issue. He treated as his own children, those of his sister, who had married, in 1713, the count de Jonsac, and by him had three sons and two daughters. The two younger sons were killed, one at Brussels, the other at Lafelt, both at the head of the regiments of which they were colonels; the eldest long survived, and was lieutenant-general and governor of Collioure and Port Vendre in Roussillon. The elder daughter married M. le Veneur, count de Tillieres, and died in 1757; the second married the marquis d'Aubeterre, ambassador to Vienna, Madrid, and Rome. In 1800 a very able posthumous work of the president’s was published at Paris, entitled “Histoire Critique de l'Etablissement des Francois dans les Gaules,” 2 vols. 8vo.

, a French poet, was the son of a baker at Paris, and at first a receiver of the taxes at Fores. Then he travelled into Holland and England, and was employed by the superintendant Fouquet, who was his patron. After his return to France, he soon became distinguished as one of the finest geniuses of his age; and gained a prodigious reputation by his poetry. His sonnet on the miscarriage of mad. de Guerchi is looked upon as a master-piece, though it has little intrinsic merit. He also wrote a satirical poem against the minister Colbert, which is reckoned by Boileau among his best pieces. This was written by way of revenging the disgrace and ruin of his patron Fouquet, which Henault ascribed to Colbert. The minister being told of this sonnet, which made a great noise, asked, “Whether there were any satirical strokes in it against the king” and being informed there were not, “Then,” said he, “I shall not mind it, nor shew the least resentment against the author.” Henault was a man who loved to refine on pleasures, and gloried in infidelity. He went to Holland on purpose to visit Spinoza, who did not much esteem him. When, however, sickness and death came to stare him in the face, he became a superstitious convert, and was for receiving the Viaticum or Sacrament, with a halter about his neck, in the middle of his bed-chamber. He died in 1682.

He had printed at Paris, 1670, in 12mo, a small collection of his works, under the title of “Oeuvres Diverses,” or “Miscellanies:' containing sonnets, and letters in verse and prose to Sappho, who was probably the celebrated madam lies Houlieres, to whom he had the honour to be preceptor. Henault had translated three books of Lucretius: but his confessor having raised in him scruples and fears, he burnt this work, so that there remains nothing of it but the first 100 lines, which had been copied by his friends. Voltaire says, that” he would have gained great reputation, had these books that were lost been preserved, and been equal to what we have of this work."

, an eminent mineralogist, whose name has unaccountably been omitted in all our English as well as in the French, biographical collections, was born at Fryberg, or Friburg, in Misnia, in 1679. He appli himself, in the former part of his life, to physic; but quitted practice to devote his time entirely to the study of mineralogy and the various branches connected with it. The place of his birth afforded many facilities in his researches, being situated among those mountains which have been rendered famous by their mines, and which have been wrought with success through a long course of ages. Dr. He? ^kel, therefore, had the most favourable opportunity of studying nature, which he did with assiduity and success; and his superior skill gained him so high and so extens.ve a reputation, that his lectures were not only attended by persons who came from all parts of Germany, but he had also disciples who resorted to him from Sweden and Russia. Augustus II. king of Poland, and elector of Saxony, made him counsellor in the mines at Fryberg, and it was under his direction, that the porcelain manufacture was brought to perfection, which has rendered the town of Meissen so famous. He died in 1744-at Fryberg. His fine cabinet of natural rarities was purchased by Mr. Demidoff, a man of fortune, whose son presented it to the university of Moscow. Dr. HenckePs “Pyritologia” is known in this country by a translation, “History of the Pyrites,” published in 1757, 8vo; and there is a French translation of a posthumous work, entitled “Henckelius in Mineralogia redivivus,” Paris, 1756, 2 vols. 8vo, said to be very accurate.

, a learned professor of divinity in the university of llinteln, in the country of Hesse, was born in January 1616. He was educated at Zell, Lunenburg, and Helmstad; and after having studied at this last four years, was received doctor in philosophy. Having afterwards read some lectures, and presided in public disputations, he gained the friendship in an especial manner of doctor Calixtus and doctor Horneius, two famous divines. He was appointed professor of metaphysics and of Hebrew, in the university of Rinteln, in 1643; and a year and a half after this, being invited to Bardewik, to be superintendant, he discharged the duties of that employment during five years, with so much care and diligence, that duke Augustus of Brunswick would have appointed him &ole inspector of the diocese of Wolfenbuttel, but he returned to Rinteln in 1651, and was made professor of divinity, had a seat in the ecclesiastical consistory, and was also made inspector of the churches in the earldom of Schauemburg. He was a man of great candor and moderation, and ardently wished that there might be an union between the Lutherans and Calvinists, which occasioned his bein^ suspected bv both parties. He was himself a Lutheran, and a man of great erudition. He died at Rinteln June 27, 1671, leaving the following works: 1. “DisserUitio de Majestate civili,” Rintel. 1653, 4to. 2. “De cultu creaturarum &, imaginufn dissert.” ibid. 1663, 4to. 3. “De libertate Arbitrii, imprimis Je concursu causne secundce cum primis,” ibid. 1645, 4to. 4. “De Officio boni Principis piique Subditi,” ibid. 1661, 12mo. 5. “Dissertatio de Pceniteutia lapsorum,” ibid. 1659, 4to. 6. “DC Gratia & Prxdestinatione Dissertatio,” ibid. 1663, 4to. 7. “Compendium S. Theologian,” ibid. 1657, 1671, 8vo. 8. “De Veritate Religionis Christiana?,” ibid. 1667, 12mo. 9. “Institutiones Theologica,” Brunsvigce, 1665, 4to. 10. “Historiae Ecclesiasticoe & Civilis Pars I.” Rinte). 1669, Pars II. 1670, Pars III. 1674, 4to. 11. “Disputationes de Mysterio S. S. Trinitatis: de Confessione Augustini, de fide & operibus,” &c.

, an English gentleman of parts and learning, was the son of sir R ->bert Henley, of the Grange in Hampshire, descended from the Henleys of Henley in Somersetshire; of whom sir Andrew Henley was created a baronet in 1660. This sir Andrew had a son of the same name, famous for his frolics and profusion. His seat, called Bramesley, near Hartley-row, in the county of Southampton, was very large and magnifirent. He had a great estate in that and the other western counties, which was reduced by him to a very small one, or to nothing. Sir Robert Henley of the Grange, his uncle, was a man of good sense and osconomy. He held the master’s place of the King’s-bench court, on the pleas side, many years; and by the profits of it, and good management, left his son, Anthony Henley, of the Grange, of whom we now treat, possessed of a very fine fortune, above 3000l. a-year, part of which arose from the ground-rents of LincolnVinnfields. Anthony Henley was bred at Oxford, where he distinguished himself by an early relish for polite learning. He made a great proficiency in the study of the classics, and particularly the ancient poets, by which he formed a good taste for poetry, and wrote verses with success. Upon his coming to London, he was presently received into the friendship and familiarity of persons of the first rank for quality and wit, particularly the earls of Dorset and Sunclerland. The latter had especially a great esteem and affection for him; and as every one knew what a secret influence he had on affairs in king William’s court, it was thought strange that Mr. Henley, who had a genius for any thing great, as well as any thing gay, did not rise in the state, where he would have shone as a politician, no Jess than he did at Will’s and Tom’s as a wit. But the Muses and pleasure had engaged him. He had something of the character of Tibullus, and, except his extravagance, was possessed of all his other qualities; his indolence, his gallantry, his wit, his humanity, his. generosity, his learning, his taste for letters. There was hardly a contemporary author, who did not experience his bounty. They soon found him out, and attacked him with their dedications; which, though he knew how to value as they deserved, were always received as well as the addressers could wish; and his returns were made so handsomely, that the manner was as grateful as the present.

There was, for a long time, a strict friendship between /Mr. Henley and Richard Norton of Sonthwick in Hampshire, es-q. who was often chosen to represent that county. This gentleman had the same passion for the Muses; and the similarity there was in their pleasures and studies, made that friendship the more firm and affectionate. They both lived to a good age before they married, and perhaps the breach that happened between them was one reason of their entering both into the state of matrimony much about the same time. Mr. Henley married Mary youngest daughter and co-heiress of the lion. Peregrine Bertie, sister to the countess Pawlet, with whom he had 30,000l. fortune, and by her he left several children. Of these Anthony, the eldest, died in 1745; and Robert, the second son, was created baron Henley and lord keeper of the great seal in 1760; became lord chancellor in 1761 and earl of Northington in 1764.

On becoming a husband and a father, Mr. Henley relinquished his gay mode of life, and was chosen a member of parliament for Andover in 1698; after which he was constantly the representative for either Weymouth, or Melcombe Regis, in the county of Dorset. He was always a zealous assertor of liberty in the house of commons, or at least of what went by that name; and on one occasion moved in the house for an address to her majesty, that she would be graciously pleased to give Mr. Benjamin Hoadly some dignity in the church, for strenuously asserting and vindicating the principles of that revolution which is the foundation of our present establishment in church anci state. This made him odious to the Tory party, and some impotent endeavours were used to have him laid aside in the queen’s last parliament; but he carried his election both at his corporation, and afterwards in the house of commons.

Mr. Henley wrote several compositions, though he did not put his name to them; and very frequently assisted the writers of the “Tatler” and “Medley.” No man wrote with more wit and more gaiety. He affected a simplicity in his writings, and in particular was extremely happy in touching the manners and passions of parents and children, masters and servants, peasants and tradesmen, using their expressions so naturally and aptly, that he has very fre quently disguised by it both his merit and character.

His most darling diversion was music, of which he was entirely master; his opinion was the standard of taste; and after the Italian music was introduced, no opera could be sure of applause, till it had received his approbation. He was such an admirer of Purcell’s music, and the English manner, that he did not immediately relish the Italian; but, practice reconciling his ear, he was at last much attached to it. Whether he composed himself, we know not; but he sang with art, and played on several instruments with judgment. He wrote several poems for music, and almost finished the opera of “Alexander” set by Purcell. Garth, in his preface to the Dispensary, has highly praised Henley, who was his friend; and his death, which happened in 1711, was very generally lamented.

, better known by the appellation of “Orator Henley,” has furnished the world with memorials of himself, in a work entitled “Oratory Transactions,” which are in some respects worth preserving. He was born Tit. Melton Mowbray, Leicestershire, Aug. 3, 1692. His father, the rev. Simon Henley, and his grandfather by his mother’s side (John Dowel, M. A.) were both vicars of that parish. His grandfather by his father’s side, John Henley, M. A. was likewise a clergyman, rector of Salmonby and Thetford in Lincolnshire. % He was educated among the dissenters, and conformed at the restoration. Henley was bred up first in the free-school of Melton, under Mr. Daffy, a diligent and expert grammarian. From this school he was removed to that of Okeham in Rutland, under Mr. Wright, eminent for his knowledge of the Latin, Greek, and Hebrew languages. About 1709 he entered of St. John’s-college, Cambridge; where, on his examination by Dr. Gower then master, Dr. Lambert, Dr. Edmundson, and others, he was, he tells us, particularly approved. While an undergraduate at St. John’s, he wrote a letter to the “Spectator,” dated from that college, Feb. 3, 1712, signed Peter de Quir, abounding with quaintness and local wit. He began here to be very soon uneasy; he was more inclined to dispute than to assent to any points of doctrine, and already fancied himself able to reform the whole system of academical education.

After he had commenced bachelor of arts, he was first desired by the trustees of the school in Melton to assist in, and then to take the direction of, that school; which he increased and raised from a declining to a flourishing condition. He established here, he tells us, a practice of improving elocution, by the public speaking of passages in the classics, morning and afternoon, as well as orations, &c. Here he was invited by a letter from the rev. Mr. Newcome, to be a candidate for a fellowship in St. John’s; but as he had long been absent, and therefore lessened his personal interest, he declined appearing for it. Here likewise he began his “Universal Grammar,” and finished ten languages, with dissertations prefixed, as the most ready introduction to any tongue whatever. In the beginning of this interval he wrote a poem on “Esther,” which, was approved by the town, and well received, as indeed it amply deserved. It is preceded by a learned preface, in which he discovers an intimate knowledge of Oriental studies, and some learned etymologies from the Persic, Hebrew, and Greek, concerning the name and person of Abasuerus, whom he makes to be Xerxes. On the occasion of his “Grammars,” Dr. Hutchinson wrote him a complimentary letter. He was ordained a deacon by Dr. Wake, then bishop of Lincoln; and after having taken his degree of M. A. was admitted to priest’s orders by Dr. Gibson, his successor in that see. He did not long consent to rest in the country, but, impatient to obtain wealth and fame in London, resigned his offices of master and curate, and entered upon his new career.

In town, he produced several publications; as, a translation of Pliny’s “Epistles,” of several works of abbe Vertot, of Montfaucon’s “Italian Travels” in folio, and many other books. His principal patron was the earl of Macclesfield, who gave him a benefice in the country, the value of which to a resident would have been above 80/ a year; he had likewise a lecture in the city; and, according to his own account, preached more chanty-sermons about town, was more numerously followed, and raised more for the poor children, than any other preacher, however dignified or distinguished. This popularity, with his enterprising spirit, and introducing regular action into the pulpit, were “the true causes,” he says, “why some obstructed his rising in town, from envy, jealousy, and a disrelish of those who are not qualified to be complete spaniels. For there was no objection to his being tossed into a 'country benefice by the way of the sea, as far as Galilee of the Gentiles (like a pendulum swinging one way as far as the other.)” Not being able to obtain preferment in London, and not choosing to return into the country, he struck out the plan of his Lectures, or Orations, which he puffed with an astonishing vulgarity of arrogance, as may be seen in the following specimen:

This strange man struck medals, which he dispersed as tickets to his subscribers: a star rising to the meridian, with this motto, “ad summa;” and below, *' Inveniam viam, aut faciam.“Each audkor paid Is. His audience was generally composed of the lowest ranks; and it is well known, that he once collected a vast number of shoemakers, by announcing that he could teach them a speedy mode of operation in their business, which proved only to be, the making of shoes bv cutting off the tops of readymade boots. His motto on this occasion was,” Onine majus continet in se minus.“He was author of a weekly paper of unintelligible nonsense, called” The Hyp Doctor,“for which secret service he had 100l. a year given him, and which was intended to counteract the effect of the” Craftsman,“a proof how little his patron sir Robert Walpole knew of literary assistance. Henley used, every Saturday, to print an advertisement in” The Daily Advertiser," containing an account of the subjects on which he intended to discourse in the ensuing evening, at his Oratory near Lincoln’s-inn-fields. The advertisement had a sort of motto before it, which was generally a sneer at some public transaction of the preceding week . Henley died Oct. 14, 1756. In his account of himself he assumes the credit of considerable learning, and a strong zeal for knowledge, which at one time certainly was the case, but his talents became miserably perverted, if we may judge from the specimens we have seen of his compositions. Both his style and his thoughts are low; vanity and censoriousness are the most conspicuous qualities, and his manners, become gross and ferocious, corresponded with his writings.

