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

“That he had a design to write an epic poem, and was to call it Chorologia, of the worthies of his country raised by Fame, and was to dedicate it to his country. It is all in couplets, for he detested all other rhimes. He said he had written a discourse of poetry both against Campion and Daniel, especially the last, where he proves couplets to be the best sort of verses, especially when they are broke like hexameters, and that cross rhimes and stanzas, because the purpose would lead beyond eight lines, were all forced.”

Ben Jonson, continues Drummond, “was a great lover and praiser of himself, a contemner and scorner of others, given rather to lose a friend than a jest; jealous of every word and action of those about him, especially after drink, which is one of the elements in which he lived a dissembler of the parts which reign in him a bragger of some good that he wanted, thinking nothing well done, but what either be himself or some of his friends have said or done. He is passionately kind and angry, careless either to gain or keep; vindictive, but if he be well answered at himself, interprets best sayings and deeds often to the worst. He was for any religion, as being versed in both oppressed with fancy, which hath over- mastered his reason, a general disease in many poets. His inventions are smooth and easy, but above all he excelleth in a translation. When his play of the Silent Woman was first acted, there were found verses after on the stage against him, concluding, that that play was well named the Silent Woman, because there was never one man to say plaudite to it.” Drummond adds, “In short, he was in his personal character the very reverse of Shakspeare, as surly, ill-natured, proud, and disagreeable, as Shakspeare with ten times his merit was gentle, good-natured, easy, and amiable.”

Lord Clarendon’s character of our author is more favourable, and from so accurate a judge of human nature, perhaps more valuable. “His name,” lord Clarendon says, <l can never be forgotten, having by his very good learning, and the severity of his nature and manners, very much reformed the stage; and indeed the English poetry itself. His natural advantages were, judgment to order and govern fancy, rather than excess of fancy, his productions being slow and upon deliberation, yet then abounding with great wit and fancy, and will live accordingly; and surely as he did exceedingly exalt the English language in eloquence, propriety, and masculine expressions, so he was the best judge of, and fittest to prescribe rules to poetry and poets, of any man who had 'lived with, or before him, or since: if Mr. Cowley had not made a flight beyond all men, with that modesty yet, as to ascribe much of this to the example and learning of Ben Jonson. His conversation was very good, and with the men of most note; and he had for many years an extraordinary kindness for Mr. Hyde (lord Clarendon), till he found he betook himself to business, which he believed ought never to be preferred before his company. He lived to be very old, and till the palsy made a deep impression upon his body and his mind."

From these accounts it may surely be inferred that Jonson in his life-time occupied a high station in the literary world. So many memorials of character, and so many eulogiums on his talents, have not fallen to the lot of many writers of that age. His failings, however, appear to have been so conspicuous as to obscure his virtues. Addicted to intemperance, with the unequal temper which habitual intemperance creates, and disappointed in the hopes of wealth and independence, which his high opinion of his talents led him to form, degenerating even to the resources of a libeller who extorts from fear what is denied to genius, he became arrogant, and careless of pleasing even those with whom he associated. Of the coarseness of his manners there can be no doubt, but it appears at the same time that his talents were such as made his temper be tolerated for the sake of his conversation. As to his high opinion of himself, he did not probably differ from his contemporaries, who hailed him as the reformer of the stage, and as the most learned of criticsand it is no great diminution of his merit, that an age of more refinement cannot find enough to justify the superior light in which he was contemplated. It is sufficient that he did what had not been done before, that he displayed a judgment to which the stage had been a stranger, and furnished it with examples of regular comedy which have not been surpassed. His memory was uncommonly tenacious, and his learning certainly superior to that of most of his contemporaries. Pope gives him the praise of having “brought critical learning into vogue,” and having instructed both the actors and spectators in what was the proper province of the dramatic muse. His “English Grammar,” and his “Discoveries,” both written in his advanced years, display a-n attachment to the interests of literature, and a habit of reflection, which place his character as a scholar in a very favourable point of view. The editor of a recent edition: of his Discoveries, justly attributes to them “a closeness and precision of style, weight of sentiment, and accuracy of classical learning.”

Yet whatever may be thought of his learning, it is greatly over-rated, when opposed or preferred to the genius of his contemporary Shakspeare. Jonson 1 s learning contributed very little to his reputation as a dramatic poet. Where he seems to have employed it most, as in his “Cataline,” it only enables him to encumber the tragedy with servile versifications of Sallust, when he should have been studying nature and the passions. Dry den, whose opinions are often inconsistent, considers Jonson as the greatest man of his age, and observes, that “if we look upon him when he was himself (for his last plays were but his dotages) he was the most learned and judicious writer any theatre ever had.” In another place (preface to the “Mock Astrologer”), he says “that almost all Jonson’s pieces were but crambt his cocta, the same humour a little” varied and written worse."

It is certain that his high character as a dramatic writer has not descended to us undiminished. Of his fifty dramas, there are not above three which preserve his name on the stage, but these indeed are excellent. It was his misfortune to be obliged to dissipate on court masks and pageants those talents which concentrated might have furnished dramas equal to his “Volpone,” “Alchemist,” and the “Silent Woman.” Contrasted with the boundless and commanding genius of Shakspeare, Dr. Johnson has hit his character with success in his celebrated prologue.

Among his poems there are few which can be specified as models of excellence. The “Hymn” from “Cynthia’s Ilevels,” the “Ode to the Memory of sir Lucius Gary,” and “Sir H. Morison,” one of the first examples of the Pindaric, or irregular ode, and some of his songs, and “Underwoods,” are brightened by occasional rays of genius, and dignified simplicity, but in general he was led into glittering and fanciful thoughts, and is so frequently captivated with these as to neglect his versification. Although he had long studied poetry, it does not appear that be could pursue a train of poetical sentiment or imagery so far as to produce any great work. His best efforts were such as he could execute almost in the moment of conception, and frequently with an epigrammatic turn which is very striking. He once meditated an epic poem, but his habitual irregularities and love of company denied the necessary perseverance.

, a painter of history and portraits, possessed of very superior abilities in his art, was born at Antwerp in 1594. He first studied with Adam Van Oort, whose daughter he married at an early period of his life but it was to Rubens he stood indebted for the principal part of his knowledge; though it is dubious whether he ever was admitted into the school of that master. Certain it is, however, that he more forcibly carried into effect his principles than any of his disciples, except Vandyke. It is said by Sandrart, that Rubens was jealous of him, but this assertion is generally thought to be unfounded; yet if so great a man were capable of that mean passion, certainly the talents of Jordaens might well excite it. He painted with almost incredible force and brilliancy. Neither Rubens nor Tintoretto, in that respect, excel him; his compositions are full of bustle, and designed with great truth, even grandeur of form. His defect (and it must be allowed that it is a great one, in an art whose principal end is to adorn, to improve, to please mankind) is grossness of subject and of form; not indecent, but vulgar, low common life. His power to give rotundity and relief to his figures, is amazing; and his execution is of the most masterly kind. The French have possessed themselves of many of his principal works; two are particularly noticeable in the gallery of the Louvre, the Flemish celebration. of Twelfth night, known by the appellation of “L'e Roi boit,” and Christ driving the money-changers from the temple. He was remarkable for the rapidity of his execution, and appears to have studied his figures and effects by candle-light, or in bright sun-shine. Having obtained great renown and success, he died in 1678.