Henley, says a late judicious reviewer of his life, “was a scholar of great acquirements, and of no mean genius; hardy and inventive; eloquent and witty; he might have been an ornament to literature, which he made ridiculous; and the pride of the pulpit, which he so egregiously disgraced; but having blunted and worn out that interior feeling, which is the instinct of the good man, and the wisdom of the wise, there was no balance in his passions, and the decorum of life was sacrificed to its selfishness. He condescended to live on the follies of the people, and his sordid nature had changed him till he crept ‘ licking the dust with the serpent’.”

, a learned and laborious historian of the sixteenth century, was a native of Germany, a disciple of Melancthon, and became distinguished by his genealogical researches. His principal works are, 1. “Genealogiae Familiarum Saxonicarum,” Hamburgh, 1596, fol. 2. “Theatrum Genealogicum omnium Ætatum et Monarchiarum Familias complectens,” Magdeburgh, 1598, fol. 7 vols. in four, which Clement considers as of great rarity, and indeed it is very difficult to be found complete. It contains the Jewish families from Adam to the destruction of Jerusalem the origin of all other nations, and the families of the second and third monarchies the families of ancient Greece and Italy, and those of all the principal modern kingdoms.

, the bishop of Lisieux, so justly celebrated for his humanity at the time of the dreadful massacre of St. Bartholomew, was born at St. Quintin in Picardy, in 1497. He was confessor to Henry II. of France, and bishop of Lodeve. In the reign of Charles IX. when the royal lieutenant of his province communicated to him the order to massacre all the protestants in the diocese of Lisieux, he signed a formal and official opposition to the order; for which striking act of clemency, it is wonderful to say, he was not censured or persecuted by the bigotry of the court. The beauty of virtue exacted respect. He died in 1577, universally respected, having gained over more by his mildness than any bigot by his fury.

, or Blind Harry, are the names given to a Scotch poet who lived in the fifteenth century, but of whom there are few memorials that can be relied on. It is conjectured that he wrote his celebrated “Actis & Deidis of Shyr Willam Wallace,” about 1446, and that he was then an old man. No surname is known; which belonged to Henry, nor is any thing known of his parentage or education. He discovers some knowledge in astronomy, in classical history, in the Latin and French languages, and in divinity; and some think he belonged to one or other of the religious orders, but this in a man blind from his infancy seems very improbable. He was a kind of travelling bard, visited the middle and south partsof Scotland, and probably the court of Scotland, and the great families. Wallace, his hero, was put to death in 1305, and Henry is supposed to have been born half a century later, but not too late for acquiring many particulars proper for his narrative, and it appears that he consulted with the descendants of some of Wallace’s contecaporaries. Besides this, he informs us that he followed very strictly a hook of great authority, a complete history of Wallace, written in Latin, partly hy John Blair and partly by Thomas Gray, both whom he mentions particularly, but no such work exists, nor can we tell whether he borrowed his many anachronisms and mistakes of persons and places from this work, or whether they were owing to defects in his own memory. Henry was blind from his birth; and that he should have acquired the knowjedge imputed to him, is much more wonderful than that he should be misled by traditionary reports. As he was blind, he fails in the descriptive parts of his poems, but for the same reason his invention is perpetually at work, and for matters of fact, he gives us all the wonders of romance. Many of his events never happened, and those which did are misplaced in point of time, or greatly exaggerated. His admirers are ready to allow that it is now impossible to distinguish between what is true and what is false in many of Henry’s relations but this can only be the case where the relation is all his own where we can appeal to other authorities, we frequently find him more erroneous than can easily be accounted for. A comparison has been formed between Henry’s “Wallace,” and Harbour’s “Bruce,” which terminates decidedly in Barbour’s favour. The “Bruce,” says an elegant critic, “is evidently the work of a politician as well as poet. The characters of the king, of his brother, of Douglas, and of the earl of Moray, are discriminated, and their separate talents always employed with judgment; so that every event is prepared and rendered probable by the means to which it is attributed; whereas the life of Wallace is a mere romance, in which the hero hews down whole squadrons with his single arm, and is indebted for every victory to his own muscular strength. Both poems are filled with descriptions of battles; but in those of Barbour our attention is successively directed to the cool intrepidity of king Robert, to the brilliant rashness of Edward Bruce, or to the enterprizing stratagems of Douglas; while in Henry we find little more than a disgusting picture of revenge, hatred, and blood.” As a poet, however, he has considerable merit, and the numerous editions through which his “Wallace” has passed, affords a sufficient proof of his popularity during all that period, when his language would be understood and the nature of his narrative be acceptable. The only manuscript known of this poem, and from which all th printed copies have been taken, is now in the Advocates’ library at Edinburgh, and bears date 1488. The first printed edition was that of Edinburgh, 1570; but the best and more correct is that of the Morisons of Perth, 1790, 3 vols. 12mo.

, a good Hebrew scholar, was born 1692 at Verdun. He was tutor to the son of M. Joly de Fleury, procurator-general to the parliament of Paris, appointed professor of Hebrew at the royal college in 1723, and discharged that office with credit till 1752, when he was killed in the street, February 4, by the fall of an entablature. He left a small abridgement of the Hebrew grammar, folio, which is useful but rather obscure; and a good edition of Vatable’s Bible, 2 vols. fol.

, an able divine, a Carmelite, born at Ath in Flanders, taught theology with reputation, and passed through the most important offices of his order. He made a long stay at Rome in the beginning of the pontificate of Clement XI. by whom he was much esteemed, and died in a very advanced age at Cavee, a Carmelite convent, about 1720. His chief work is a complete system of moral theology, entitled “Ethica amoris,” Liege, 1709, 3 vols. fol. in which he strongly opposes the relaxed casuists, but supports the principles of the Ultramontanes. He has also left another theological work, where he explains the first part of the Sum of St. Thomas, fol. This last is very scarce. “Molinismus profligatus,” 2 vols. 8vo; “Artes Jesuiticse in sustinendis novitatibus laxitatibusque Sociorum;” the best edition is 1710. “Tuba magna mirum clangens sonum de necessitate reformandi Societatem Jesu, per Liberium Candidum.” This is a collection of pieces; the best edition is 1717, in two thick vols. 12mo. These two works are dedicated to pope Clement XI. Henry de St. Ignace openly declared himself, in his writings, a friend to the cause and sentiments of M. Arnauld and P. Quesnel.

, an ingenious printer, was born in the neighbourhood of Aberdeen, in 1710, which place he left at the age of fourteen, and coming to London became Connected with the celebrated projector of the Gentleman’s Magazine, Edward Cave, whose sister Mary he married in 1736. Soon after his marriage, he began business at Reading, where he established a provincial paper for the use of that town, and of Winchester, where he had likewise a printing-office. In 1754 we find his name used in the Gentleman’s Magazine, as a partner with Cave at St. John’s Gate, where he continued to reside for many years with great reputation: and he possessed the freehold property of the Gate and its appurtenances at the time of his death, which happened at Lewisham, June 5, 1792.

Besides taking an active part in-the management of the Gentleman’s Magazine for more than half a century, his separate literary labours were such as do credit to his judgment and industry. The only printed volume that we recollect, which bears his name, was a compilation, while he lived at Reading, under the patronage of Dr. Bolton, dean of Carlisle, entitled, “Twenty Discourses abridged from archbishop Tillotson, c.” of which a second edition was published in 1763, and a fourth in 1779. Those useful and popular publications which describe the curiosities of Westminster abbey, St. Paul’s, and the Tower, c. were originally compiled by Mr. Henry, and were improved by him through many successive impressions. He wrote also “The Complete English Farmer, or a Practical System of Husbandry,” a science which he cultivated on his farm at Beckingham in Kent; and “An historical Account of all the Voyages round the world, performed by English navigators,” 1774, 4 vols. 8vo, to which he afterwards added two more, including capt. Cook’s voyages all remarkable for being comprehensive, perspicuous, and accurate. To the Gentleman’s Magazine he was a frequent correspondent on a variety of subjects. He was a man of sound understanding, well acquainted with the literary history of his time, and agreeably communicative of what he knew.

, an eminent nonconformist, was born at Whitehall in 1631: his father, John Henry, was page of the back-stairs to the king’s second son, James duke of York. About twelve years old he was admitted into Westminster-school, under Mr. Thomas Vincent, then usher; a man very diligent in his business, but who grieved so anuch at the dulness of many of his scholars, that he fell into a consumption, and was said to be “killed with false Latin.” In the regular time, he was taken into the upper school under Dr. Busby, with whom he was a great favourite; and was employed by him, xvith some others, in collecting materials for that excellent Greek grammar which he afterwards published. Soon after the civil wars broke out, there was a daily morning lecture set up at the abbey church by the assembly of divines. His pious mother requested Dr. Busby to give her son leave to attend this, and likewise took him with her every Thursday to Mr. Case^s lecture, at St. Martin’s: she took him also to the jnonthly fasts at St. Margaret’s, where the House of commons attended; and where the service was carried on with great strictness and solemnity, from eight in the morning till four in the evening: in these, as he himself has expressed it, he had often “sweet meltings of soul.”

He was elected from Westminster to Christ-church, Oxford, where he was admitted a student in 1648, and vigorously applied himself to the proper studies of the place. When he had completed his master’s degree, he was entertained in the family of judge Puleston, at Emeral in Flintshire, to take the care of his sons, and to preach at Worthenbury. He was ordained to the work of the ministry in this place in 1657, according to the known directory of the assembly of divines, and the common usage of the presbyterians. He soon after married the only daughter and heiress of Mr. Daniel Matthews, of Broad-oak, near Whitchurch, by whom he became possessed of a competent estate. When the king and episcopacy were restored, he refused to conform, was ejected, and retired with his family to Broad-oak. Here, and in this neighbourhood, he spent the remainder of his life, about twenty-eight years, relieving the poor, employing the iiuiustrious, instructing the ignorant, and exercising every opportunity of doing good. His moderation in his nonconformity was eminent and exemplary; and upon all' occasions he bore testimony against uncharitable and schismatical separation. In churchgovernment, he desired and wished for abp. Usher’s reduction of episcopacy. He thought it lawful to join in the common-prayer in the public assemblies; which, during the time of his silence and restraint, he constantly attended with his family, with reverence and devotion.

Upon the whole, his character seems to have been highly exemplary and praiseworthy; and it may be asked, as Dr. Busby asked him, “What made him a nonconformist” The reason which he principally insisted on was, that he could *not submit to be re-ordained, which was required of those who had been ordained only according to the presbyterian form. When named in the commission of the peace, it was as Philip Henry, esq. He was, however, so well satisfied with his call to the ministry, and solemn ordination to it, by the laying on the hands of the presbytery, that he durst not do that which looked like a renunciation of it as null and sinful, and would at least be a tacit invalidating and condemning of all his administrations. Despairing to see an accommodation, he kept a meeting at Broad-oak, and preached to a congregation in a barn. He died June 24, 1696. His “Life” was written by his son, the subject of our next article, and published in 1699. The piety, Christian moderation, and good sense, which pervade the whole, render it one of the most interesting pieces of biography of the seventeenth century, and induced Dr. Wordsworth to reprint the whole in his “Ecclesiastical Biography,” with some useful notes

, an eminent dissenting teacher, and a voluminous writer, was the son of the foregoing, and born in 1662. He continued under his father’s eye and care till about eighteen; and had the greatest advantages of his education from him, both in divine and human literature. He was very expert in the learned languages, especially in the Hebrew, which had been made familiar to him from his childhood; and from first to last, the study of the scriptures was his most delightful employment. For further improvement, he was placed in 16SOat an academy at Islington. He was afterwards entered in Gray’s-inn, for the study of the law where he went on with his usual diligence, and became acquainted with the civil law, and the municipal law of his own country. His proficiency was soon observed; and it was the opinion of those who knew him, that his great industry, quick apprehension, tenacious memory, and ready utterance, would render him very eminent in that profession. But he adhered to his first resolution of making divinity his study and business, and attended the most celebrated preachers in town; and, as an instance of his judgment, was best pleased with Dr. Stillingfleet for his serious practical preaching; and with Dr. Tillotson for his admirable sermons against popery, at his lectures at St. Lawrence Jewry. In 1686, he returned into the country, and preached several times as a candidate for the ministry with such success and approbation, that the congregation at Chester invited him to be their pastor. To this place he was ordained in 1687, where he lived about twenty-five years. He had several calls from London, which he constantly declined but was at last prevailed ou to accept a very important and unanimous one from Hackney. He died in 1714, at Nantwich, of an apoplectic fit, upon a journey, and was interred in Trinity-church, in Chester.

He was universally lamented; every pulpit of the Dissenters gave notice of the great breach that was made in their church; every sermon was a funeral sermon for Mr. Henry. The writings he published, besides several single sermons, are, 1. “A Discourse concerning the Nature of Schism,” 1689. 2. “The Life of Mr. Philip Henry,” 1696. 3. “A Scripture Catechism,” 1702. 4. “Family Hymns,” 1702. 5. “The Communicant’s Companion,” 1704. 6. “Four Discourses against Vice and Immorality,” 1705. 7. “A Method for Prayer,” 1710. 8. “Direcsions for daily Communion with God,” 1712. 9. “Expotition of the Bible,” 5 vols. folio, of which editions continue still to be multiplied. Mr. Henry however had not completed the work at the time of his death; and the last volume, from “Romans” to “Revelations,” was written, with some assistance from his Mss. by Messrs. Evans, Browne, Mayo, Bays, Rosewell, Harris, Atkinson, Smith, Tong (his biographer), Wright, Merrell, Hill, Reynolds, and Billingsley, all Dissenting divines. His other works still retain their popularity.

, author of a History of England on a new plan, which has been generally and highly approved, was the son of James Henry, a farmer, at Muirtown in the parish of St. Ninian’s, Scotland, and of Jean Galloway his wife, of Stirlingshire. He was born on Feb. 18, 1718; and, having early resolved to devote himself to a literary profession, was educated first under a Mr. John Nicholson, at the parish school of St. Ninian’s, and for some time at the grammar-school at Stirling. He completed his academical studies at the university of Edinburgh, and afterwards became master of the grammar-school of Annan. He was licensed to preach on the 27th of March, 1746, and was the first licentiate of the presbytery of Annan, after its erection into a separate presbytery. Soon after he received a call from a congregation oi presbyterian dissenters at Carlisle, where he was ordained in November 1748. In this station he remained twelve years, and, on the 13th of August, 1760, became pastor of a congregation in Berwick upon Tweed. Here, in 1763, he married the daughter of Mr. Balderston, a surgeon, and though he had no children, enjoyed to the end of his life a large share of domestic happiness. In 1768, he was removed from Berwick, to be one of the ministers of Edinburgh, and was minister of the church of the New Grey Friars, from that time till November 1776. He then became colleague-minister in the old church, and in that station remained till his death, which happened in November, 1790. The degree of doctor in divinity was conferred on him by the university of Edinburgh, in 1770; and in 1774, he was unanimously chosen moderator of the general assembly of the church of Scotland, and is the only person on record who obtained that distinction the first time he was a member of the assembly.

It is thought to have been about 1763 that Dr. Henry first conceived the idea of his History of Great Britain the plan of which is indisputably his own. In every period it arranges, under seven distinct heads, or chapters, 1. The civil and military history of Great Britain 2. The history of religion 3. The history of our constitution, government, laws, and courts of justice 4. The history of learning, of learned men, and of the chief seminaries of learning 5. The history of arts; 6. The history of commerce, shipping, money, &c. and 7. The history of manners, customs, &c. Under these heads, which extend the province of an historian greatly beyond its usual limits, and compel him to attend to all these points uniformly and regularly, every thing curious or interesting in the history of any country may be comprehended. The first volume of his History, in qiprto, was published in 1771, the second in 1774, the third in 1777, the fourth in 1781, and the fifth (which brings down the history to the accession of Henry VII.) in 1785. The sixth volume, a posthumous >vork, the greater part of which he had prepared for publication before his death, appeared in 17S'3. Dr. Henry published his volumes originally at his own risk, and suffered for some time from the malignity of uniair attacks from his own country. The English critics were more liberal, and very early allowed to his work that merit which has since been universally acknowledged. In 1786, when an octavo edition was intended, Dr. Henry conveyed the property to Messrs. Cadell and Strahan, for the sum of 1000l. reserving to himself what remained unsold of the quarto edition. His profits on the whole, including this sum, he found to amount to 3, 300l. a strong proof of the intrinsic merit of the work. The prosecution of this history had been his favourite object for almost thirty years of his life. He had naturally a sound constitution, with a more equal and a larger portion of animal spirits than is commonly possessed by literary men. From 1789 his bodily strength was sensibly impaired, yet he persisted steadily in preparing his sixth volume.

Henry was naturally fond of society, and few men enjoyed it more perfectly, or were capable of contributing so much to its pleasures. Though his literary pursuits might have been supposed to have given him sufficient employment, he always found time for social conversation, for the offices of friendship, and for objects of public utility. Of the public societies in Edinburgh he was always one of the most useful and indefatigable members; and he conversed with the ardour, and even the gaiety of youth, long after his bodily strength had yielded to the infirmities of age. His library he left to the magistrates of Linlithgow, &c. under such regulations as he conceived would tend to form a library calculated to diffuse knowledge and literature in the country. Both as a man, and as an author, he has left a character which will, and ought to be esteemed. A history of England, “from the death of Henry VIII. to the accession of James VI.” was published by James Pettit Andrews, as a “continuation” of Dr. Henry’s, and professedly on the same plan. But although this work, proceeding from a well-known lover of anecdotes, is not unamusing, a continuation upon Henry’s more serious plan is yet wanting to complete what would be a truly valuable series of English history.

, a Scotch poet of the reign of Henry VIII. is unknown, except by his works. Mr. Henry styles him chief school-master of Dunfermline; and lord Hailes conjectures that he officiated as preceptor in the Benedictine convent. His “Fabils” were printed at Edinburgh by Andrew Hart, in 1621, and there is a ms copy in the Harleian library, dated 1571, collected, as Mr. Pinkerton thinks, near a century after Henryson’s death, which of course removes him to a more distant period than the reign of Henry VIII. These “Fabils” are likewise in Bannatyne’s Mss. His “Testament of Faire Creseide,” the subject of which was suggested by the perusal of Chaucer’s “Troilus and Creseide,” occurs in the common editions of Chaucer’s Works. His oenius seems to have been well adapted to didactic poetry; and in point of versification and fancy, he is not inferior to any of his contemporaries. Very favourable specimens of his talents may be seen in our authorities.

, a learned Dominican, a native of France, was born about 1499, and went into Portugal in his infancy, and was there educated. He afterwards entered into the Dominican order at Louvain, where he died in 1566. He published some of the works of Euthymius Zigubenus, QScumenius, and Arethras, but is best known for the aid he contributed in publishing a beautiful edition of the Vulgate Bible, printed by Plantin in 1565, 5 vols, 12mo, and the Louvain Bible of 1547, reprinted 1583. The faculty of Louvain, who had engaged his assistance in these editions, employed him also on a less honourable commission, to collect from the works of Erasmus all erroneous and scandalous propositions, as they were called, that they might be laid before the council of Trent. This commission he executed in the true spirit of expurgatorial bigotry.

, an eminent linguist, was born at Hamstocks, in Haddingtonshire, Scotland, July 14, 1573. His father, a disciple of John Knox, was rector of that place. The son was educated at St. Andrew’s, where, for some reason, he embraced the popisfi religion, and went to France and Italy. He afterwards travelled through Turkey, Persia, Syria, and most other countries of the East, devoting his attention principally to the study of their languages: on his return he entered into a convent of Minims in. the neighhourhood of Avignon, which he exchanged after some time for the monastery of the Holy Trinity at Rome, belonging to the same order. His fame as a linguist having reached the ears of pope Paul V. he appointed him librarian of Oriental books and Mss. in the Vatican, in which office he remained six years. He is said to have been at Venice in 1620, whither he had gone with an intention of translating from Hebrew, Syriac, and Chaldaic writings, and is supposed to have died there in that or the following year. Wonders are told of his proficiency in languages; we may allow that it was great for his time, but must hesitate in believing that he knew seventy-two languages. Of his works, Dempster mentions “A Hebrew and Chaldaic Dictionary, and an Arabic Grammar,” forming one volume, quarto, printed at Rome in 1591. The rest of his works, enumerated by Mackenzie, are translations from the Hebrew manuscripts, most of them of legendary authority, and not printed.

, a miscellaneous writer, and an imitator of the periodical essays of queen Anne’s reign, was born in Scotland in 1690, and in 1711 began a periodical paper called The Tatler, by Donald Macstaff of the North,“which extended to thirty numbers. They are evidently the production of a man of vigorous native powers, and of a, mind not meanly stored with ancient learning, and familiar with the best writings of the moderns; but they gave much offence, by the description of known characters, and by the personal satire which the author employed, with no gentle or delicate hand, on some men of note, both in the ecclesiastical and civil departments, among his countrymen. Mr. Hepburn, who had studied the civil law in Holland, became a member of the faculty of advocates at Edinburgh in 1712, and died soon after very young. Lord Hailes justly termed him” ingenii praecocis etpraefervidi.“In the concluding paper of his” Tatler“he announced, as then in the press, a translation of sir George Mackenzie’s” Idea eloquentia? Forensis;“and in the Advocates’ library is a small volume containing two treatises of his writing; the one entitled” Demonstratio quod Deus sit,“and the ether, Dissertatio de Scriptis Pitcarnianis.” The former of these is neatly and methodically written; the latter is somewhat jejune in point of matter, and too lavish of general panegyric.

, the founder of the sect of Heraciiteans, was born at Ephesus. He discovered an early propensity to the study of wisdom, and, by a diligent attention to the operations of his own mind, soon became sensible of his ignorance, and desirous of instruction. He was initiated into the mysteries of the Pythagorean doctrine by Xenophanes and Hippasus, and afterwards incorporated them into his own system. His fellow citizens solicited him to undertake the supreme magistracy; but, on account of their dissolute manners, he declined it in favour of his brother. When he was, soon afterwards, seen playing with the boys in the court of the temple of Diana, he said to those who expressed their surprize that he was not better employed, “Why are you surprised that I pass my time with children? It is surely better than governing the corrupt Ephesians.” He was displeased with them for banishing from their city so wise and able a man as Hermodorus; and plainly told them that he perceived they were determined not to keep among them any man who had more merit than the rest. His natural temper being splenetic and melancholy, he despised the ignorance and follies of mankind, shunned all public intercourse with the world, and devoted himself to retirement and contemplation. He made choice of a mountainous retreat for his place of residence, and lived upon the natural produce of the earth, Darius, king of Persia, having heard of his fame, invited him to his court; but he treated the invitation with contempt. His diet, and manner of life, at length brought him into a dropsy; upon which this philosopher, who was always fond of enigmatical language, returning into the city, proposed to the physicians the following question “Is it possible to bring dry ness out of moisture?” Receiving no relief from them, he attempted to cure himself by shutting himself up in a close stable of oxen; but it is doubtful how far he succeeded, for the cause and manner of his death are differently related by different writers. He flourished, as appears from his preceptors and contemporaries, about the sixty-ninth olympiad, B. C. 504. Sixty years are said to have been the term of his hfe. It has been a tale commonly received, that Heraclitirs was perpetually shedding tears on account of the vices of mankind, and particularly of his countrymen. But the story, which probably took its rise from the gloomy severity of his temper, ought to be ranked, like that of the perpetual laughing of Detnocritus, among the Greek fables. He wrote a treatise “On Nature,” of which only a few fragments remain. Througb the natural cast of his mind, and perhaps too through a desire of concealing unpopular tenets under the disguise of a figurative and intricate diction, his discourses procured him the name of the “Obscure Philosopher.” Neither critics norphilosopbers were able to explain his writings; and they remained in the temple of Diana, where he himself had deposited them for the use of the learned, till they were made public by Crates, or, as Tatian relates the matter, till the poet Euripides, who frequented the temple of Diana y committing the doctrines and precepts of Heraclitus to memory, accurately repeated them. From the fragments of this work, which are preserved by Sextus Empiricus, it appears to have been written in prose, which makes Tatian’s account the less credible. Brucker, to whom we refer, has given as good an account of Heraclitus’s systera as his obscure manner will permit. His sect was probably very soon extinct, as we find no traces of its existence after the death of Socrates, which may be ascribed, in part, to the insuperable obscurity of the writings of Heraclitus, but chiefly to the splendour of the Platonic system, by which it was superseded.

, French, Didier Herault, a counsellor of the parliament of Paris, has given good proofs of uncommon learning by very different works. His “Adversaria” appeared in 1599; which little book, if the “Scaligerana” may be credited, he repented having published. His notes on Tertullian’s “Apology,” on “Minutius Fe&­lix,” and on “Arnobius,” have been esteemed. He also wrote notes on Martial’s “Epigrams.” He disguised himself under the name of David Leidhresserus, to write a political dissertation on the independence of kings, some time after the death of Henry IV. He had a controversy with Salmasius “de jure Attico ac Romano;” but did not live to finish what he had written on that subject. What he he had done, however, was printed in 1650. He died in June 1649. Guy Patin says, that “he was looked upon as a very learned man, both in the civil law and in polite literature, and wrote with great facility on any subject he pitched on.” Daille, speaking of such protestant writers as condemned the execution of Charles I. king of England, quotes the “Pacifique Royal en deuil,” by Heranlt. This author, son to our Desiderius Heraldus, was a minister in Normandy, when he was called to the service of the Walloon-church of London under Charles I. but was so zealous a royalist, that he was forced to fly to France, to escape the fury of the commonwealth’s-men. He returned to England after the restoration, and resumed his ancient employment in the Walloon-church at London: some time after which he obtained a canonry in the cathedral of Canterbury, and enjoyed it till his death.

, an eminent Orientalist of France, was born at Paris Dec. 14, 1625. When he had gone through classical literature and philosophy, he applied himself to the Oriental languages; and especially to the Hebrew, for the sake of understanding the original text of the Old Testament. After a continual application for several years, he took a journey to Rome, thinking that conversing with Armenians, and other eastern people who frequented that city, would make him perfect in the knowledge of their languages.

Here he was particularly esteemed by the cardinals Barberini and Grimaldf, and contracted a firm friendship with Lucas Holstenius and Leo Allatius. Upon his return from this journey, in which he did not spend above a year and a half, Fouquet invited him to his house, and settled on him a pension of 1500 livres. The disgrace of this minister, which happened soon after, did not hinder Herbelot from being preferred to the place of interpreter for the eastern languages; because, in reality, there was nobody else so fit for it: for Voltaire says, “he was the first among the French who understood them.” Some years after he took a second journey into Italy, where he acquired so great a reputation, that persons of the highest distinction for their rank and learning solicited his acquaintance. The grand duke of Tuscany, Ferdinand II. whom he had the honour to see first at Leghorn, gave him extraordinary marks of his esteem had frequent conversations with him; and made him promise to visit him at Florence. Herbelot arrived there July 2, 1666, and was received by a secretary of state, who conducted him to a house prepared for him, where he was entertained with great magnificence, and had a chariot kept for his use, at the expence of the grand duke. These were very uncommon honours, but one remained much more grateful to a man of literature; a library being at that time exposed to sale at Florence, the duke desired Herbelot to see it, to examine the Mss. in the Oriental languages, and to select and value the best: and when this was done, the generous prince made him a present of them.

The distinction with which he was received by the duke of Tuscany, taught France to know his merit, which had hitherto been but little regarded; and he was afterwards recalled and encouraged by Colbert, who encouraged every thing that might do honour to his country. The grand tluke was very unwilling to let him go, and even refused to consent, till he had seen the express order of the minister for his return. When he came to France, the king often did him the honour to converse with him, and gave him a pension of 1500 livres. During his stay in Italy, he began his “Bibliotheque Orientale, or Universal Dictionary, containing whatever related to the knowledge of the eastern world;” and finished it in France. This work, equally curious and profound, comprises the substance of a great number of Arabic, Persian, and Turkish books which he had read; and informs us of an infinite number of particulars unknown before in Europe. He wrote it at first in Arabic, and Colbert had a design to print it at the Louvre, with a set of types cast on purpose. But after the death of that minister, this resolution was waved; and Herbelot translated his work into French, in order to render it more universally useful. He committed it to the press, but had not the satisfaction to see the impression finished; for he died Dec. 8, 1695, and it was not published till 1697, folio. What could not be inserted in this work was digested by him under the title of “Anthologie:” but this was never published, nor his Turkish, Persian, Arabian, and Latin dictionary, which, as well as other works, he had completed.

He was no less conversant in Greek and Latin than in the Oriental languages and history. He was indeed aa universal scholar; and, what was very valuable in him, his modesty was equal to his erudition, and his uncommon abilities were accompanied with the utmost probity, piety, charity, and other Christian virtues, which he practised uniformly through the course of a long life.

An improved edition of his “Bibliotheque” was published at Maastricht in 1776 1780, fol, but a superior one has since appeared at the Hague in 4 vols. 4to, 1777 1782.