, a person distinguished more by his connections than by his works, was born at Berlin in 1702, and discovered early a taste for letters. He was brought up to the church, but becoming acquainted with Frederic, then prince, and afterwards king of Prussia, a friendship commenced between them of no common sincerity; and when Frederic came to the throne, he prevailed on Jordan to abandon the church and come to court. Here he became the confidential friend of Frederic, and had the courage to give him on all occasions the best advice, and to oppose to his face such measures as he thought hurtful. Notwithstanding this freedom he was advanced to several posts of profit and honour, and became at length vice-president of the academy of sciences at Berlin where he died in 1745. The king of Prussia erected a mausoleum over him, and also honoured him with the following eloge “Jordan,” says he, “was born with parts, lively, penetrating, yet capable of application his memory vast and retentive his judgment sure, his imagination brilliant always governed by reason, yet without stiffness in his morals; open in conversation, full of politeness and benevolence; cherishing truth, and disguising it; humane, generous, ready to serve; a good citizen; faithful to his friends, his master, and his country.” His merits as an author do not give us so high an idea of him as the above eloge, or as the more interesting account given by Thibault. His only writings were, “L‘Histoire d’un voyage literaire,” in France, England, and Holland. “Un Recueil de Littrature, de Philosophic, & de Histoire.” A Life of M. de la Croze, in French, &c.

, an English physician, and considerable writer on chemistry and mineralogy, was born in 1569, at High Halden in Kent, and probably educated at Hart-hall, Oxford. He visited foreign universities, and took his degree of doctor in that of Padua. After his return, he practised in London, where he became a member of the college of physicians, and was in high reputation for learning and abilities. He injured his fortune by engaging in a project to manufacture alum. We are ignorant where his works were situated; but it is certain, he obtained a grant from James I. of the profits of them, which was revoked at the importunity of a courtier; and though he made application for redress, he never obtained it, notwithstanding the king appeared particularly sensible of the hardship of his case. He spent the latter part of his life at Bath, and died there, of the gout and stone, in January 1632.

, a learned English divine, was born in the parish of St. Giles’s, Middlesex, Oct. 23, 1698. His father, Renatus, was a native of Bretagne in France; came over to England about 1685, when protestantism was no longer tolerated in that country was made a gentleman of the privy -chamber in 1691 became afterwards secretary to lord Orford, sir George Rooke, and sir Cloudesly Shovel; and was cast away with the last, when his ship struck upon the rocks of Scilly, Oct. 22, 1707. His mother was Martha Rogers, of an ancient and respectable family in Bucks, which had produced some clergymen, distinguished by their abilities and learning. He was educated at the Charter-house, where he made a good profiqiency in Greek and Latin: French he learned at home, and he understood and spoke that language well.

In May 1715, he was admitted of Jesus-college, Cambridge; and, about two years after, recommended by his tutor Dr. Styan Thirlby, who was very fond of him, and always retained a friendship for him, to make extracts from Eustathius, for the use of Pope’s “Homer.” He was not employed directly by Pope, nor did it ever happen to him to see the face of that poet: for, being of a shy modest nature, he felt no impulse to force his way to him; nor did the other make inquiry about him, though perfectly satisfied with what he had done for him. He took the degree of B. A. in 1718-19, and M. A. in 1722: he had been chosen fellow of his college soon after the taking of his first degree. This year he distinguished himself by the publication of a few Latin poems, entitled, “Lusus Poetici;” which were well received, and were twice reprinted, with additions. In Sept. 1723, he entered into deacon’s orders, and into priest’s the June following. In Jan. 1726 -7, he was presented by his college to Swavesey, near Cambridge; but, marrying in 1728, he resigned that living, and spon after settled himself in London, where he was engaged as a reader and preacher at a chapel in street, near Russell-street, Bloomsbury. ID this town he spent the next twenty-five years of his life: for though, in 1737, the earl of Winchelsea gave him the living of Eastvvell in Kent, where he resided a little time, yet he very soon quitted it, and returned to London. Here for many years he had employment as a preacher, in the abovementioned and other chapels; with the emoluments of which occasional services, and a competency of his own, he supported himself and family in a decent though private manner, dividing his leisure hours between his books and his friends, especially those of the literati, with whom he always kept up a close and intimate connection. In 1730, he published “Four Sermons upon the Truth of the Christian Religion:” the substance of which was afterwards incorporated in a work, entitled, “Discourses concerning the Truth of the Christian Religion, 1746,” 8vo.

In 1731, he published “Miscellaneous Observations upon Authors, ancient and modern,” in 2 vols. 8vo. This is a collection of critical remarks, of which, however, he was not the sole, though the principal, author: Pearce, Masson, Dr. Taylor, Wasse, Theobald, Dr. Robinson, Upton, Thirlby, and others, were contributors to it. This work was highly approved by the learned here, and was translated into Latin at Amsterdam, and continued on the same plan by D'Orville and Burman. In 1751, archbishop Herring, unsolicited, gave him the living of St. Dunstan in the East, London. This prelate had long entertained a high and affectionate regard for him had endeavoured to serve him in many instances with others and afterwards, in 1755, conferred upon him the degree of D. D. This same year, 1751, came out his first volume of “Remarks upon Ecclesiastical History,” 8vi. This work was inscribed to die earl of Burlington by whom, as trustee for the Boylean Lecture, he had, through the application of bishop Herring and bishop Sherlock, been appointed, in 1749, to preach that lecture. There is a preface to this volume of more than forty pages, which, with much learning and ingenuity, displays a spirit of liberty and candour. These “Remarks upon Ecclesiastical fiistory” were continued, in tour succeeding volumes, down to the year 1517, when Luther began the work of reformation; two, published by himself, in 1752 and 1754; and two, after his death, in 1773. In 1755, he published “Six Dissertations upon different Subjects,” 8vo. The sixth dissertation is, “On the state of the dead, as described by Homer and Virgil;” and the remarks in this, tending to establish the great antiquity of the doctrine of a future state, interfered with Warburton in his “Divine Legation of Moses,” and drew upon him from that quarter a very severe attack. He made no reply; but in his “Adversaria” was the following memorandum, which shews that he did not oppose the notions of other men, from any spirit of envy or contradiction, but from a full persuasion that the real matter of fact was as he had represented it. “I have examined,” says he, “the state of the dead, as described by Homer and Virgil; and upon that dissertation I am willing to stake all the little credit that I have as a critic and philosopher. I have there observed, that Homer was not the inventor of the fabulous history of the gods: he had those stories, and also the doctrine of a future state, from old traditions. Many notions of the Pagans, which came from tradition, are considered by Barrow, Serm. viii. vol. II. in which sermon the existence of God is proved from universal consent.”

In 1758, appeared his “Life of Erasmus,” in one vol. 4to; and in 1760, another vol. 4to, containing “Remarks upon the Works of Erasmus,” and an “Appendix of Extracts from Erasmus and other Writers.” In the preface to the former volume, he says, that “Le Clerc, while publishing the Works of Erasmus at Leyden, drew up his Life in French, collected principally from his letters, and inserted it in the ‘ Bibliotheque Choisie;’ that, as this Life was favourably received by the public, he had taken it as a groundwork to build upon, and had translated it, notsuperstitiously and closely, but with much freedom, and with more attention to things than to words; but that he had made continual additions, not only with relation to the history of those days, but to the life of Erasmus, especially where Le Clerc grew more remiss, either wearied with the task, or called off from these to other labours.” After mentioning a few other matters to his readers, he turns his discourse to his friends “recommending himself to their favour, whilst he is with them, and his name, when he is gone hence and intreating them to join with him in a wish, that he may pass the evening of a studious and unambitious life in an humble but not a slothful obscurity, and never forfeit the kind continuance of their accustomed approbation.” The plan of this work, however, is highly objectionable, unless as a book to be consulted. It contains, in that respect, a vast mass of tacts and opinions respecting Erasmus and his contemporaries, put together in chronological order, and of great importance in ecclesiastical or biographical researches.