, lord Herbert, of Cherbury in Shropshire, an eminent English writer, was descended from a very ancient family, and born 1581, at Montgomery-­castle in Wales. At the age of fourteen he was entered as a gentleman-commoner at University college, in Oxford, where he laid, says Wood, the foundation of that admirable learning, of which he was afterwards a complete master. In 1600 he came to London, and shortly after the accession of James I. was created knight of the hath. He served the office of high sheriff for the county of Montgomery, and divided his time between the country and the court. In 1608, feeling wearied with the sameness of domestic scenes, he visited the continent, carrying with him some romantic notions on the point of honour, which, in. such an age, were likely to involve him in perpetual quarrels. His advantageous person and manners, and the reputation for courage which he acquired, gained him many friends, among whom was the constable Montmorenci. As a seat of this nobleman he passed several months practising horsemanship, and other manly exercises, in which he became singularly expert. He returned to England in 1609, and in the following, year he quitted it again, in. order that he might have the opportunity of serving with the English forces sent to assist the prince of Orange at the siege of Juliers. Here he signalised himself by his valour, which, in some instances, was carried to the extreme of rashness. After the siege he visited Antwerp and Brussels, and returned to London, where he was looked now upon as one of the most conspicuous characters of the time. An attempt was made to assassinate him, in revenge for some liberties which he took, or was supposed to have taken, with a married lady. In 1614 he went into the Low. Countries to serve under the prince of Orange; after this he engaged with the duke of Savoy, to conduct from France a body of protestants to Piedmont for his service. In 1616 he was sent ambassador to Louis XIII. of France, to mediate for the relief of the protestants of that realm, but was recalled in July 1621, on account of a dispute between him and the constable de Luines. Camden says that he had treated the constable irreverently; but Walton tells us that “he could not subject himself to a compliance with the humours of the duke de Luines, who was then the great and powerful favourite at court: so that, upon a complaint to our king, he was called back into England in some displeasure; but at his return gave such an honourable account of his employment, and so justified his comportment to the duke and all the court, that he was suddenly sent back upon the same embassy.”

Another writer relates this more particularly. Sir Edward, while he was in France, had private instructions from England to mediate a peace for the protestants in France; and, in case of a refusal, to use certain menaces. Accordingly, being referred to de Luines, he delivered to him the message, reserving his threatenings till he saw how the matter was relished. De Luines had concealed a gentleman of the reformed religion behind the curtain; who, heing an ear-witness of what passed, might relate to his friends what little expectations they ought to entertain of the king of England’s intercession. De Luines was very haughty, and asked what our king had to do in this affair. Sir Edward replied, “It is not to you, to whom the king my master owcth an account of his actions; and for me it is enough that I obey him. In the mean time I must maintain, that my master hath more reason to do what he doth, than you to ask why he doth it. Nevertheless, if you desire me in a gentle fashion, I shall acquaint you farther.” Upon this, de Luines bowing a little, said, “Very well.” The ambassador then gave him some reasons; to which de Luines said, “We will have none of your advices.” The ambassador replied, “that he took that for an answer, and was sorry only, that the affection and good-will of the king his master was not sufficiently understood and that, since it was rejected ii> that manner, he could do no less than say, that the king his master knew well enough what to do.” De Luines answered, “We are not afraid of you.” The ambassador smiling a little, replied, “If you had said you had not loved us, I should have believed you, and given you another answer. In the mean time, all that I will tell you more is, that we know very well what we have to do.” De Luines upon this, rising from his chair with a fashion and countenance a little discomposed, said, “By G, if you were not monsieur the ambassador, I know very well how I would use yon.” Sir Edward Herbert rising also from his chair, said, that “as he was the king of Great Britain’s ambassador, so he was also a gentleman; and that his sword, whereon he laid his hand, should give him satisfaction if he had taken any offence.” After which, de Luines making no reply, the ambassador went on towards the door, and de Luines seeming to accompany him, sir Edward told him, that “there was no occasion to use such ceremony after such language,” and so departed, expecting to hear farther from him. But no message being brought from de Luines, he had, in pursuance of his instructions, a more civil audience from the king at Coignac; where the marshal of St. Geran told him that tf he had offended the constable, and was not in a place of security there:“to which he answered, that” he thought himself to be in a place of security wheresoever he had his sword by him." De Luines, resenting the affront, procured Cadinet his brother, duke of Chaun, with a train of officers, of whom there was not one, as he told king James, but had killed his man, to go as an ambassador extraordinary; who misrepresented the affair so much to the disadvantage of sir Edward, that the earl of Carlisle, who was sent to accommodate the misunderstanding which might arise between the two crowns, got him recalled; until the gentleman who stood behind the curtain, out of a regard to truth and honour, related all the circumstances so as to make it appear, that though de Luines gave the first affront, yet sir Edward had kept himself within the bounds of his instructions and honour. He afterwards fell on his knees to king James, before the duke of Buckingham, requesting that a trumpeter, if not an herald, might be sent to de Luines, to tell him that he had made a false relation of the whole affair; and that sir Edward Herbert would demand satisfaction of him sword in hand. The king answered, that he would take it into consideration; but de Luines died soon after, and sir Edward was sent again ambassador to France.

In 1625 sir Edward was advanced to the dignity of a baron of the kingdom of Ireland, by the title of lord Herbert of Castle-Island; and, in 1631, to that of lord Herbert of Cherbury in Shropshire. After the breaking out of the civil wars, he adhered to the parliament; and, Feb. 25, 1644, “had an allowance granted him for his livelihood, having been spoiled by the king’s forces,” as Whitelocke says; or, as “Wood relates it,” received satisfaction from the members of that house, for their causing Montgomery castle to be demolished.“In the parliamentary history, it is said that lord Herbert offended the House of lords by a speech in favour of the king, and that he attended his majesty at York. It appears that when he saw the drift of the parliamentary party, he quitted them, and was a great sufferer in his fortune from their vengeance. He died at his house in Queen-street, London, August 20, 1648; and was buried in the chancel of St. Giles’s in the Fields, with this inscription upon a flat marble stone over his grave:” Heic inhumatqr corpus Edvardi Herbert equitis Balnei, baronis de Cherbury et Castle-Island, auctoris libri, cui titulus est, De Veritate. Keddor ut herbae; vicesimo die Augusti anno Domini 1648."

This noble lord was the author of some very singular and memorable works: the first of which was his book “De Veritate,” which is mentioned in his epitaph. It was printed at Paris in 1624, and reprinted there in 1633; after which it was printed in London, in 1645, under this title; “De Veritate, prout distinguitur a revelatione, a verisimili, a possibili, a falso. Cui operi additi sunt duo alii tractatus primus de causis errornm; alter de Religione Laici.” In this he is said to have been the first author who formed deism into a system, and endeavoured to assert the sufficiency, universality, and absolute perfection of natural religion, without the necessity of any extraordinary revelation. He attempted to prove that the light of reason, and the innate principles planted in the human mind, are sufficient to discover the great doctrines of morality, to regulate our actions, and conduct us to happiness in a future state. The fallacy of all this has been ably displayed by Locke, Leland, and many other writers of eminence. But the noble author proved himself the greatest enthusiast, while he affected to combat enthusiasm, and by his own example evinced the absurdity of his system. Having finished the above treatise “De Veritate,” in which revelation is considered as useless, he was desito publish it; but, as the frame of his whole book differed from all former writings concerning the discovery of truth, he hesitated whether he should suspend the publication: “Being thus doubtful in my chamber,” says lord Herbert, “one fair day in the summer, my casement being open towards the south, the sun shining clear, and no wind stirring, I took my book * De Veritate‘ in my hands, and kneeling on my knees, devoutly said these words: ’ O thou eternal God, author of this light, which now shines upon me, and giver of all inward illuminations, I do beseech thee, of thine infinite goodness, to pardon a greater request than a sinner ought to make. 1 am not satisfied enough, whether I shall publish this book if it be for thy glory, I beseech thee give me some sign from heaven if not, I shall suppress it.' I had no sooner spoken these words, but a loud, though yet gentle noise, came forth from the heavens, for it was like nothing on earth, which did so chcar and comfort me, that I took my petition as granted, and that I had the sign I demanded; whereupon also I resolved to print my book. This, how strange soever it may seem, I protest before the eternal God, is true: neither am I any way superstitiously deceived herein, since I did not only clearly hear the noise, but in the serenest sky that ever 1 saw, being without all cloud, did, to my thinking, see the place from whence it came. And now I sent my book to be printed in Paris, at my own cost and charges.” It is not possible to reprove the folly and blindness of his conduct in this instance, in warmer terms than those which are employed by his noble editor. “There is no stronger characteristic of human nature than its being open to the grossest contradictions: one of lord Herbert’s chief arguments against revealed religion is, the improbability that Heaven should reveal its will to only a portion of the earth, which he terms particular religion. How could a man who doubted of partial, believe individual revelation What vanity, to think his book of such importance to the cause of truth, that it could extort a declaration of the divine will, when the interest of half mankind could not”

The celebrated Gassendi wrote a confutation of this book “De Veritate,” at the desire of Peirescius and Elias Diodati and finished it at Aix, without publishing it: and when lord Herbert paid him a visit in Sept. 1647, Gassendi was surprized to find, that this piece had not been delivered to him, for he had sent him a copy: upon which he ordered another copy to be taken of it, which that nobleman carried with him to England. It was afterwards published in Gassendi’s works, under the title of “Ad librum D. Edvardi Herberti Angli de Veritate epistola;” but is imperfect, some sheets of the original being lost.

His most useful work, the “History of the Life and Reign of Henry VIII.” was published in 1649, a year after his death, and has always been much admired. Nicolson says, that lord Herbert “acquitted himself in this history with the like reputation, as the lord chancellor Bacon gained by that of Henry Vllth. For in the public and martial part this honourable author has been admirably particular and exact from the best records that were extant; though as to the ecclesiastical, he seems to have looked upon it as a thing out of his province, and an undertaking more proper for men of another profession.” Although it has been considered as a very valuable piece of history, there is not, perhaps, so much candour displayed in every part as could be wished. In 1663, appeared his book “De Religione Gentilium, errorumque apud eos causis.” The first part was printed at London, in 1645; and that year he sent the ms. of it to Gerard Vossius, as appears from a letter of his lordship’s, and Vossius’s answer. An English translation of this work was published in 1705, under this title: “The ancient Religion of the Gentiles, and causes of their errors considered. The mistakes and failures of the Heathen Priests and wise men, in their notions of the Deity and matters of Divine Worship, are examined with regard to their being destitute of Divine Revelation.” Lord Herbert wrote also in 1630, “Expeditio Buckingham! ducis in Ream insulam,” which was published in 1656; and “Occasional Verses,” published in 1665, by his son Henry Herbert, and dedicated to Edward lord Herbert, his grandson; hut they form no claim to the poetical character. Christian Kortholt, on account of his book “De Veritate,” has ranked him with Hobbes and Spinosa, in his dissertation entitled “De tribus impostoribus magnis, Edvardo Herbert, Thoma Hobbes, & Benedicto Spinosa, Liber,” printed at Kilon m 1680. Granger has very aptly described him as a man who was at once wise and capricious: who redressed wrongs, and quarrelled for punctilios; hated bigotry in religion, and was himself a bigot to philosophy; exposed himself to suoh dangers as other men of courage would have carefully declined and called in question the fundamentals of religion, which none had the hardiness to dispute besides himself. The life of lord Herbert, written by himself, was recovered by the family, after having been long missing, and printed at Strawberry -hill, by lord OrItbrd, in 1764, for private distribution; but was reprinted for sale by Dodsley in 1770, 4to. Lord Orford observes, that it is, perhaps, the most extraordinary account that ever was seriously given by a wise man of himself.

, an eminent and exemplary divine, younger brother to the preceding, was born April 3, 1593, at Montgomery castle. His father died when he was very young; and until the age of twelve, he was educated under private tutors in his mother’s house. He was then put under the care of Dr. Neale, dean of Westminster, and afterwards archbishop of York, who placed him at Westminster-school. At the age of fifteen, being then a king’s scholar, he was elerted to Trinity college, Cambridge, and went thither about 1608, during the mastership of that great benefactor to the college, Dr. Nevil, who, at his mother’s request, took particular notice of him. At college he was assiduous in his studies, and virtuous in his conduct. Here he took his bachelor’s degree in 1612, and that of master in 1616, before which he had obtained a fellowship. During his studies, his principal relaxation was music, for which he had a good taste, and in which, as Walton says, “he became a great master.” At this time, however, he betrayed a little of the vanity of youth and birth, by affecting great finery of dress, and maintaining a reserved behaviour towards his inferiors. In 1619, he was chosen university orator, which office he held for eight years, much to the satisfaction of his hearers, and particularly of those great personages whom he had occasionally to address. The terms of flattery he appears to have known how to use with great profusion; and in more than one instance, pleased king James very much with his liberal offerings of this kind. He gave no less satisfaction to his majesty also, by his apt and ingenious replies to Andrew Melville, a Scotch divine, at the Hampton-court conference. His talents recommended him to the notice of Dr. Andrews, bishop of Winchester, and of the great lord Bacon, who is said to have entertained such a high opinion of Mr. Herbert, as to consult him in his writings, before they went to press, and dedicated to him his translation of some ef the Psalms into English verse, as the best judge of divine poetry. Nor was bishop Andrews less enraptured with his character; for Herbert, having, in consequence of a dispute between them on predestination and sanctity of life, written a letter to the bishop on the subject in Greek, Andrews used to show it to many scholars, and always carried it about him. Sir Henry Wotton and Dr. Donne may also be added to the number of those eminent men of his time whose friendship he shared.

All this sufficiently shews that his attainments were of no common kind; but unfortunately the praises he received, and the favour into which he was admitted, inspired him with ambition to rise at court. His predecessors in the office of public orator, sir Robert Nanton and sir Francis Nethersole, had both risen to places of distinction in the state; and he being at this time a favourite with the king, and “not meanly valued and loved by the most eminent and most powerful of the court nobility,” began to cherish hopes of similar success. With this view he frequently left Cambridge to attend the king, wheresoever the court was and the king having given him a sinecure worth about 120l. a year, he devoted himself yet more to court-attendance, and seldom visited Cambridge, unless the king was there. But, as Walton says, “God, in whom there is an unseen chain of causes,” terminated his hopes of rising at court, by the deaths of the duke of Richmond and the marquis of Hamilton, his chief patrons, and about the same time, by that of king James.

The loss of these friends appears to have given a new turn to his mind. He now left London, and went to the house of a gentleman in Kent, where he lived for a considerable time in great privacy, and after having taken a careful retrospect of his past views and hopes, he determined to dedicate himself to the church, and, to use his own words, to “consecrate all his learning and all his abilities to advance the glory of that God which gave them; knowing that I can never do too much for him that hath done so much for me, as to make me a Christian. And I will labour to be like my Saviour, by making humility lovely in the eyes of all men, and by following the merciful and meek example of my dear Jesus.” Such was his resolution, and perhaps few men have more literally fulfilled it in every respect. His life from this time became a pattern to all, but especially to his brethren in the church.

It appears that when at college, about 1617, he had applied himself to the study of divinity, which his subsequent views at court probably interrupted. Having now obtained deacon’s orders, he was made prebendary of Leighton Bromswold, in the diocese of Lincoln, a piece of preferment given to him by bishop (afterwards archbishop) Williams. His first memorable act, when he entered on this, was to rebuild the parish church of Leighton, which he undertook at great risk of expence to himself, but by the aid of his friends, he was enabled to accomplish this, his favourite object,

About 1629, he was seized with a quotidian ague, which obliged him to remove to Woodford in Essex, for change of air; and when, after his ague had abated, some consumptive appearances were apprehended, he went to Dauntsey in Wiltshire, the seat of lord Danvers, earl of Danby, who appropriated an apartment for him, and treated him with the greatest care and kindness. Here, by abstaining from hard study, and by air and exercise, he apparently recovered his health, and then declared his resolution to marry, and to take priest’s orders. Accordingly he married Jane Danvers, daughter of Mr. Charles Danvers of Bainton in Wilts, related to the earl of Danby; and about three months after his marriage, at the request of Philip earl of Pembroke, the king presented him to the living of Bemerton, into which he was inducted April 26, 1630. Here he passed the remainder of his days, discharging the duties of a parish priest in a manner so exemplary, that the history of his life here, as given by Walton, or perhaps as delineated by himself in his “Country Parson,” may justly be recommended as a model. His own behaviour was indeed an exact comment on all he wrote, which appears to have come from the heart of a man of unfeigned piety and humility. Unhappily, however, for his rlock, his life was shortened by a return of the consumptive symptoms which had formerly appeared, and he died in February 1632, and was buried March 3.

He published, 1. “Oratio qua auspicatissimum sereniss. princ. Caroli reditnm ex Hispaniis celebravit G. H. acad. Cantab. Orator,” 1623. 2. A translation of Coniaro “Oil Temperance.” 3. “Herbert’s Remains, &c.” Lond. 1652, 12mo. In this volume is his “Priest to the Temple, or the Country Parson’s character and rule of Holy Life,” a series of short chapters on the duties and character of a parish priest, which has been separately and very recently printed, and always much admired. 4. “The Temple, Sacred Poems and private ejaculations,” Cambridge, 1633, 12mo, often reprinted. As a poet Mr. Herbert ranks with Donne, Quarles, and Crashaw; but, as some critics have asserted, is inferior to these. He was, however, the most popular poet of his day, for, according to Walton, 10,Ooo copies of this work were sold, and we know that there have been editions since Walton’s time. At the end of this volume is a collection of poems entitled “The Synagogue,” which Granger very improperly attributes to Crashaw. Mr. Zouch has endeavoured to prove that these pieces were written by Mr. Christopher Hervey. There are some Latin poems by Herbert in the “Ecclesiastes Solomonis,” published by Dr. Duport, in the “Epicedium Cantabrigiense,” 1612, and the “Lachrymae Cantabrigienses,” 1619; and a series of his letters are in the orator’s book at Cambridge.

, an eminent person of the Pembroke family, was born at York, where his grandfather was an alderman, and admitted of Jesus-college, Oxford, in 1621: but before he took a degree, removed to Trinity-­college in Cambridge. He made a short stay there, and then went to wait upon William earl of Pembroke, recorded in the following article; who owning him for his kinsman, and intending his advancement, sent him in 1626 to travel, with an allowance to bear his charge. He spent four years in visiting Asia and Africa; and then returning, waited on his patron at Baynard’s-castle in London. The earl dying suddenly, he was disappointed in his expectations of preferment, and left England a second time, and visited several parts of Europe. After his return he married, and now being settled, devoted much of his time to literary employments. In 1634 he published in folio, “A Relation of some Years Travels into Africa and the great Asia, especially the territories of the Persian Monarchy, and some parts of the Oriental Indies, and Isles adjacent.” The edition of 1677 is the fourth, and has several additions. This work was translated by Wiquefort into French, with “An Account of the Revolutions of Siam in 1647,” Paris, 1663, in 4to. All the impressions of Herbert’s hook are in folio, and adorned with cuts.

Upon the breaking out of the civil wars, he was induced to side with the parliament; and, by the influence of Philip earl of Pembroke, became not only one of the commissioners of parliament who acompanied the army of sir Thomas Fairfax, but a commissioner also to treat with those of the king’s party for the surrender of the garrison at Oxford. He afterwards attended that earl, especially in Jan. 1646, when he, with other commissioners, was sent from the parliament to the king at Newcastle about peace, and to bring his majesty nearer London. While the king was at Oldenby, the parliament commissioners, pursuant to instructions, addressed themselves to his majesty, and desired him to dismiss such of his servants as were there and had waited on him at Oxford: which his majesty with great reluctance consented to do. He had taken notice in the mean time of Mr. James Harrington, the author of the “Oceana,” and Mr. Thomas Herbert, who had followed the court from Newcastle and hearing a favourable character of them, was willing to receive them as grooms of his bed-chamber with the others that were left him; which the commissioners approving, they were that night admitted. Being thus settled in that honourable office, and in good esteem with his majesty, Herbert continued with him when all the rest of the chamber were removed; even till his majesty was brought to the block. The king, though he found him, says Wood, to be presbyterianly affected, yet withal found him very observant and loving, and therefore entrusted him with many matters of moment. The truth was, he found the king tu be of a very contrary disposition and character from what the malcontents of the day had represented him, and being equally ashamed of them, and of the delusion into which he had himself fallen, he attached himself to the king from that time to the moment of his murder; and during these two years he underwent, night and day, all the difficulties, dangers, and distresses, that his royal master suffered. At the restoration he was made a baronet by Charles II. “for faithfully serving his royal father during the two last years of his life;” as the letters patent for that purpose expressed. He died at his house in York, March 1, 1681-2.

Besides the travels already mentioned, he was the author of other things. He wrote in 1678, “Threnodia Carolina, containing an historical Account of the two last Years of the Life of King Charles I.;” and the occasion of it was this. The parliament having a little before taken into consideration the appointing of 70,000l. for the funeral of that king, and for a monument to be erected over his grave, sir William Dugdale, then garter king of arms, sent to our author, living at York, to know of him, whether the king had ever spoke in his hearing, where his body should be interred. To this sir Thomas Herbert returned a large answer, with many observations concerning his majesty; with which sir William Dugdale was so much pleased, that he desired him by another letter, to write a treatise of the actions and sayings of the king, from his first confinement to his death: which forms the contents of this interesting volume. He wrote also an account of the last days of that king, which was published by Wood in the 2d volume of his “Athenae Oxonienses.” At the desire of his friend John de Laet of Leyden, he translated some books of his “India Occidentals;” he assisted also sir William Dugdale, in compiling the third volume of his “Monasticon Anglicanum.” A little before his death, he gave several Mss. to the public library at Oxford, and others to that belonging to the cathedral at York; and in the Ashmolean Museum at Oxford, there are several collections of his, which he made from the registers of the archbishops of York, given to that repository by sir William Dugdale.

, earl of Pembroke, was born at Wilton in Wiltshire, April 8, 1580, and admitted of Newcollege in Oxford in 1592, where he continued about two years. In 1601, he succeeded to his father’s honours and estate; was made knight of the garter in 1604; and governor of Portsmouth six years after. In 1626 he was elected chancellor of the university of Oxford, and about the same time made lord steward of the king’s houshold. He died suddenly at his house called Baynard’s-castle, in London, April 10, 1630; according, as Wood foolishly says, to the calculation of his nativity, made several years before by Mr. Thomas Allen, of Gloucester-hall. Clarendon, however, seriously relates, concerning this calculation, that some considerable persons connected with lord Pembroke being met at Maidenhead, one of them at supper drank a health to the lord steward: upon which another said, that he believed his lordship was at that time very merry; for he had now outlived the day, which it had been prognosticated upon his nativity he would not outlive; but he had done it now, for that was his birth-day, which had completed his age to fifty years. The next morning, however, they received the news of his death. Mr. Park remarks that had his lordship possessed a credulous mind, it might have been suspected that this astrological prediction had worked upon his feelings, and occasioned a temporary suspension of the animal faculties, which was too hastily concluded to be dissolution; for Mr. Granger states it as an accredited fact in the Pembroke family, that when his lordship’s body was opened in order to be embalmed, he was observed, immediately after the incision was made, to lift up his hand. This remarkable circumstance, adds Granger, compared with lord Clarendon’s account of his sudden death, affords a strong presumptive proof that his distemper was an apoplexy. Lord Pembroke was not only a great favourer of learned and ingenious men, but was himself learned, and endued with a considerable share of poetic genius. All that are extant of his productions in this way, were published with this title: “Poems written by William earl of Pembroke, &c. many of which are answered by way pf repartee by sir Benjamin Rudyard, with other poems written by them occasionally and apart,” 1660," 8vo.

The character of this noble person is not only one of the most amiable in lord Clarendon’s history, but is one of the best drawn. We can, however, give only a few particulars. “He was,” says the great historian, “the most universally beloved and esteemed of any man of that age; and having a great office in the court, he made the court atself better esteemed, and more reverenced in the country: and as he had a great number of friends of the best men, so no man had ever the confidence to avow himself to be his enemy. He was a man very well bred, and of excellent parts, and a graceful speaker upon any subject, having a good proportion of learning, and a ready wit to apply it, and enlarge upon it: of a pleasant and facetious humour, and a disposition affable, generous, and magnificent. He lived many years about the court before in it, and never by it; being rather regarded and esteemed by lung James, than loved and favoured. As he spent and lived upon his own fortune, so he stood upon his own feet, without any other support than of his proper virtue and merit. He was exceedingly beloved in the court, because he never desired to get that for himself which others laboured for, but was still ready to promote the pretences of worthy men: and he was equally celebrated in the country, for having received no obligations from the court, which might corrupt or sway his affections and judgment. He was a great lover of his country, and of the religion and justice which he believed could only support it: and his friendships were only with men of those principles. Sure never man was planted in a court who was fitter for that soil, or brought better qualities with him to purify that air. Yet his memory must not be flattered, that his virtues and good inclinations may be believed he was not without some alloy of vice he indulged to himself the pleasures of all kinds, almost in all excesses,” &c. It ought not to be forgot that this earl of Pembroke vras a munificent contributor to the Bodleian library, of two hundred and forty-two Greek Mss. purchased by him in Italy, and formerly belonging to Francis Barroccio. This gift is commemorated by an inscription over the collection in the library, where also are a painting and a statue of his lordship. Pembroke-college was so named in honour of him.

, an eminent typographical antiquary, was born Nov. 29, 1718, and educated at Hitchin in Hertfordshire. He appears to have been originally destined for trade, as he was bound apprentice to a hosier in London, and carried on that business for some time on his own account. It is probable, however, that he did noj succeed, or became desirous of some other means of livelihood, and it is said that one time he studied the art of painting on glass. About his thirtieth year he accepted the situation of purser’s clerk to three East-India ships. He set sail in one of them which was to take in a lading of pepper at Tellicherry: but before she had completed that purpose, an alarm of six French men of war was given. The governor demanded thirty men out of each ship, as he had a power to do, for the defence of the place; and the ship sailed away without lights round the Lucadine islands, and by Mount Delhi, to Bombay. After the alarm was over they returned, and sent Mr. Herbert, in a miserable boat, without change of linen, to demand their men, whom the governor refused to give up, and he returned; but the ships having left their station, the boat could not find them, and the wind being against him, he was obliged to remain at Tellicherry. Being engaged to return to his ship by the middle of July, he was obliged to undertake a journey over land on the sixteenth of that month, with a Portuguese boy, (who understood a little English, Portuguesej and Parriar or Lingua Franca), twelve sepoys, eight porters, in all twenty, besides himself and boy; and went round by sea to Calicut, before he ascended the heights with two bramins, who were bound by their caste to conduct him safe. The anxiety at not meeting the ships at the appointed time, he did not recover for a twelvemonth: though he rejoined them August 8, at Fort St. David, Fort George being in the hands of the French.

On his return home, having produced a number (if plans of the several settlements, he received from the India company 300l. These plans were afterwards incorporated into a publication by Bowles, printseller, near Mercers’ chapel. Mr. Herbert had now, probably, acquired a considerable knowledge of the relative situations of coasts, countries, and rivers, which he had surveyed abroad, and, in consequence, thought himself competent to set up the business of an engraver of charts and printseller, which he did on London-bridge; and when the houses on that bridge were pulled down, removed to Leadenhall-street. About this time he, and a Mr. Nicholson, published a “New Directory for the East-Indies,” 4to, to which Herbert supplied the greater part of the materials. He afterwards removed to^Goulston-square, and frequently published lists of his vendible books, charts, and maps. Having now the means as well as the inclination to gratify his passion for literary antiquities, he became an attendant on book-sales, made frequent purchases, chiefly of black-letter volumes, which were carefully examined, and treasured in his library, to augment the “History of Printing,” by Ames. Of this work he had purchased the author’s own copy, enriched with numerous manuscript notes, and was most assiduous in preparing materials for a new edition. In the mean time, in 1769, he came forward as the republisher of Atkyns’s “History of Gloucestershire,” originally published in 1712, but rendered extremely scarce from the number of copies that were burnt in the fire which consumed the printing-office of the elder Mr. Bowyer in White-Friars. Having purchased the old plates that had escaped the fire, and caused new engravings to be made for the lose ones, he republished the book, correcting the literal errors, but not restoring to their proper places several particulars pointed out in the original errata.

Having now succeeded to his utmost wishes as a vender of charts and prints, he resolved to retire from business, and with this view purchased a country residence at dieshunt in Hertfordshire, and turned his whole attention to editing “Ames’s Typographical Antiquities,” the first volume of which he at length published in 1785, in 4to, under the title of “Typographical Antiquities, or an Historical Account of the Origin and Progress of Printing in Great Britain and Ireland containing memoirs of our ancient Printers, and a register of books by them from the year 1471 to 1500. Begun by the late Joseph Ames, F. R. and A. Ss. and secretary to the society of antiquaries. Considerably augmented, both in the Memoirs and number of books. By William Herbert of Cheshunt, Herts.” The second volume appeared in 1786, and the third and last in 1790. The reception of this work by the public was proportionate to its utility; but he did not live long to enjoy the fruit of his labours. He was seventy-two years of age when -he published the last volume, and yet went on improving the work, with a view to a future edition. At length exhausted by constant mental as well as bodily activity, he gradually sunk under the accumulated afflictions of disease and debility attendant on age, and died March 18, 1795, in his seventy-seventh year. His body was interred in Cheshunt church-yard. Mr. Herbert a man of great integrity, simplicity, and modesty, but his manner was somewhat odd and peculiar. His valuable library was scattered at his decease, by a priced catalogue. These particulars of his life we have selected from the fuller account given of him, by his able successor Mr. DuV din, whose first two volumes of the new edition afford the well-grounded hope that we may say of him, as he has of Herbert, that “no single country can boast of such an acquisition to its history of ancient literature as our own;” in his typographical labours.