But whatever Dr. Jortin’s wishes mightbe as to retirement, he was to live hereafter neither so studiously nor so obscurely as his imagination had figured out to him: more public scenes than any he had yet been engaged in still awaited him. For, Hayter, bishop of London, with whom he had been upon intimate terms, dying in 1762, and Osbaldiston, who was also his friend, succeeding to that see, he was made domestic chaplain to this bishop in March, admitted into a prebend of St. Paul’s the same month, and in October presented to the living of Kensington, whither he went to reside soon after, and there performed the office of a good parishpriest as long as he lived. In 1764, he was appointed archdeacon of London, and soon after had the offer of the rectory of St. James, Westminster; which, however, he refused, from thinking his situation at Kensington more to his honour, as well as better adapted to his now advanced age. Here he lived occupied (when his clerical functions permitted) amongst his books, and enjoying himself with his usual serenity, till Aug. 27, 1770: when, being seized with a disorder in the breast and lungs, he grew continually worse in spite of all assistance; and, without undergoing much pain in the course of his illness, died Sept. 5, in his 72d year. He preserved his understanding to the last; and, in answer to a female attendant who offered him something, “No,” said he, with much composure, “I have had enough of every thing.” He was buried in the new church-yard at Kensington, as he had directed; and had a flat stone laid over him, with this inscription, dictated by himself:

This son died in July 1795. He had considerable practice in the court Exchequer. His wife, who survived him, was one of the daughters of Dr, Mat ried to the rev. Samuel Darby, fellow of Jesus-college, in Cambridge, and afterwards rector of Whatfield, in Sutfolk.

Besides great integrity, great humanity, and other qualities which make men amiable as well as useful, this learned person was oi a very pleasant and facetious turn; as his writings abundantly shew. He had, nevertheless, great sensibility, and could express himself with warmth, and even with some degreeof indignation, when he thought the occasion warranted him to do so. For instance, he had a great respect and fondness for critical learning, which he so much cultivated; and though he knew and allowed it to have been disgraced by the manners of proud, fastidious, and insolent critics, yet he thought the restoration of letters, and the civilization of Europe, so much indebted to it, that he could ill bear to see it contemptuously treated. Hence a little tartness sometimes in his writings, when this topic falls in his way.

For the motto of his “Life of Erasmus,” he chose the following words of Erasmus himself: “illud certe praesagio, de meis lucubrationibus, qualescunque sunt, candidius judicaturam Posteritatem: tametsi nee de meo seculo queri possum.' 1 Yet it is certain that he had very slight notions of posthumous fame or glory, and of any real good which could arise from it; as appears from what he has collected and written about it, in a note upon Milton, at the end of his” Remarks upon Spenser.“He would sometimes complain, and doubtless with good reason, of the low estimation into which learning was fallen; and thought it discountenanced and discouraged, indirectly at least, when ignorant and worthless persons were advanced to high stations and great preferments, while men of merit and abilities were overlooked and neglected. Yet he laid no undue stress upon such stations and preferments, but entertained just notions concerning what must ever constitute the chief good and happiness of man, and is himself believed to have made the most of them. Dr. Parr has drawn his character with his usual elegance and discrimination.” Jortin,“says he,” whether I look back to his verse, to his prose, to his critical, or to his theological works, there are few authors to whom I am so much indebted for rational entertainment, or for solid instruction. Learned he was, without pedantry. He was ingenious without the affectation of singularity. He was a lover of truth, without hovering over the gloomy abyss of scepticism, and a friend to free inquiry, without roving into the dreary and pathless wilds of latitudinarianism. He had a heart which never disgraced the powers of his understanding. With a lively imagination, an elegant taste, and a judgment most masculine, and most correct, he united the artless and amiable negligence of a school-boy. Wit without ill-nature, and sense without effort, be could at will scatter upon every subject; and in every book the writer presents us with a near and distinct view of the real man."

, i. e. the son of Gorion, a Jewish historian, is sometimes confounded by the rabbins with the more celebrated historian Josephus. He lived about the end of the ninth, or beginning of the tenth century, and left a History of the Jews, in Hebrew, which Gagnier translated into Latin, Oxford, 1706, 4to. There is also an edition in Hebrew and Latin, Gotha, 1707, 4to. It is obvious from internal Evidence, that this work could not have been written earlier than the ninth century; and that the author was, according to all appearance, a Jew of Languedoc.

, a celebrated capuchin, better known by the name of Father Joseph, was born November 4, 1577, at Paris, where his father, John de Clerc, had an office in the palace. After pursuing his studies with success, he visited Italy and Germany, entered into the army, and gave his family the most flattering expectations of his future fortune, when he suddenly renounced the world, and took the capuchins’ habit in 1599. He afterwards preached, and discharged the office of a missionary with reputation, was entrusted with the most important commissions by the court, and contributed much to the reformation of Fontevrauld. He sent capuchin missionaries into England, Canada, and Turkey, and was the intimate confidant of cardinal Richelieu, to whotn he was servilely devoted. Father Joseph founded the new order of Benedictine nuns of Calvary, for whom he procured establishments at Angers. Louis XIII. had nominated him to the cardinalate, but he died at Reuel, before he had received that dignity, December 18, 1638. The parliament attended his funeral in a body. The abbe Richard has published two lives of this capuchin, in one of which, in 2 vols. 12mo, he represents him as a saint; and in the other, entitled “Le veritable Pere Joseph,” as an artful politician, and courtier. This last is most esteemed, and probably most to be credited.

, or Josephus Iscanus, a writer of considerable taste and elegance, in an age generally reputed barbarous, was a native of Devonshire, and flourished in the close of the twelfth, and the commencement of the thirteenth centuries. He was an ecclesiastic, and patronized by Baldwin, archbishop of Canterbury. Some say that he was a priest of the cathedral of Exeter, from which he took his name. According to Camden, he accompanied Richard I. of England into the Holy Land, and was a great favourite with that prince. By archbishop Baldwin’s interest he was made archbishop of Bourdeaux, where he is supposed to have died in the reign of Henry III. and to have been buried in the cathedral of that city. He was author of two epic poems in Latin heroics. The first, in six books, is on the Trojan war the other is entitled “Antiochesis,” the war of Antioch, or the Crusade; of this last only a fragment remains, in which the heroes of Britain are celebrated. His style is not only for the most part pure, but rich and ornamented, and his versification approaches the best models of antiquity. His diction is compounded chiefly of Ovid, Statius, and Claudian, the favourite poets of the age, and wants only Virgilian chastity. “Italy,” says Warton in his History of English Poetry, “had at that time produced no poet comparable to him.” He was also author of love verses, epigrams, and miscellaneous poems. His “De Bello Trojano, lib. V.” was published at Basil, 1541, 8vo; Lond. 1675, 8vo Francfcnt, 1620, 4to, and ibid. 1623; Amst. 1702, 4to. All that remains of his “Antiochesis” is printed in Warton’s “Ftistory of English Poetry.” His love-verses, &c. are lost.

, the celebrated historian of the Jews, was born at Jerusalem, of parents who belonged to the illustrious Asmonean family, about the year 37. He soon discovered great acuteness and penetration, and made so quick a progress in the learning of the Jews, that he was occasionally consulted by the chief priests and rulers of the city, even at the age of sixteen. For the purpose of studying the history and tenets of the several Jewish sects, he became for three years a pupil of Banun, a hermit, who had acquired great fame for wisdom; and with him lived a recluse and abstemious life. After this he became of the sect of the Pharisees, of which he was a very great ornament. In the year 63, he went to Rome, where a Jew comedian, who happened to be in favour with Nero, served him much at court, by making him known to Poppaea, whose protection was very useful to him, and enabled him to procure liberty for some of his countrymen. Upon his return to his country, where he found all things in confusion, he had the command of some troops, and distinguished himself at the siege of Jotapata, which he defended seven weeks against Vespasian and Titus, but was taken prisoner. A short time after, Vespasian granted him his life, at the intercession of Titus, who had conceived a great esteem for him. He now visited Egypt, and took up his residence at Alexandria, where he doubtless studied the Grecian and Egyptian philosophy. His patron, Titus, carried him with him to the siege of Jerusalem, after the taking of which, he attended Titus to Rome, where Vespasian gave him the freedom of the city, and settled a pension upon him. At Rome he cultivated the Greek language, and began to write his History. He continued ta experience favour under Titus and Domitian, and lived beyond the 13th year of Domitian, when he was fifty-six for his books of “Antiquities” end there and after that period he composed his books against Apion. In what year he died is uncertain.