, an able Oriental scholar, was born March 15, 1783, and from his earliest years appears to have devoted his attention to the study of the Oriental languages. From the age of sixteen he began to compose an Arabic grammar, the first part of which was published at Paris, 1803, 4to. and folio, under the title “Developpemens des principes de la Langue Arabe moderne,” &c. The second part has not yet appeared. In his twenty-first year, his talents and reputation procured his admission into the academy of sciences, belles-lettres, and arts. Besides his knowledge of Oriental languages, he was ably versed in the best Greek, Latin, Italian, and English authors. He published also a “Treatise on ancient Music,” and an account of Hafiz, the Persian poet, with specimens of his poetry translated. Of this, however, he printed only a small number, in 1806. He died in his twenty-third year, Dec. 30, 1806, leaving many Mss. which prove his death an irreparable loss to the learned world.

, a native of Bitschen in Silesia, where he was born in 1632, was deputed by the Polish protestant churches to those of Germany, Holland, &c. in 16.64. This employment leading him to travel, he took the opportunity of examining such matters as interested his curiosity, particularly cataracts and water-falls^ which produced the following publications: 1. “De Admirandis Mundi Cataractis,” &c. Amsterdam, 1678, 4to. 2. “Kiovia subterranea.” 3. “Terrse motus et quietis exarnen.” He wrote also, 4. “De statu Ecclesiarum Augustanae confessionis in Polonia,” 1670, 4to. 5. “Tragicocomcedia, et Ludi innocui de Juljano Imperatore Apostata,” &c. He died in 1676.

, an eminent practical and theoretical German musician, was born at Nuremberg. In 1628 he was appointed chapel-master at Francfort on the Maine, and continued in that station till 1641, when he was called to the same office at Nuremberg. However, in 1650 he thought fit to return to Francfort, at the solicitation of the magistrates and others his friends; and being by them re-instated in his former dignity, he continued in that station till the time of his death, in 1660. He was excellently skilled in the theory of music, and in the art of practical composition, and was a sound and judicious organist. In 1643 he published, in the German language, a book entitled “Musica Poetica” and, ten years after, a translation, either from the Latin or the Italian, for it is extant in both languages, of the “Arte prattica e poetica of Giov. Chiodino,” in ten books. Herbst was also the author of a tract entitled “Musica njoderna prattica, overo maniere del buon canto,” printed at Francfort in 1658, in which he recommends the Italian manner of singing. His other works are, a small tract on Thoroughbass, and a discourse on counterpoint, containing directions for composing “a mente non a penna.” Of his musical compositions, all that are extant in print are, “Meletemata sacra Davidis,” and “Suspiria S. Gregorii ad Christum,” for three voices. These were printed in 1619, as was also a nameless composition by him for six voices.

, a German philosopher of the new school, was born in 1741, in a small town of Prussia, and was originally intended for the profession of a surgeon, but afterwards studied divinity, and was invited to Buckeburg, to officiate as minister, and to be a member of the consistory of the ecclesiastical council, In 1774 he was promoted by the duke of Saxe Weimar, to be first preacher to the court, and ecclesiastical counsellor, to which was afterwards added the dignity of vice-president cjf the consistory of Weimar, which he held until his death, Pec. 18, 1803. Some of his ficst works gained him great^ praise, both as a critic antj philosopher; such as his, 1. “Three fragments on the new German Literature,” Riga, 1776. 2. “On the Writings of Thomas Abbt,” Berlin, 1768; and “On the origin of Language,” ibid. 1772. But he afterwards fell into mysticism, and that obscure mode of reasoning which has too frequently been dignified, with the name of philosophy. The first specimen he gave of this was in his “Oldest Notices of the Origin of Mankind,” Riga, 1774; after which his system, if it may be so called, was more fully developed in his “Outlines of a philosophy of the history of Man,” of which an English translation was published in 1800, 4to, but without attracting much public notice. It was not indeed to be supposed that such extravagant opinions, conveyed in an obscure jargon, made up of new and fanciful terms, and frequently at variance with revealed religion, could be very acceptable to an English public.

, an ingenious member of the academy at Soissons, and that of ^the Ricovrati at Padua, was born at Soissons of a noble family; and the meetings held at his hoTise gave rise to the academy afterwards established in that place. He was entrusted with some important commissions by the French court, and wrote a history of the academy of Soissons, in Latin, printed at Montauban, 1688, 8vo. He died 1704. M. Lewis de Hericourt, an eminent advocate at Paris, his grandson, who died 1753, was author of “Traite” des Loix Ecclesiastiques, mises dans leur ordre naturel,“1771,fol. an abridgement of pere Thomassins’s” Discipline de PEglise,“with remarks, 4to;” Traite de la Vente des Immeubles," 4to; and some posthumous works, 4 vols. 4to.

, an eminent French botanist, was born at Paris in 1746. In 1772 he was appointed superintendant of the waters and forests of the generality of Paris, and his active mind being turned to fulfil the duties of his office, he began to apply to botany, with a particular view to the knowledge of foresttrees. Broussonet, who had studied with sir Joseph Banks, and was an ardent Linnaean, was the intimate friend of L'Heritier, and contributed in no small degree to urge him forward in his career. The first fruits of his labours was a splendid book, with finely engraved plates, entitled “Stirpes novae,” of which the first fasciculus, containing eleven plates with their descriptions, appeared in J7S4. Five more followed, amounting to eighty-four platas. To secure to himself some of his own discoveries, and especially the establishment of certain new genera and their names, L'Heritier contrived a method of publishing such in the form of monographs, with one or two plates. Of these he distributed the copies gratuitously to different people, so that no individual might be possessed of the entire collection. A complete set, however, is in the library of sir Joseph Banks, and another in that of the president of the Linnaean society. In 1786 he came over to England, and collected from the English gardens the materials of his “Sertum Anglicum,” a Work consisting of several fasciculi, on a similar plan to his Stirpes Novafe, but it remains unfinished. In 1775 he became a conseiller a la cour des aides, was for a long time the dean of that court, and accepted the office of a judge in the civil tribunals of the department of the Seine, and is recorded to have fulfilled its duties with the most exemplary rectitude and incorruptibility. He also sat from time to time as a member of the representative body. His views were always those of a true patriot, the correction of abuses, the maintenance of the laws in their genuine force and purity; and the darling object of his emulation was the uncorrupted British constitution.

It is with pain that we advance towards the dreadful catastrophe of his life. He had married, in 1775, an estimable woman of the name of Dore, with whom he passed nineteen years in domestic happiness. She died in 1794, leaving him five children. He devoted himself to their education, but with respect to one of them, a son, his parental solicitude was attended with little success, and his hopes were blasted in a cruel manner, by the most refractory and unprincipled conduct. The parent returning very late one evening in August 1801, from a meeting of the national institute, never again reached his own domestic circle. His children expected him all night in the greatest anxiety and uncertainty. Some savage cries of insult or exultation were overheard in the silence of the night, but their object was not discovered till the dawn of morning, when the murdered body of the father of the family was found near his own threshold, with the money and other valuables which he carried about him untouched. No certain discovery was made of the murderer, but suspicion seems to have attached to the wretched son, who is since dead.

, a French poet of the seventeenth century, was nephew to du Vair, a celebrated keeper ef the seals. His original profession was military, but being disabled by a wound from actual service, hfe bought the place of treasurer to the French guards. He was afterwards appointed historiographer of France, and died in 1680. He wrote only two tragedies, of no great merit, “Hercule furieux,” and “Clavis,” and a few fugitive poems, some of which have a degree of elevation, particularly the “Portrait d'Amaranthe.”

, de Villandon, a daughter of the preceding, born at Paris in 1664, inherited a taste and talent for poetry, and was esteemed also for the sweetness of her manners, and the dignity of her sentiments. The academy of the “Jeux Floraux,” received her as a member in 1696, and that of the “Ricovrati,” at Padua, in 1697. She died at Paris in 1734. Her works are various, in prose and verse: 1. “A Translation of Ovid’s Epistles,” sixteen of them in verse. 2. “La Tour te'nebreuse,” an English tale. 3. “Les Caprices du Destin,” another novel. 4. “L'avare puni,” a novel in verse; with a few poems of an elegiac or complimentary nature.

, a learned mathematician of the academy of Berlin, and member of the academy of sciences at Paris, was born at Basil in 1678. He was a great traveller; and for six years was professor of mathematics at Padua. He afterwards went to Russia, being iovited thither by the Czar Peter I. in 1724, as well as his compatriot Daniel Bernoulli. On his return to his native country he was appointed professor of morality and natural law at Basil, where he died in 1733, at fifty-five years of age. He wrote several mathematical and philosophical pieces, in the Memoirs of different academies, and elsewhere; but his principal work is the “Phoronomia, or two books oh the forces and motions of both solid and fluid bodies,” 1716, 4to a very learned work on the new mathematical physics.

, professor of botany and the materia medica at Strasburgh, was born Dec. 21, 1738, at Barr, near Strasbnrgh. His father, a protestant clergyman at that place, devoted his leisure hours to physical experiments, and imparted to his son a tasce for the study of natural history and the science of nature, who made at the same time an extraordinary progress in rhetoric, philology, history, philosophy, mathematics, and hiedicine, In 1765, he took the degree of doctor of medicine, and made a -journey to Paris, where he enlarged his knowledge, enriched his cabinet of natural history, and acquired the friendship of the most eminent French literati. In the twenty-sixth year of his age he commenced at Strasburgh, lectures on natural history, which he continued until his death. In 1768 he was appointed professor extraordinary of medicine; ten years afterwards he obtained the chair of philosophy, and in 1782 that of pathology. At the death of professor Spielmann, in 1784, he was promoted to the professorship of botany, chemistry, and materia medica. On the reform of the system of literary education in France he was appointed professor of bot^in^ and the materia medica, at the medical academy established in Strasburgh in 1795, and professor of natural history at the central school. He was also admitted a fellow of the national institute of France, and successively chosen a member of the royal academy of sciences, of Berlin, of the Linnaean society, and of several other academies and literary societies. Among his numerous correspondents were Buffon, Cuvier, Fortis, Hany, Millin, La Peyrouse, Schreber, Zimmer*­mann, c, Hesacrificed all his property to form one of the finest and richest cabinets of natural history in Europe, and without having edited any large work on natural science, he has enriched it with many interesting discoveries and ingenious observations, published in his numerous dissertations, and in several literary journals, both Gerjnan and French. He died of a pulmouic disease, Oct. 4, 1800.

, a celebrated botanist, was born at Halle, in Saxony, towards the middle of the seventeenth century. Having resided some time in the East Indies, and especially at Ceylon, where he practised as a physician, he was induced to re-visit Europe in 1679, and filled the botanical professorship at Leyden, and at the same time having the care of the botanical garden, he soon more than doubled the number of plants which had been introduced by his predecessors during 150 years. He was the first in Holland who adopted a system of botany founded on the fructification, partly following the arrangement of Morison, and partly that of Ray. His works are remarkable for the excellence and neatness of his figures, containing descriptions of many new plants found in various parts of the world. He died on the 29th of January, 1695. Linnæus, in his “Classes Plantarum,” has given a sketch of the Hennannian system, which is founded upon the fruit, to which he adhered with more pertinacity than either Ray or Morison themselves. The first work he published was a “Catalogue of the Leyden Garden,” in 1687, reprinted at Leyden in 1720, 8vo, under the title of “Index Piantarum quse in horto Leidensi aluntur,” to which Boerhaave added a history of the garden. To Hermann may be ascribed, on the authority of Sherard, the following work, “Florae Lugdunobatavrc flores,” though publislied under the name of Zumbach. In 1695, a work, entitled “Flora Lugdunobatava,” was begun to be printed, but after a few sheets were taken oft, its author’s death put a stop to any further continuation of it. At this time the “Paradisus Batavus” was in a state of forwardness, and it was published in 8vo, as a posthumous work, about three years afterwards. It was, however, reprinted in quarto in 1705, having been edited by William Sherard, at the expence of Hermann’s widow. This indefatigable man left a considerable number of papers and dried plants, the latter of which came into the possession of J. Burmann; and formed the corner-stone of his “Thesaurus Zeylanicus,” published at Amsterdam in 1737. These same plants came afterwards into tha hands of Linnæus for a time, and from them his “Flora Zeylanica” was composed. They are now finally the property of sir Joseph Banks. Besides the above books, he was the author of the foliowing works “Mussei Indici catalogus, continens varia exotica animalia, insecta, vegetabilia, mineralia, quse collegerat,” 1711, 8vo; “Lapis Lydius Materiae Medicae,” 1704, 8vo “Musaeum Zeylanicum” (unfinished) “Catalogus Plantarum Capitis Bonse Spei” (unedited) and wrote various botanical and medical tracts, which are of less moment, and some of which are superseded by the former.

, a learned and pious doctor of the Sorbonne, and a voluminous author, was born at Beauvais in 1617, and displayed early propensities for learning. Potier bishop and earl of Beauvais sent him to the various colleges of Paris for education. He obtained a canonry of Beauvais, was rector of the university of Paris in 1646, and died in 1690, after being excluded from his canonry and the Sorbonne for some ecclesiastical dispute. Hermant had the virtues and defects of a recluse student^ and was much esteemed for his talents and piety by Tillemont and others of the solitaries at Port Royal. His style was noble and majestic, but sometimes rather inflated. His works are numerous: 1. “Toe Life of St. Athanasius,” 2 vols. 4to. 2. Those of “St. Basil and Gregory Nazianzen,” of the same extent. 3. The Life of St. Chrysostom,“written under the name of Menan. And, 4. That of” St. Ambrose,“both in 4to. 5. A translation, of some tracts from St. Chrysostom. 6. Another from St. Basil. 7. Several polemical writings against the Jesuits, who therefore became his mortal enemies, and contrived to interfere with his monumental honours after death, by preventing the inscription of a very commendatory epitaph. 8.” A Defence of the Church against Labadie.“9.” Index Universalis totius juris Ecclesiastici,“folio. 10.” Discours Chretien sur retablissement du Bureau des pauvres de Beauvais," 1653. A life of him has been published by Baillet.

, or Hermas commonly called the Shepherd, was an antient father of the church, and is generally supposed to have been the same whom St. Paul mentions in Rom. xvi. 14. He is ranked amongst those who are called Apostolical Fathers, from his having lived in the times of the apostles: but who he was, what he did, and what he suffered for the sake of Christianity, are all in a great measure, if not altogether, unknown to us. He seems to have belonged to the church at Rome, when Clement was bishop of it; that is, according to Dodwell, from the year 64 or 65 to the year 81. This circumstance we are able to collect from his “Second Vision,” of which, he tells us, he was commanded to communicate a copy to Clement. What his condition was before his conversion, we know not; but that he was a man of some consideration, we may conclude from what we read in his “Third Vision;” where he owns himself to have been formerly unprofitable to the Lord, upon the account of those riches which afterwards he seems to have dispensed in works of charity and beneficence. After his conversion he probably lived a very strict life, since he is said to have been employed in several messages to the church, both to correct their manners, and to warn them of the trials that were about to come upon them. His death, if we may believe the “Roman Marty rology,” was conformable to his life; where we read, that being “illustrious for his miracles, he at last offered himself a worthy sacrifice unto God.” Baronius says, that “having undergone many labours and troubles in the time of the persecution under Aurelius, he at last rested in the Lord July 26th, which is therefore observed in commemoration of him.” But Hermas being sometimes called by the title of “Pastor, or Shepherd,” the Roman martyrologist has divided the good man into two saints: and they observe the memorial of Hennas May the 9th, and of Pastor July the 26th.

The original Greek of this piece is lost, and we have nothing but a Latin version of it, except some fragments preserved in the quotations of other authors; which, it is observable, are sufficient to evince the fidelity of this version. The best edition of it is that of 1698; where it is to be found among the other apostolical fathers, illustrated with the notes and corrections of Cotelerius and Le Cierc. with them also it was translated into English by archbishop Wake, and published with a large preliminary discourse relating to each father; the best edition of which translation is that of 1710.

, an Egyptian legislator, priest, and philosopher, lived, as some think, in the year of the world 2076, in the reign of Ninus, after Moses: and was so skilled in all profound arts and sciences, that he acquired the surname of Trismegistus, or “thrice great.” Clemens Alexandrinus has given us an account of his writings, and a catalogue of some of them such as, the book containing the Hymns of the Gods another “De rationibus vitae regiae” four mo*e, “De astrologia,” that is, “De ordine fixarunl stellarum, & de conjunctione & illuminatione Solis & Lunae” ten more, entitled, “lE^arwa,” or which treat of laws, of the gods, and of the whole doctrine and discipline of the priests. Upon the whole, Clemens makes Hermes the author of thirty -six books of divinity and philosophy, and six of physic; but they are all lost. There goes indeed one under his name, whose title is “Poemander;” but this is agreed by all to be supposititious, and Casaubon imagines it to be written about the beginning of the second century, by some Platonizing Christian, who, to enforce Christianity with a better grace upon Pagans, introduces Hermes Trismegistus delivering, as it were long before, the greatest part of those doctrines which are comprised in the Christian creed.

This philosopher has stood exceedingly high in the opinion of mankind, ancients as well as moderns. Plato tells us, that he was the inventor of letters, of ordinary writing, and hieroglyphics. Cicero says, that he was governor of Egypt, and invented letters, as well as delivered the first laws to the people of that country; and Suidas asserts, that he flourished before Pharoah, and acquired the surname of Trismegistus, because he gave out something oracular concerning the Trinity. Gyraldus thinks he was called Thrice Great, because he was the greatest philosopher, the greatest priest, and the greatest king. When the great lord chancellor Bacon endeavoured to do justice to the merits of our James I. he could think of no better means for this purpose, than by comparing him to Hermes Trismegistus, who was at once distinguished by the glory of a king, the illuminations of a priest, and the learning of a philosopher."

, an heretic of the second century, was a native of Africa, a painter, and stoic philosopher, and was alive in the days of Tertullian, according to Fleury. Tillemont makes him flourish in the year 200; but Du Fresnoy says he did not preach his erroneous opinions concerning the origin of the world, and the nature of the soul, till the year 208. He established matter as the first principle, and made Idea the mother of all the elements; for which reason his followers were commonly called Mattriarians. By his assertion of the self-existence and improduction of matter, he endeavoured to give an account (as stoic philosophers had done before him) of the original of evils; and to free God from the imputation of them, he argued thus: God made all things either out of himself, or out of nothing, or out of pre-existent matter. He could not make all things out of himself, because, himself being always unmade, he should then really have been the maker of nothing: and he did not make all out of nothing, because, being essentially good, he would have made every thing in the best manner, and so there could have been no evil in the world: but since there are evils, and these could not proceed from the will of God, they must needs rise from the fault of something, and therefore of the matter out of which things were made. His followers denied the resurrection, rejected water-baptism, asserted that angels were composed of fire and spirit, and were the creators of the soul of man; and that Christ, as he ascended, diveste'd himself of human nature, and left his body in the sun. Tertullian has written against him.

, a naturalist and physician, was sent out by Philip II. king of Spain, to make obseryations on, and to describe, the natural productions of Spanish America. His pecuniary allowance for this purpose appears to have been ample, and he spared no expence to make himself acquainted with such objects as he was in search of. He wrote an account of their nature *nd properties, but it does not appear that he lived to superintend the publication of his labours, for in 1651 the result of his inquiries was edited at Rome under the care of the Lyncaean academy, established in that city; tht papers of Hernandez having been purchased by Frederic Cesi, a young nobleman, who founded and was perpetual president of the Lyncaei. This work had originally been published in the Spanish language at Mexico, under the name and care of Francis Ximenes; but the Roman edition, in small folio, came out in Latin, having the following title, “Nova Plantarum, Animalium, et Mineralium Mexicanorum Historia, a Francisco Hernandez, Medico, in Indiis praestantissimo primum compilata. Dein a Nardo Antonio Reecho in volumen digesta, a Johanno Terentio, Johanno Fabro, ct Fabio Columna, Lyncseis, notis et adtlitionibus longe doctissimis illustrata.” The original drawings of this work were procured by Hernandez, who paid the immense sum of sixty thousand ducats for them; they had been drawn at the time when Joseph a Costa was in America, but the numerous wooden cuts which accompany this volume are by no means equal to what might have been expected from the account we have of the drawings, and the work did not answer the trouble and expence which had been bestowed upon it. What became of him is not recorded, but his drawings were consumed by a fire in the Escurial. Some of liis representations are so extraordinary, that their truth has been doubted, but his accuracy has lately been verified. Hernandez does not appear to have published any other works on natural history, but this will entitle him to our gratitude for' having first unfolded to European botanists the treasures of that then little known quarter of the world. A history of the church at Mexico has been ascribed to our author, but without certainty.

, A. M. an English controversial writer, was a native of Suffolk, and admitted pensioner of Corpus Christi college, Cambridge, under the tuition of Mr. Fawcett, Oct. 29, 1711; he was made scholar of the house next year, and proceeded A. B. in 1715. About this time he was recommended to the duchess of Bedford, who took him into her family, for the instruction of her sons, Wrotthesly, the third, and John, the fourth duke of Bedford; and the year following he was made fellow of Merton college, Oxford, where he commenced M. A. in 1718. He was a man of learning, virtue, and spirit, and continued a batcheior and a layman till the time of his death, which happened at Woburn about the year 1722. He published “The False notion of a Christian priesthood, &c.” in answer to Mr. Law, 1717-8 “A Letter to the Prolocutor,” jjo answer to one from him to Dr. Tenison, 1717-8. “A Letter to the Rev. Dr. Tenison concerning Citations out of Arch. Wake’s Preliminary Discourse to the Apostolic Fathers,” Lond. 1718; ' Three Discourses on private Judgment, against the authority of the Magistrate over conscience, and considerations concerning uniting Protestants, translated from Professor Werenfels, with a preface to Dr. Teaison by Philakuthtirus Cantabrigiemis, Lond. 171-8.“Under this name he was one of the writers in the Bangorian controversy, of which he began in some measure the history, by publishing an account of all the considerable pamphlets to which it gave rise, with a continuation and occasional observations, to the end of the year 1719, by the name of Philonagnostes Criticus. He published also, w An account of all the considerable books and pamphlets written in the controversy concerning the Trinity,” from 1712 to the same time, Lond. 1720: also a “Vindication of the Archbishop of Canterbury from being the author of a Letter on the State of Religion in England, printed at Zurich,” Lond. 1719; and “Two letters to Dr. Mangey on his Sermon upon Christ’s Divinity,” published about the same time.

, is the name of two celebrated mathematicians of antiquity, who are usually distinguished by the epithets, Hero the elder, and Hero the younger. The first was a native of Alexandria, and the disciple of Ctesias, who flourished in the reigns of Ptolemy Philadelphia and Euergetes I. He was distinguished by his great skill in mechanics, and particularly in the construction of machinery; as a moralist he was inclined to the tenets of Epicurus. He was author of a treatise “De Constructione et Mensura Manubalistoe,” of which a fragment was published in Greek by Bernardino Baldi “Pe Telis conficiendis jaculandisque Liber,” published with notes by Baldi “Spiralia,” published in 1575 by Frederic Commandine and “De Automatorum Fabrica.” These are all to be found in the Louvre edition of the “Ancient Mathematicians.” The younger Hero is supposed to have flourished under the reign of the emperor Heraclius. He was author of “De Machinis Bellicis Geodcesia;” “Liber de Obsidione repellenda et toleranda” and <c De Vocabulis Geonaetricis et Stereometricis."

, so called rather from his power and talents than his goodness, was a native of Ascalon in Judea, and thence sometimes called the Ascalonite. He was born seventy years before the Christian osra, the son of Antipater an Idumean, who appointed him to the government of Galilee. He at first embraced the party of Brutus and Cassius, but, after their death, that of Antony. By him he was named tetrarch, and afterwards, by his interest, king of Judea in the year 40 A. C. After the battle of Actium, he so successfully paid his court to Augustus, that he was by him confirmed in his kingdom. On all occasions he proved himself an able politician and a good soldier. But he was far from being master of his passions, and his rage very frequently was. directed against his own family. Aristobiilus, brother to his beloved wife Mariamne, her venerable grandfather Hyrcanus, and finally she herself, fell victims to his jealousy and fury. His keen remorse fojp her death rendered him afterwards yet more cruel. He put to death her mother Alexandra, and many others of his family. His own sons Alexander and Aristobulus having excited his suspicions, he destroyed them also, which made Augustus say, that it was better to be Herod’s hog than his son. Among his good actions svas *he rebuilding qf the temple at Jernsalenj, which be performed in nine years, with great magnificence; and in the time of a famine he sold many valuable and curious articles he had collected, to relieve the sufferers. To Augustus he paid the utmost adulation, and even divine honours. At the birth of our Saviour, his jealousy was so much excited by the prophetic intimations of his greatness, that he slaughtered all the infants in Bethlehem, in hopes of destroying him among the number. But his tyranny was now nearly at an end, and two or three years after the birth of Christ he died of a miserable disease at the age of more than seventy. He had nine or ten wives, of which number Mariamiie was the second. A little before his death, soured yet more by his acute sufferings, he attempted a greater act of cruelty than any he had performed in his former life. He sent for all the most considerable persons in Judea, and ordered that as soon as he was dead, they should all be massacred, that every great family in the country might weep for him. But this savage order was not executed. Some have supposed that he assumed the character of the Messiah, and that the persons who admitted that claim were those called in the gospel Herodians. But this is by no means certain. Herod was the first who shook the foundations of the Jewish government. He appointed the high-priests, and removed them at his pleasure, without regard to the laws of succession; and he destroyed the authority of the national council. But by his credit with Augustus, by his power, and the very magnificent buildings he erected, he gave a temporary splendour to that nation. His son, Herod Antipas, (by his fifth wife Cleopatra) was tetrarch of Galilee after his death.

, surnamed the Athenian, a native of Marathon, in the second century, studied rhetoric, and although he was somewhat disconcerted in his first speech before Adrian, he became so famous in Greece, and at Rome, for his extempore harangues, that Titus-Antoninus appointed him teacher of rhetoric to his adopted sons, Marcus Aurelius, and Lucius Verus; considering him as the most eloquent man of the age. He rose from this office to the highest dignities, and was consul in the year 143. He retired towards the end of his life to Marathon, and died there of a consumption, aged seventy-six. Some of his speeches are in the Greek Orators by Aldus, 1513, 2 vols. folio; and in those of Stephens, 1575, folio.

, a Greek historian, flourished at Rome from the reign of Commodus to the beginning of the reign of Gordian III. We know little of his life, except that he was engaged in many public employments. He is supposed to have died at Rome about the year 240. The history, which he has left us, is comprized in eight books;, at the beginning of the first of which he declares, that he will only write of the affairs of his own time, such as he had either known himself, or received information of from creditable persons. Like many historians who have related the events of their own times, Herodian forgets sometimes that he is writing for posterity, and omits the necessary dates; nor is he very correct as to matters of fact, and points of geography. His impartiality has been called in question by some critics, as far as respects his characters of Alexander Severus and Maximinian, but others seem inclined to defend him. His style is neat, perspicuous, and pleasing, and occasionally eloquent, particularly in the speeches he inserts. Herodian was translated into Latin by Angelus Politianus, and may therefore be read, according to professor Whear, either in Greek or Latin “for,” says he, “I don't know which of the two deserves the greater praise Herodian, for writing so well in his own language, or Politian, for translating him so happily, as to make him appear like an original in a foreign one.” This, however, has more of compliment than of sober criticism, although it may be allowed that Politian has been uncommonly successful. Though we have considered Herodian hitherto as an historian only, yet Suidas informs us, that he wrote many other books, which have not been preserved from the ruins of time. The first edition of Herodian is among the “Res Gestae” of Xenophun, published by Aldus, 1503, folio; but the translation by Politian appeared first at Home in June 1493. folio, and again in September of that year at Bologna, a magnificent book, printed by Plato de Benedictis, and accurately described in the <c Bibliotheca Spenceriana." There was a third edition of Politian’s translation, at the same place and in the same year, in 4to, printed by Bazalerius de Bazaleriis. The best editions of Herodian in Greek are those of Louvaine, 1525, 4to; Stephens, Paris, 1581, 4to Boeder, Strasburgh, 1644—62—72, 8vo; Ox-ford, 1678—99, 1704—8, 8vo; Ruddiman, Edinburgh, 1724, 8vo; Irsmich, Leipsic, 1789, 5 vols. 8vo, by far the most erudite and elaborate. All these have Politian’s translation.

, an ancient Greek historian of Halicarnassus in Caria, was born in the first year of the 74th olympiad; about 484 years before Christ. This time of his birth is fixed by a passage in Aulus Gellius, Book xv. chap 23. which makes Helianicus 65, Herodotus 53, and Thucydides 40 years old, at the commencement of the Peloponnesian war. The name of his father was Lyxes; of his mother, Dryo. The city of Halicarnassus being at that time under the tyranny of Lygdamis, grandson of Artemisia queen of Caria, Herodotus quitted his country, and retired to Samos; whence he travelled over Egypt, Greece, Italy, &c. and in his travels acquired the knowledge of the history and origin of many nations. He then began to digest the materials he had collected into order, and composed that history which has preserved his name ever since. He wrote it in the isle of Samos, according to the general opinion; but the elder Pliny affirms it to have been written at Thurium, a town in that part of Italy then called Magna Graecia, whither Herodotus had retired with an Athenian colony, and where he is supposed to have died, not however before he had returned into his own country, and by his influence expelled the tyrant Lygdamis. At Samos he studied the Ionic dialect, in which he wrote, his native dialect being Doric. Lucian informs us, that when Herodotus left Caria to go into Greece, he began to consider with himself, what he should do to obtain celebrity and lasting fame, in the most expeditious way, and with as little trouble as possible. His history, he presumed, would easily procure him fame, and raise his name among the Grecians, in whose favour it was written; but then he foresaw, that it would be very tedious, if not endless, to go through the several cities of Greece, and recite it to each respective city; to the Athenians, Corinthians, Argives, Lacedaemonians, &c. He thought it most proper, therefore, to take the opportunity of their assembling all together; and accordingly recited his work at the Olympic games, which rendered him more famous than even those who had obtained the prizes. None were ignorant of his name, nor was there a single person in Greece, who had not either seen him at the Olympic games, or heard those speak of him who had seen him there; so that wherever he came, the people pointed to him with their ringers, saying, “This is that Herodotus, who has written the Persian wars in the Ionic dialect; this is he who has celebrated our victories.”