His “History of the Jewish War and the Destruction of Jerusalem,” in seven books, was composed at the command of Vespasian first in the Hebrew language, for the use of his own countrymen, and afterwards in the Greek. It is singularly interesting and affecting, as the historian was an eye-witness of all he relates. With the very strong colouring of an animated style and noble expression, he paints to the imagination, and affects the heart. National vanity and partiality, however, led him to imagine that all knowledge and wisdom had originated in Judea, and had flowed thence through all the nations of the earth; a notion which, says Brucker, gave rise to many errors and misrepresentations in his writings. The authenticity of the celebrated passage in Josephus, respecting our Saviour, is ably vindicated by our learned countryman Jacob Bryant, in his “Vindiciae Flavians.”

, a supposed heretic of the fourth century, was an Italian monk, and observed all the austerities of a monastic life for a time, and taught some points of doctrine directly opposite to the growing superstitions; for this he was expelled Rome, and fled to Milan, with an intent to engage Ambrose, bishop of that place, and the emperor Theodosius, who was then in that city, in his favour; but Syricius, then bishop of Rome, dispatched three presbyters to Milan, Crescentius, Leopardus, and Alexander, with letters to that church, which are still extant in Ambrose’s works, acquainting them with the proceedings of himself and his followers, in consequence of which he was rejected by Ambrose, and driven out of the town by the emperor. From Milan, Jovinian returned to the neighbourhood of Home, where his followers continued to assemble under his direction, till the year 398, when the emperor Honorius commanded him and his accomplices to be whipped and banished into different islands. Jovinian himself was confined to Boas, a small island on the coast of Dal matin, where he died about the year 406. Jovinian wrote several books, which were answered by Jerome in the year 392, but in such a manner as to render it difficult to know what were Jovinian’s errors, or what his general character, except that he was no friend to celibacy or fasting.

, or Paullo Giovio, an Italian historian, was a native of Como, and was born in 1483. Being early deprived of his father, he was educated under the care of his elder brother Benedict, who was also a historical writer. After having studied at Padua, Milan, and Pavia, he took the degree of M. D. and practised for some time; but an early propensity led him to the study and composition of history. Having completed a volume, he presented it to Leo X. at Rome, in 1516, who expressed a very high opinion of him, and gave him a pension and the rank of knighthood. Jovius now became intimate with the literati of Rome, and wrote several Latin poems, which appeared in the “Coryciana,” and other collections. After the death of Leo, Adrian VI. presented him to a canonry in the cathedral of Como, and Clement VII. appointed him one of his attendant courtiers, provided him with a handsome establishment in the Vatican, gave him the precentorship of Como, and lastly the bishopric of Nocera. During the sacking of the city of Rome, in 1527, Jovius was robbed of a considerable sum of money and of his manuscripts, but recovered the latter. Under the pontificate of Paul III. he wished to exchange his bishopric of Nocera for that of Como, and even carried his ambition to the place of cardinal, but was disappointed in both. His favourite residence was at a beautiful villa on the banks of the lake of Como, where he pursued his studies, and in his museum made a collection of portraits of eminent characters, to each of which he affixed an inscription, or brief memoir, some highly favourable, others sarcastically severe. These memoirs have been frequently printed under the title “Elogia doctorum Virorum,” and the portraits, engraved in wood, have been published under the title of “Musaei Jovian i Imagines,” Basil, 1577. About two years before his death, he quitted his retirement, and took up his residence in Florence, where he died in 1552, and was buried in the church of St. Laurence, in that city.

His historical works, which are all in the Latin tongue, written with great facility, were first printed at Florence, 1550 52, in 2 vols. fol. and again at Strasburgh, in 1556. They are to be read with great caution, as he was not unjustly accused of flattery and malignity, and of having sacrificed his talents to servile and interested purposes. He indeed openly acknowledges the venality of his writings, and is said to have asserted that he had two pens, the one of iron, and the other of gold, which he made use of alternately, as occasion required. But his greatest blemish is the defective or perverted morality with which his works abound; yet with all this, says his late biographer, the writings of Jovius cannot be wholly rejected without the loss of much important information, copiously narrated and elegantly expressed.

, a learned priest of Montpellier, whose father was syndic of the states of Languedoc, which office he himself held before he became an ecclesiastic, was born in 1689. He wrote an explanation of the history of Joseph, 12mo; “Caractere essentiel aux Prophe'tes,” 12mo; “Lettres sur Tlnterpretation des Saintes Ecritures,” 12mo; and Explanations of the prophecies of Jeremiah, Ezekiel, Daniel, 5 vols. 12mo; of the Minor Prophets, 6 vols. 12mo; of the Revelations, 2 vols. 12 mo. His attachment to the Jansenists occasioned his being confined six weeks in the Bastille on false suspicions. He died 1763, aged seventy-four.

, a learned physician, and royal professor at Montpellier, was born at Valence, in the province of Dauphine, in France, on the 16th of December, 1529, of a good family. After he had finished his school education, he went to Mompellier, where he was matriculated in the faculty of medicine on the 1st of March, 1550, and took his degree of bachelor the following year. He afterwards studied at Padua, where he attended the lectures of the celebrated Fallopius, and at some other places; but, returning to Montpellier, he finished his exercises, and received the degree of doctor in 1558. The manner in which he had performed his acts procured for him so much of the confidence and esteem of Honore Castellan, that this professor, being summoned to court in the following year, to hold the office of first physician of Catharine de Medicis, queen of Henry II. he nominated Joubert to give the lectures in the schools during his absence; and Joubert acquitted himself in so distinguished a manner, that on the death of professor Rondelet in 1566, he was immediately named his successor, in the chair. He was likewise the second successor of Rondelet, in the dignity of chancellor, having followed Saporta in 1574. He was called to Paris by Henry III. in 1579, who entertained hopes that Joubert would be able to cure the barrenness of Louisa de Lorraine, his queen. But his attempts proved unsuccessful; and he returned to Montpellier with the title of physician in ordinary to the king, and continued to practise there to his death, October 21, 1583.

His Latin works, written with correctness and elegance, have been frequently reprinted under the title of “Operum Latinorum Tomus primus et secundus.” The first edition is that of Lyons, in 1582, folio; the subsequent ones appeared at Francfort, in 1599, 1645, and 1668, also in fol. He published also some medical treatises in French, particularly a treatise on “Laughter, its causes and effects,” 1579, 8vo; but of all his works, that in which he ventured to raise his voice against popular medical errors, was the most distinguished “Erreurs populaires touchant la Medecine,” Bourdeaux, 1579. This was printed ten successive times in the course of six months; a degree of favour, however, which it appears to have acquired by its levity of manner, and the indelicacy of some of the subjects.

, or rather Jouvancey (Joseph de), a celebrated Jesuit, was born September 14, 1643, at Paris. He taught rhetoric with uncommon reputation at Caen, la Fleche, and Paris. At length he was invited to Rome, in 1669, that he might continue “The History of the Jesuits,” with more freedom than he could have done in France, and died in that city May 29, 1719. His principal works are, two volumes of Latin Speeches, 12mo; a small tract entitled “De ratione discendi et docendi,” much esteemed; Notes, in Latin, on P-ersius, Juvenal, Terence, Horace, Martial, Ovid’s Metamorphoses, &c. The fifth part of the “History of the Jesuits,” in Latin, from 1591 to 1616, fol.; as a supplement to Fathers Orlandino, Sacchini, and Poussines. All Jouvenci’s works are written in pure Latin, and in this consists their principal excellence. His History of the Jesuits, in which he undertakes to justify his brother, Pere Guignard, who was hanged by sentence of parliament on account of Chatel’s infamous attempt, and to represent him as a martyr, being printed at Rome, 1710, fol. made much noise, and was condemned by two decrees of the parliament of Paris one Feb. 22, 1713 the other, March 24th the same year. This last sentence suppresses the work, and contains the declaration which had been demanded from the Jesuits. Several pieces appeared on this occasion against P. Jouvenci’s history, 1713, 12mo.

, an historical painter, born at Bouen, in Normandy, in 1644, received his first instructions from his father; but his principal teacher was Poussin, and his most useful studies the works of that master. He had a ready invention, and was therefore employed to adorn the apartments of Versailles and the Trianon. In the hospital of the invalids at Paris, he painted the twelve apostles; each figure 14 feet high. It must be acknowledged, however, that he failed in true taste. His style partakes too much of French flippancy the substitution of something striking for what is solid and good and his colouring is heavy. In the latter end of his life, he was struck with a palsy on his right side, and after having tried to no purpose the virtue of mineral waters, despaired of being able to paint any longer; but in one of his lectures happening to take the pencil into his left hand, and trying to retouch a piece before him, the attempt succeeded so well, that it encouraged him to make others; till at length he determined to finish with his left hand a large cieling, which he had begun in the grand hall of the parliament at Kouen, and a large piece of the Annunciation, in the choir of the church of Paris. These last works are no ways inferior to any of his best. He died at Paris in 1717.

, one of the early promoters of the reformation, was a native of the county of Bedford, and educated at Peterhouse, in Cambridge, where he took the degree of B. A. in 1513, and that of M. A. in 1517, and the same year was admitted a fellow. In 1527, being a strenuous advocate for the doctrines of the reformation, and an intimate friend of the celebrated Tindale, he was accused of heresy, which obliged him to resign his fellowship; and finding himself in danger from the continual persecutions of Wolsey, sir Thomas More, and Fisher, he retired to Germany, where he continued many years. He had a concern in the superintendance of Tindale’s Bible, printed at Antwerp in 1533, and is ranked by Ames as a printer himself; but, not content with corrections of the press, he took liberties with the translation, of which Tindale complained with justice, and Joy published an apology, Of these the reader will find ample information in Lewis. When Joy returned to England is not known, but it is said that he died in 1553, and was buried in his native country. Besides his translations of some parts of the Bible, he published, 1. “On the unity and schism of the ancient church,” Wesal, 1534, 8vo. 2. “The subversion of More V false foundation,” Embden, 1534, 12mo. 3. “Epistle to the prior of Newenham,” Strasburgh, 1527, 8vo. 4. “Commentary on Daniel, from Melancthon,” &c. Geneva, 1545, Lond. 1550, 8vo. 5. “A present consolation for the sufferance of persecution for righteousness,” 1544, 12mo: and other works, enumerated by Tanner.

, alias Lyde, second son of William, Joyner, alias Lyde*, of Horspath, near Oxford, by Anne his wife, daughter and coheir of Edward Leyworth, M. 0. of Oxford, was born in St. Giles’s parish there, ApriT 1622, educated partly in Thame, but more in Coventry free-school, elected demy of Magdalen-college, 1626, and afterwards fellow. But, “upon a foresight of the utter ruin of the church of England by the presbyterians in the time of the rebellion,” he changed his religion for that of Rome, renounced his fellowship, 1644, and being taken into the service of the earl of Glamorgan, went with him into Ireland, and continued there till the royal cause declined in that country. He then accompanied that earl in his travels abroad; and some time after being recommended to the service of the hon. Walter Montague, abbot of St. Martin, near Pontoise, he continued several years in his family as his steward, esteemed for his learning, sincere

* In the Oen?. Mag. for 1781, p 38, daleo, Oxford, on Edward Joyner, is a curious- Latin epitaph, taken from alias Lyde, who was probably the elthe parish church of St. Mary Mag- der brother of William. piety, and great fidelity. At his return he lived very retired in London; till, on the breaking out of the popish plot in 1678, he retired to Horspath, where some time after he was seized for a Jesuit, or priest, and hound to appear at the quarter-sessions at Oxford. Being found to be a mere lay-papist, and discharged, he went to Ickford, an obscure village in Buckinghamshire, near Thame, and there spent many years in devout retirement. In 1687 he was restored to his fellowship by James II. but expelled from it after a year’s enjoyment, and retired to his former recess, where, says Wood, his apparel, which was formerly gay, was then very rustical, little better than that of a day-labourer, and his diet and lodging suitable. In one of his letters to Wood, April 12, 1692, he told him that “the present place of his residence is a poor thatcht-house, where the roof is of the same stuff in the chamber where he lodged, which he assured me was never guilty of paying chimney-tax. However, he hoped that all this would not make a person neglected and despicable who had formerly slept in the royal palaces of France, under a roof fretted and embossed with gold; whereas, this is doubly and trebly interweaved only with venerable cobwebs, which can plead nothing of rarity besides the antiquity.” This personage has written, 1. “The Roman Empress,” a comedy, Lond. 1670, 4to. 2. “Some Observations on the Life of Cardinal Pole,” 1686, 8vo. 3. Various Latin and English poems, scattered in several books, especially a large English copy in “Horti Carolini Rosa altera,” 1640. He died at Ickford, Sept. 14, 1706. He was great uncle to Thomas Philips, canon of Tongres, who wrote the “Life of Cardinal Pole,” published in 1766.

, a learned Spanish mathematician, knight of Malta, and commander of the band of gentlemen marine guards, was chosen, with Ulloa, to attend the French academicians, who went to Peru', for the purpose of measuring a degree on the meridian, in order to determine the earth’s figure. They embarked May 26, 1735. Ulloa undertook the historical part of the voyage, which appeared translated into French, Amsterdam, 1752, 2 vols. 4to; and D. George Juan the astronomical part, who accordingly published a large work on the earth’s figure, printed in Spanish. On his return he went to Paris, 171 where the academy of sciences admitted him a member. He died at Madrid, 1773, leaving several works in Spanish on naval affairs, a translation of which would be useful.

, or Jehuda, Hakkadosh, or the Saint, a rabbi celebrated for his learning and riches, according to the Jewish historians, lived in the time of the emperor Marcus Antoninus, whom he made a proselyte to Judaism, and it was by his order that Jehuda compiled the Mishna, the history of which is briefly this: The sect of the Pharisees, after the destruction of Jerusalem, prevailing over the rest, the study of traditions became the chief object of attention in all the Jewish schools. The number of these traditions had, in a long course of time, so greatly increased, that the doctors, whose principal employment it was to illustrate them by new explanations, and to confirm their authority, found it necessary to assist their recollection by committing them, under distinct heads, to writing. At the same time, their disciples took minutes of the explanations of their preceptors, many of which were preserved, and grew up into voluminous commentaries. The confusion which arose from these causes was now become so troublesome, that, notwithstanding what Hillel had before done in arranging the traditions, Jehuda found it necessary to attempt a new digest of the oral law, and of the commentaries of their most famous doctors. This arduous undertaking is said to have employed him forty years. It was completed, according to the unanimous testimony of the Jews, which in this case there is no sufficient reason to dispute, about the close of the second century. This Mishna, or first Talmud, comprehends all the laws, institutions, and rules of life, which, beside the ancient Hebrew scriptures, the Jews supposed themselves bound to observe. Notwithstanding the obscurities, inconsistencies, and absurdities with which this collection abounds, it soon obtained credit among the Jews as a sacred book. But as the Mishna did not completely provide for many cases which arose in the practice of ecclesiastical law, and many of its prescriptions and decisions were found to require further comments and illustrations, the task of supplying these defects was undertaken by the rabbis Chiiam and Oschaiam, and others, disciples of Jehudah; who not only wrote explanations of the Mishna, but made material additions to that voluminous compilation. These commentaries and additions were collected by the rabbi Jochanan ben Eliezer, probably in the fifth century, under the name of the “Gemara,” because it completed the Mishna. This collection was afterwards called the Jerusalem Gemara, to distinguish it from another of the same kind made in Babylon, at the beginning of the sixth century.