His work is divided into nine books, which, according to the computation of Dionysius Halicarnassensis, contain the most remarkable occurrences within a period of 240 years; from the reign of Cyrus the first king of Persia, to that of Xerxes, when the historian was living. These nine books are called after the nine Muses, each of which is distinguished by the name of a Muse and this has given birth to two disquisitions among the learned first, whether they were so called by Herodotus himself; and secondly, for what reason they were so called. As to the first, it is generally agreed that Herodotus did not impose these names himself; but it is not agreed why they were imposed by others. Lucian, in the place referred to above, tells us, that those names were given them by the Grecians at the Olympic games, when they were first recited, as the best compliment that could be paid the man who had taken pains to do them so much honour. Others have thought, that the name of Muses have been fixed upon them by way of reproach, and were designed to intimate, that Herodotus, instead of true history, had written a great deal of fable, for which, it must be owned, he has been censured by Thucydides, Strabo, and Juvenal, and particularly Plutarch, who conceived a warm resentment against him, for casting an odium upon his countrymen the Thebans, and therefore wrote that little treatise, to be found in his works, “Of the Malignity of Herodotus.” Herodotus, however, has not wanted defenders in Aldus Manutius, Joachim Camerarius, and Henry Stephens, who have very justly observed, that he seldom relates any thing of doubtful credit, without producing his authority, or using terms of caution; and some events, narrated by him, which were once thought wonders, have been confirmed by modern voyages and discoveries.

Besides this history, he promised to write another of Assyria: but this was never finished, at least not published. There is ascribed also to Herodotus a “Life of Homer,” which is usually printed at the end of his works; hut the style of this piece is very different from that of Herodotus; and the author mentions several things of Homer, which do not at all agree with what the ancients have said of that poet.

Herodotus wrote in the Ionic dialect, and his style and manner have ever been admired by all readers of taste. Cicero, in his second book “De Oratore,” says, that “he is so very eloquent and flowing, that he pleased him exceedingly;” and in his “Brutus,” that “his style is free from all harshness, and glides along like the waters of a still river.” He calls him also the Father of History; because he was, if not the first historian, the first who brought history to that degree of perfection. Quintilian has given the same judgment of Herodotus. “Besides the flowing sweetness or' his style, even the dialect he uses has a peculiar grace, and seems to express the harmony of numbers. Many,” says he, “have written history well; but every body owns, that there are two historians preferable to the rest, though extremely different from each other. Thucydides is close, concise, and sometimes even crowded in his sentences: Herodotus is sweet, copiou&, and exuberant. Thucydides is more proper for men of warm passions Herodotus for those of a sedater turn. Thucydides excels in orations Herodotus in narrations. The one is more forcible the other more agreeable.” There have been several editions of Herodotus the first in Greek, is that of Aldus, 1502, folio. There are also two by Henry Stephens, in 1570 and 1592; one by Gale at London in 1679; and one by Gronovius at Leyden in 1715. But the best is that of Wesseling, published at Amsterdam in 1763. There is also an elegant edition by Schcefer, Leipsic, 1800, &c. 8vo, and anothef printed at Edinburgh, 1806, 7 vols. 8vo. The first Latin translation was published at Venice in 1474, folio. It has been twice translated into English once by Littlebury, in 2 vols. 8vo, without notes the second time by, Mr. Beloe, in 4 vols. with many useful and entertaining remarks. There is also an excellent French translation, by M. Larcher, with very learned notes and dissertations, first printed in 1786, 7 vols. 8vo, and reprinted with additions, 1802, y vols. 8vo.

, an ancient physician, flourished almost five hundred years before Christ. Cicero, Pliny, and Plutarch, mention him. Fallopius says, that he was the greater anatomist, and understood the sirucu.e of the human body better, and made more discoveries than Erasistratus his contemporary. He is also said to have discovered the lacteal vessels; and gave names to the various parts of the body, which they retain to this day. He was a great lover of botany, as wells physic and surgery and is said to have made some considerable improvement in each. Galen calls him a consummate physician, and a very great anatomist; and says, that these two great anatomists dissected many human bodies at Alexandria in Egypt; Tertullian says 600, and calls him “Herophilus ille Medicus aut Lanius;” as they are said to have dis^c ued condemned criminals alive. He is said also to have discovered the nerves, and their use. He makes three sorts of them; the first to convey sensation, the second to move the bones, and the third the muscles. He also mentions the optic nerves, the retina, and the tunica arachnoirles, and choroides the lacteals, mesenteric glands, and the glandulae prostatae and is the first that wrote any thing distinctly with exactness on the pulse.

, a Spanish historian of great fame, was born in 1565. He became first secretary to Vespasian Gonzaga, viceroy of Naples, and afterwards grand historiographer of India, with a considerable pension under Philip II. He did not receive his money unearned, but published a general history of India from 14^2 to 1554, in four volumes, folio. A very short time before his death he received from Philip IV. the appointment of secretary of state. He died in 1625. His History of India is a very curious work, carried to a great detail, and chargeable with no defects, except too great a love for the marvellous, a degree of national vanity, and too great inflation in the style. There is an English translation by capt. John Stevens, published in 1725 and 1726, 6 vols. 8vo. He published also a general History of Spain, from 1554 to 1598, which has been less esteemed than the other work. It is in three volumes, folio.

, a Spanish poet, was born at Seville, and flourished in the sixteenth century. In 1582 he published a collection of lyrical and heroic poems, which was reprinted in 1619, and acquired their author a high reputation, as one who had attained to the greatest excellence in the lyric poetry of Spain. His style is neat, correct, elegant, and copious. He published an edition of Garcilasso de la Vega, with notes the life of sir Thomas More; and a narrative of the war of Cyprus, and the battle of Lepanto.

, one of the minor poets, of very considerable merit, in the reign of Charles I. was born in London, but descended from an ancient and genteel family in Leicestershire, the history of which is amply detailed by the able historian of that county. He was the fourth son of Nicholas Herrick, of St. Vedast, Foster-lane, by Julian Stone his wife, and was born in August 1591. He was educated at St. John’s college, Cambridge, from 1615 to 1617; and Wood, who indeed speaks with hesitation, seems wrong in placing him in his Athenæ Oxonienses. He is said to have afterwards removed to Trinity hall, Cambridge; but nothing more of his academical progress is known. Being patronised by the earl of Exeter, he was presented by king Charles I. on the promotion of Dr. Potter to the see of Carlisle, to the vicarage of Dean Prior in Devonshire, Oct. 1, 1629, where he became distinguished for his poetical talents and wit. During the prevalence of the parliamentary interest, he was ejected from his living, and resided in London in St. Anne’s parish, Westminster, until the Restoration, when he again obtained his vicarage. The time of his death is not known. His poetical works are contained in a scarce volume, entitled “Hesperides, or the works, both humane and divine, of Robert Herrick, Esq. London,” 1643, 8vo. To this volume was appended his “Noble numbers, or, his pious pieces,” in which, says Wood, “he sings the birth of Christ, and sighs for his Saviour’s sufferings on the cross. These two books made him much admired in the time they were published, and especially by the generous and boon loyalists, who commiserated his sufferings.” In 1810, Dr. Nott of Bristol published a selection from the “Hesperides,” which may probably contribute to revive the memory of Herrick as a poet, who certainly in vigour of fancy, feeling, and ease of vereification, is entitled to a superior rank among the bards of his period, He is one of those, however, who will require the selector’s unsparing hand, for, notwithstanding his “pious pieces,” there are too many of an opposite description, which cannot, like his quaint conceits, be placed to the account of the age in which he lived.

, a distinguished English prelate, was born in the year 1691, at Walsoken in Norfolk. His father, John Herring, was then rector of that place; and Dr. John Carter, afterwards fellow of Eton, having at that time the care of the school of Wisbeach, in the Isle of Ely, Mr. Herring placed his son under his care. Here our young student continued till June 21, 1710, when he was admitted into Jesus college, Cambridge, under the tuition of Mr. Richard Warren, afterwards D. D. rector of Cavendish, and archdeacon of Suffolk. In this college he took the degree of bachelor of arts; but there being no prospect of his succeeding to a fellowship, he removed in July 1714, to Corpus Christ! college, and was made a fellow of that seat of learning on the resignation of Mr. Peane in April 1716. The same year he was ordained deacon, and the year following commenced master of arts, and took upon him the charge of pupils.

In 1719 he was ordained priest, and was successively minister of the several pa ishes of Great Shelford, Stow cumqui, and Trinity, in Cambridge. In these stations he deservedly acquired the character of a celebrated preacher. His person was majestic; he had a gracefulness in his behaviour, and gravity in his countenance, that always procured him reverence. His pronunciation was so remarkably sweet, and his address so insinuating, that his audience, immediately on his beginning to speak, were prepossessed in his favour. Nor were these conspicuous talents suffered to remain long without being rewarded; for, in the year 1722, bishop Fleetwood made him his domestic chaplain, and, the same year, presented him to the rectory of Rettenden in Essex, and soon after to that of Barclay in Hertfordshire; which occasioned his fellowship to become vacant the year following.

In 1724 he took the degree of bachelor of divinity, and, about the same time, was presented by his majesty to the rectory of Allhallows the Great, in London; but gave up the benefice before institution. His friends, however, being desirous of bringing him to town, upon a vacancy of a preacher to Lincoin’s-inu, recommended him to that society, who accordingly made choice of him in 1726; and soon after he was appointed chaplain in ordinary to the king, and, on attending his majesty on his visit to the university of Cambridge in 1728, was honoured with the degree of doctor of divinity .

In 1731, sir William Clayton, bait, presented him to the rectory of Blechingly in Surrey; upon which he was succeeded in that of Barclay by Mr. Castle. About the close of the same year, his majesty nominated him to the deanery of Rochester, where he was installed on the fifth of February 1731-2. In 1737 he was preferred to the bishopric of Bangor; and, on the death of archbishop Blackburn, in 1743, translated to the archiepiscopal see of York. While he was employed in the business of this high station, the rebellion broke out in Scotland; when his love for his country, his prince, his religion, would not suffer him to remain an indolent and unactive spectator of the dangers which threatened the happy constitution and liberties of these kingdoms. He was indefatigable in assisting, advising, and persuading the inhabitants of his diocese to join heartily in an association, then on foot, for defending his majesty’s sacred person and government. In consequence of these services, the archiepiscopal see of Canterbury becoming vacant by the death of archbishop Potter, in 1747, Dr. Herring was translated thither. In 1753 he was seized with a violent fever, which brought him to the brink of the grave; and though he did in some measure recover, yet from that time he might be rather said to languish, than to live. He retired to Croydon, declined all public business, and saw little other company than his relations and particular friends. After languishing about four years, he expired March 13, 1757; and, agreeably to the express direction of his will, was interred in a private manner, in the vault of Croydon church. In 1763 a volume of his sermons on public occasions was printed, which bear the strongest marks of unaffected piety and benevolence; ancl the profits of the edition were given to the treasurer of the London Infirmary, for the use of that charity. A volume of his “Letters” was also published by the Rev. Mr. Buncombe in 1777, which exhibit his character in a very amiable point of view, and include many interesting particulars of his life, ably illustrated by the editor. The virtues of the man, indeed, appear to have afforded the principal cause of the high praises every where bestowed on the archbishop. The natural mildness and indolence of his temper, led him to a degree of indifference towards the disputed doctrines of the church, which procured him the good opinion of the sectaries, some of whom, not content with mere foibearance, seem to have wished his more active co-operation, and have accused him of diffidence and timidity; and from his having spoken slightingly of the orthodox in one of his letters, and having said “1 abhor every tendency to the Trinity controversy,” they thought him willing, but unfortunately not ready, to bring about what they call a reformation in the doctrines of the church. In these respects they probably mistook his character . While archbishop of York, he much improved the gardens at Bishopsthorpe, and gave a new clock to the turret; and after his advancement to the metropolitical see of Canterbury, he laid out about 6000l. in repairing the houses and gardens at Lambeth and Croydon. By his last will, he left to the incorporated society for the relief of the widows and sons of poor clergymen the sum of 1000l. and to the master and fellows of Corpus Christi college, Cambridge, the sum of 1000l. Old South Sea stock, towards rebuilding or repairing the college. His grace was never married

, or Hersan, a French divine, known chiefly for a violent satire which he wrote against cardinal Richelieu, under the feigned name of Optatus Gallus, which, having been condemned and burnt by the parliament of Paris, is become very scarce, and therefore sells at from 60 to 100 livres, among French collectors. It is entitled “Optati Galli de cavendo Schismate, Liber Paraeneticus,” and was published at Paris in 1640, in 8vo. There is, however, a counterfeit edition, bearing the same date, which is distinguished from the true by a very few differences, as superiorum for Superiore, in p. 7, and by the sentence of parliament which takes up twelve pages, and only eleven in the counterfeit. In this book the author maintained that the Galilean church was in danger of separating from Home, like the English, and strenuously maintained the supremacy of the pope. The cardinal employed three or four writers to answer this anonymous assailant, the best of whom was Isaac Habert in his treatise “De consensu hierarchies et monarchic;” but the author in the mean time retired to Rome, where after a time his violence and indiscretion involved him with the inquisition, on some points respecting the doctrine of grace, which he handled in a “Panegyric on St. Louis.” He was cited, refused to appear, and was excommunicated. He therefore returned to France, where he died in 1660. There are extant also by him, a paraphrase on Solomon’s Song, in prose, published in 1635, 8vo; some funeral orations, sermons, and attacks against the congregation of the oratory, which he had quitted; with a few other pieces. His chief promotion was that of chancellor to the church of Metz.

, a celebrated civilian, was born at Oberklee, near Giessen, in 1651, was educated at Giessen, and afterwards became professor of law, chancellor of the university of Giessen, and counsellor to the landgrave. He died September 18, 1710. He left, “Notitia veteris Francorum regni,” 1710, 4to; “Commentationes et Opuscula ad Mistoriam et Geographiam antiquae Germanise spectantia,” 1713, 4to; and other valuable works.