, one of the reformers, son of John Judah, a German priest, was born in 1482, in Alsace. Some authors have reported that he was a converted Jew, but father Simon has proved that he neither was a Jew, nor of Jewish extraction, but the son of the above John Judah, or de Juda, who, according to the custom of those times, kept a concubine, by whom he had this Leo. He was educated at Slestadt, and thence in 1502, was sent to Basil to pursue his academical studies. Here he had for a fellowstudent, the afterwards much celebrated Zuinglius; and from him, who had at a very early age been shocked at the superstitious practices of the church of Rome, he received such impressions, as disposed him to embrace the reformed religion. Having obtained his degree of M. A. in 1512, he was appointed minister of a Swiss church, to the duties of which he applied himself with indefatigable zeal, preaching boldly in defence of the protestant religion. At length he was appointed by the magistrates and ecclesiastical assembly of Zurich, pastor of the church of St. Peter in that city, and became very celebrated as an advocate, as well from the press as the pulpit, of the reformed religion, for about eighteen years. At the desire of his brethren, he undertook a translation, from the Hebrew into Latin, of the whole Old Testament; but the magnitude of the work, and the closeness with which he applied to it, impaired his health; and before he had completed it, he fell a sacrifice to his labours, June 9, 1542, when he was about sixty years of age. The translation was finished by other hands, and was printed at Zurich in 1543, and two years afterwards it was reprinted at Paris by Robert Stephens, accompanying the Vulgate version, in adjoining columns, but without the name of the author of the new version. Judah was likewise the author of “Annotations upon Genesis and Exodus,” in which he was assisted by Xuinglius, and upon the four gospels, and the greater part of the epistles. He also composed a larger and smaller catechism, and translated some of Zuinglius’s works into Latin. The Spanish divines, notwithstanding the severity of the Inquisition, did not hesitate to reprint the Latin Bible of Leo Judah, with the notes ascribed to Vatabius, though some of them were from the pen of Calvin. Some particulars of Judah and of this translation, not generally known, may be found in a book written by a divine of Zurich, and printed in that city in 1616, entitled “Vindicise pro Bibliorum translatione Tigurina.”

, one of the principal writers of the Centuries of Magdeburg, was born Sept. 21, 1528, at Tippolswald, in Misnia. His inclination to literature induced his father to send him to study at Dresden: but the college of Wittenberg being more to his mind, he removed thither, and afterwards was driven, by necessity, to Magdeburg. Here he supported himself by being tutor in the family of a lawyer, who sent him with his son to Wittenberg, in 1546. This gave him an opportunity of completing his own studies; and he obtained the degree of M. A. in this university, 1548. He then returned to Magdeburg, and taught the second form there for some years; and in 1554, was chosen minister of St. Ulric’s church.

In 1559, he quitted his church at Magdeburg, being promoted to the divinity professor’s chair at Jena in 1559; but did not keep possession of it above eighteen months, being deprived by order of John Frederic duke of Saxony. He remained, however, six months longer at Jena, and thence returning to Magdeburg, was obliged, in six months more, to retire to Wismar. He suffered many persecutions and vexations, which appear to have shortened his days, as he died in 1564, in the very prime of life. He was a man of good morals, laborious, zealous, learned; and wrote a great many books on religious controversies; and one, very rare, “De Typographic inventione,”Copenhagen, 1566, 8vo. He understood music very well, and had s’ome knowledge of mathematics. He could write verses both in Latin and Greek, and had designed to write an ecclesiastical history of his own time. Besides the share he had in the first two Centuries of Magdeburg, he was concerned in the German translation of the first three Centuries. These Centuries form an ecclesiastical history, carried down to 1298, and were compiled by various protestant divines of Magdeburg. The title is “Historia ecclesiastics congesta per Magdeburgenses, et alios,” Basil, 1562, 13 vols. folio, whicb is the best edition.

, a learned divine of the congregation of the oratory, was born in 1650, at Varembon in Bresse, in the diocese of Lyons. He taught theology in several houses of the Oratory, and in the seminary de St. Magloire, at Paris, where he died December 16, 1713. His principal works are, a “Treatise on the Sacraments,” 2 vols. folio, in Latin; “Theological Institutions, 7 ' 7 vols. 12mo, also in Latin. This last was condemned at Rome, and by M. Godet, bishop of Chartres, and cardinal de Bissy, as reviving the errors of Jansenius. Cardinal de Noailles also prohibited it in his diocese, but was afterwards satisfied with the explanation given him by the author. Juennin wrote against the mandates of M. Godet and cardinal de Bissy; which two apologetical defences were published in 12mo, without any name. He also left an” Abridged System of Divinity,“by question and answer, for the use of persons going to be examined for holy orders;” La Théorie practique des Sacremens,“3 vols. 12mo, without the author’s name” Théologie Morale,“6 vols. 12mo,” Cas de Conscience sur la vertu de Justice et d'Equité," 4 vols. 12mo.

, an Italian Jesuit, and a celebrated writer of panegyrics, was born at Nice, and admitted into the society in 1622. He taught rhetoric for the space often years. Being afterwards called to the court of Savoy, to be entrusted with the education of prince Charles Emanuel, he began to publish his first works at Turin. He died at Messina, Nov. 15, 1653. All his works were printed together at Lucca, in 1710. This collection contains, I. A hundred panegyrics upon Jesus Christ; printed the first time at Genoa in 1641. 2. Forty panegyrics written in honour of Lewis XIII. printed at Lyons in 1644. 3. Many inscriptions, epitaphs, and encomiums, upon several subjects; printed likewise at Lyons in the same year. 4. Panegyrics upon the greatest bishops that have been in the church; printed also at Lyons in the same year, and reprinted at Genoa in 1653, with this title, “Pars Secunda Elogiorura humana complectens.”

, a Roman emperor, commonly, although perfcaps not very justly, styled the Apostate, was the younger son of Constantius, brother of Constantine the Great. He was the first fruit of a second marriage of his father with Basilina, after the birth of Gallus, whom he had by Galla his first consort. He was born Nov. 6, in the year 331, at Constantinople; and, according to the medals of him, named Fiavius Claudius Julianus. During the life of Constantine, he received the first rudiments of his education at the court of Constantinople; but, upon the death of this emperor, all his relations being suspected of criminal actions, Julian’s father was obliged to seek his safety by flight; and his son Julian’s escape was entirely owing to Marc, bishop of Arethusa, without whose care he had inevitably perished in the persecution of his family. As soon as the storm was over, and Constantius, the son of Constantine, quietly seated on the imperial throne, he sent young Julian to Eusebius, bishop of Nicomedia, who was related to him by his mother’s side, and who educated him in the Christian faith; but at the same time employed an eunuch called Mardonius, who was a pagan, to teach him grammar, while Eulolius, a Christian of doubtful character, was his master in rhetoric. Julian made a very quick progress in learning; and, being sent afterwards to Athens to complete his education, he became the darling of that nursery of polite literature, and particularly commenced an acquaintance with St. Basil and Gregory of Nazianzen. This last, however, observed something in him which rendered his sincerity in the Christian faith suspected: and it is certain, that, notwithstanding all the care of his preceptor Eusebius, this young prince was entirely perverted by Maximus, an Ephesian philosopher and magician. His cousin Constantius the emperor was advertised of his conduct; and Julian, to prevent the effects, and save his life, professed himself a monk, and took the habit, but, under this character in public, he secretly embraced paganism. Some time before, his brother Gallus and he had taken orders, and executed the office of reader in the church; but the religious sentiments of the two brothers were widely different.

As soon as Julian had attained the age of manhood, according to the Roman law, Constantius, at the solicitation of his consort, the empress Eusebia, raised him to the dignity of Caesar, on his birth-day, Nov. 6, in the year 355; and at the same time the emperor gave him his sister Helena in marriage, and made him general of the army in Gaul. Julian filled his command with surprizing abilities, and shewed himself every way equal to the trust; which was the more extraordinary, as he had never any instructions in the military art. The principal officers under him, from whom he was to expect assistance, were very backward in performing this service; restrained apparently by the danger of seeming too much attached to him, and thereby incurring the emperor’s displeasure, whose jealousy on this head was no secret. Under all these disadvantages, our young warrior performed wonders: he was not afraid to undertake the enterprize of driving the barbarians out of Gaul; and he completed the design in a very little time, having obtained one of the most signal victories of that age, near Strasbourg. In this battle he engaged no less than seven German kings, one of whom was the famous Chrodomairus; who had always beaten the Romans till this time, but was now Julian’s prisoner. The defeat of the Salii and Chamavi, French people, followed at the heels of this victory; and the Germans, being conquered again, were constrained to beg a peace. Our hero was crowned with these glorious laurels, when Constantius, who was hard pressed by the Persians, sent for a detachment of troops from the army in Gaul to augment his forces. This order was ill relished by the Gauls, who were reluctant to fight out of their own country. Julian took advantage of this ill humour, and got himself declared emperor by the army; but, not being able to prevail with Constantius to acknowledge him in that character, he went with these troops to Illyria, where he continued till the death of Constantius, which happened Nov. 2, 361.

Julian no sooner saw himself master of the world, than he threw off all the disguise of his religion, for it merely was a disguise. There appears very little reason to think that Julian had ever cordially embraced, or ever studied with attention, the principles of Christianity. Had this been the case, he might have seen that those principles led to a conduct very opposite to that which he beheld in the conduct of Constantius, whose cruelty to his relations perhaps first excited his hatred against Christianity. From his youth he had practised dissimulation with consummate artifice, and it was rather hypocrisy than Christianity which he had now to shake off. Accordingly he now expressly professed himself a pagan, ordered their temples to be set open, and re-established their worship: he also assumed the character and station of the sovereign pontiff, and was invested with the whole pagan ceremonial, resolving to efface the mark of his baptism by the blood of the heathen sacrifices. In short, he resolved to effect the utter ruin of Christianity, and in this attempt united solid judgment witli indefatigable assiduity. Neither address nor dexterity was wanting, nor all that the wit or prudence of man could do. We find, indeed, in this emperor all the great qualities which a projector could conceive, or an adversary would require, to secure success. He was eloquent and liberal, artful, insinuating, and indefatigable; which, joined to a severe temperance, a love of justice, and a courage superior to all trials, first gained him the affections, and soon after the peaceable possession, of the whole empire. He had been, as we have just remarked, compelled to profess the Christian religion to the time when he assumed the purple; but his aversion to his uncle Constantine and his cousin Constantius, on account of the cruelties exercised on his family, had prejudiced him against the Christian religion; and his attachment to some Platonic sophist, who had been employed in his education, gave him as violent a bias towards paganism. He was ambitious; and paganism, in some of its theurgic rites, had flattered and encouraged his views of the diadem. He was vain, which made him aspire to the glory of re-establishing the ancient rites. He was very learned, and fond of Grecian literature, the very soul of which, in his opinion, was the old theology: but, above all, notwithstanding a considerable mixture of enthusiasm, his superstition was excessive, and what nothing but the blood of hecatombs could appease.

With these dispositions he came to the empire, and consequently with a determined purpose of subverting the Christian and restoring the pagan worship. His predecessors had left him the repeated experience of the inefficacy of downright force. The virtue of the past times then rendered this effort fruitless, the numbers of the present would have made it now dangerous: he found it necessary, therefore, to change his ground. His knowledge of human nature furnished him with arms; and his knowledge of the faith he had abandoned, enabled him to direct those arms to most advantage. He began with re-establishing paganism by law, and granting a full liberty of conscience to the Christians. On this principle, he restored those to their civil rights who had been banished on account of their religion, and even affected to reconcile to a mutual forbearance the various sects of Christianity. Yet he put on this mask of moderation for no other purpose than to inflame the dissensions in the church. He then fined and banished such of the more popular clergy as had abused their power, either in exciting the people to burn and destroy pagan temples, or to commit violence on an opposite sect: and it cannot be denied, but that in the turbulent and insolent manners of some of them, he found a plausible pretext for this severity. He proceeded to revoke and take away those immunities, honours, and revenues, which his uncle and cousin had granted to the clergy. Neither was his pretence for this altogether unreasonable. He judged the grants to be exorbitant; and, besides, as they were attendant on a national religion, when the establishment came to be transferred from Christianity to paganism, he concluded they must follow the religion of the state. But there was one immunity he took away, which no good policy, even under an establishment, should have granted them and this was an exemption from the civil tribunals. He went still farther he disqualified the Christian laity for bearing offices in the state and even this the security of the established religion may often require. But his most illiberal treatment of the Christians, was his forbidding, the professors of that religion to teach polite letters, and the sciences, in the public schools; and Amm. Marcellinus censures this part of his conduct as a breach in his general character of humanity, (lib. xx. c. 10.) His more immediate design, in this, was to hinder the youth from taking impressions to the disadvantage of paganism; his remoter view, to deprive Christianity of the support of human literature. Not content with this, he endeavoured even to destroy what was already written in defence of Christianity. With this view he wrote to the governor and treasurergeneral of Egypt, to send him the library of George bishop of Alexandria, who, for his cruelty and tyranny, had been ton) in pieces by the people: nay, to such a length did his aversion to the name of Christ carry him, as to decree, by a public edict, that his followers should be no longer called Christians, but Galileans; well knowing the efficacy of a nick-name to render a profession ridiculous. In the mean time, the animosities between the different sects of Christianity, furnished him with the means of carrying on these projects. Being, for example, well assured that the Arian church oi Edessa was very rich, he took advantage of their oppressing and persecuting the Valentinians to seize every tiling belonging to that church, and divided the plunder among his soldiers; scornfully telling the Edessians, he did this to ease them of their burthens, that they might proceed more lightly, and with less impediment, in their journey to heaven. He went farther still, if we may believe the historian Socrates, and, in order to raise money to defray the extraordinary expence of his Persian expedition, he imposed a tax or tribute on all who would not sacrifice to the pagan idols. The tax, it is true, was proportioned to every man’s circumstances, but was as truly an infringement upon his act of toleration. And though he forbore persecuting to death by law, which would have been a direct contradiction to that act, yet he connived at the fury of the people, and the brutality of the governors of provinces, who, during his short reign, brought many martyrs to the stake. He put such into governments, whose inhumanity and blind zeal for their country superstitions were most distinguished. And when the suffering churches presented their complaints to him, he dismissed them with cruel scoffs, telling them, their religion directed them to suffer without murmuring.

Such were Julian’s efforts to subvert Christianity; and it cannot be denied, that the behaviour of many of the Christians at that time furnished pretence enough for most of the proceedings against them in the view of state-policy. Besides that they branded the state religion, and made a merit of affronting the public worship, it is well known that they were continually guilty of seditions; and did not scruple to assert, that nothing hindered them from engaging in open rebellion, but the improbability of succeeding in it for want of numbers. During these measures, his projects to support and reform paganism went hand in hand with his attempts to destroy Christianity. He wrote, and he preached, in defence of the Gentile superstition, and has himself acquainted us with the ill-success of his ministry at Beroea. Of his controversial writings, his answerer, Cyril, hath given us a large specimen, by which we see he was equally intent to recommend paganism, and to discredit revelation. In his reformation of the Geatile superstition, he endeavoured to hide the absurdity of its traditions by moral and philosophical allegories. These he found provided for him principally by philosophers of his own sect, the Platonists. For they, not without the assistance of the other sects, had, ever since the appearance of Christianity, been refining the theology of paganism, to oppose it to that of revelation; under pretence, that their new-invented allegories were the ancient spirit of the letter, which the first poetical divines had thus conveyed to posterity. He then attempted to correct the morals of the pagan priesthood, and regulate them on the practice of the first Christians. In his epistle to Arsacius, the chief priest of Galacia, he not only requires of them a personal behaviour void of offence, but that they reform their household on the same principle: he directs, that they who attend at the altar should abstain from the theatre, the tavern, and the exercise of all ignoble professions that in their private character they be meek and humble but that, in the acts and offices of religion, they assume a character conformable to the majesty of the immortal gods, whose ministers they are. And, above all, he recommends to them the virtues of chanty and benevolence. With regard to discipline and religious policy, he established readers in divinity planned an establishment for the order, and parts of the divine offices designed a regular and formal service, with days and hours of worship. He had also decreed to found hospitals for the poor, monasteries for the devout, and to prescribe and enjoin initiatory and expiatory sacrifices; with instructions for converts, and a course of penance for offenders; and, in all things, to imitate the church discipline at that time. In this way he endeavoured to destroy Christian principles, and at the same time to establish Christian practice.

But as the indifference and corruptions of Paganism, joined to the inflexibility and perseverance of the Christians, prevented his project from advancing with the speed he desired, he grew chagrined, and even threatened, after his return from the Persian expedition, effectually to ruin the Christian religion. He had before, in pursuance of his general scheme of opposing revelation to itself, by setting one sect against another, written to the body or community of the Jews; assuring them of his protection, his concern for their former ill usage, and his fixed purpose to screen them from future oppression, that they might be at liberty, and in a disposition to redouble their vows for the prosperity of his reign; and concluded with a promise, that, if he came back victorious from the Persian war, he would rebuild Jerusalem, restore them to their possessions, live with them in the holy city, and join with them in their worship of the great God of the universe. The rebuilding of the temple at Jerusalem was thought a sure means of destroying Christianity, since the final destruction of that temple had been foretold both by Christ and his apostles; if therefore the lye could be given to their predictions, their religion would be no more. This scheme, therefore, he set about immediately. The completing of such an edifice would be a work of time, and he pleased himself with the glory of atchieving so bold an enterprize. Accordingly, the attempt was made, and what was the consequence will be seen by the following account of it from Ammianus Marcellinus. “Julian, having been already thrice consul, taking Sallust prsefect of the several Gauls for his colleague, entered a fourth time on this high magistracy. It appeared strange to see a private man associated with Augustus; a thing of which, since the consulate of Dioclesian and Aristobulus, history afforded no example. And although his sensibility of the many and great events, which this year was likely to produce, made him very anxious for the future, yet he pushed on the various and complicated preparations for this expedition with the utmost application: and, having an eye in every quarter, and being desirous to eternize his reign by the greatness of his achievements, he projected to rebuild, at an immense expence, the proud and magnificent temple of Jerusalem, which, after many combats, attended with much bloodshed on both sides, during the siege by Vespasian, was, with great difficulty, taken and destroyed by Titus. He committed the conduct of this affair to Alypius of Antioch, who formerly had been lieutenant in Britain, When, therefore, this Alypius had set himself to the vigorous execution of his charge, in which he had all the assistance that the governor of the province could afford him, horrible bails of fire breaking out near the foundations, with frequent and reiterated attacks, rendered the place from time to time inaccessible to the scorched and blasted workmen; and the victorious element continuing in this manner, obstinately and resolutely bent, as it were, to drive them to a distance, Alypius thought best to give over the enterprize. In the mean time, though Julian was still at Antioch when this happened, yet he was so wholly taken up by the Persian expedition, that he had not leisure to attend to it. He set out soon after upon that expedition, in which he succeeded very well at first; and, taking several places from the Persians, he advanced as far as Ctesipho without meeting with an) body to oppose him. However, there passed several engagements in this place, in which it is said the Romans had almost always the advantage; but the distressed condition of their army, for want of necessaries, obliged them to come to a decisive battle. This was begun June 26, in the year 363, and victory appeared to declare itself on their side; when Julian, who was engaged personally irr the fight without |iis helmet, received a mortal wound upon his head, which put a period to his life the following night.” This fact of the interruption given to the rebuilding of the temple of Jerusalem has been denied by some modern infidels, but nothing of the kind seems better attested; and although it may be supposed that the eruption was not without natural causes,' and that the seeds of it lay in the bowels of the earth, yet, as Dr. Jortin observes, the fire’s breaking out at the very instant when the Jews and Pagans were attempting to rebuild the temple, its being renewed upon their renewed attempt to go on, and ceasing when they gave over, are circumstances which plainly shew a providential interposition.

We have, in the course of his memoir, had occasion to exhibit some qualities to the disadvantage of Julian; yet we must in justice add, that he was sober and vigilant, free from the debaucheries of women; and, to sum up all, remarkably mild, merciful, good-natured, and, in general, most amiable; except in his passions which arose from his aversion to Christianity. He not only encouraged letters by his patronage, but was himself a learned writer. As a philosopher, he strictly adhered to the Alexandrian or Eclectic school. He professes himself a warm admirer of Pythagoras and Plato, and recommends an union of their tenets with those of Aristotle. The later Platonists, of his own period, he loads with encomiums, particularly Jamblichus, whom he calls “The Light of the World,” and “The Physician of the Mind.” Amidst the numerous traces of an enthusiastic and bigoted attachment to Pagan theology and philosophy, and of an inveterate enmity to Christianity, which are to be found in his writings, the candid reader will discern many marks of genius and erudition. Concerning the manners of Julian, Libanius writes, that no philosopher, in the lowest state of poverty, was ever more temperate, or more ready to practise rigorous abstinence from food, as the means of preparing his mind for conversing with the gods. Like Plotinus, Porphyry, Jambiichus, and others of this fanatical sect, he dealt in visions and extasies, and pretended to a supernatural intercourse with divinities. Suidas relates, probably from some writings of the credulous Eunapius now lost, an oracular prediction concerning his death. Besides his answer to St. Cyril, and “Misopogon,” he wrote some other discourses, epistles, &c. in which are many proofs of genius and erudition, conveyed in an elegant style. And his rescripts in the Theodosian code shew, that he made more good laws, in the short time of his reign, than any emperor either before or after him. His works were published in Greek and Latin by Spanheim in 1696, 2 vols. fol.; and a selection from them in England by Mr. Buncombe, 1784, 2 vols. 8vo, translated principally from La Bleterie, who wrote an excellent Life of Julian.

, an eminent French sculptor, professor of the schools of sculpture and painting, a member of the French Institute and of the legion of honour, was born at Paulien, in the department of the Haute-Loire, in 1731. He was the pupil first of Samuel, a sculptor in Puy en Velay, with whom he remained two years, after which he was placed at Lyons under Riache, another artist, where he made great progress in sculpture, and after gaining a prize at the academy of Lyons, came to Paris. Here he entered the school of William Coustou, statuary to the king, in 1765, and gained the prize of sculpture for a beautiful bas-relief, representing Sabinus offering his chariot to the vestals, when the Gauls were about to invade Rome. There was a simplicity in the style, taste, and character of this piece which struck the connoisseurs as something different from what they had been accustomed to see in the modern school. The artist, according to the custom of the times, enjoyed the usual pension for three years at Paris, and did not go to Rome until 1768, where, his fame having preceded him, he was employed by the president Belenger to execute a mausoleum in marble for his wife and daughter. Besides the other labours enjoined to the pensionary artists, Julien made copies, in marble, for the president Ocardi, of the Apollo Belvidere, the Flora in the Farnese palace, and the Gladiator in the Borghese palace, all which are now in the collection at Versailles. He was afterwards recalled to Paris to assist Coustou in the mausoleum for the dauphin and dauphiness. Of this he executed the figure of immortality, and had the charge of removing the whole to the cathedral of Sens, where it now is.

His fame being fully established, he was, although otherwise a man of great modesty, ambitious of a seat in the academy of painting and sculpture, and with that view presented them with a Ganymede, but notwithstanding its acknowledged merit, he did not at this time succeed. In 1779, however, he made a second effort, and his “Dying Gladiator” procured him immediate admission into the academy. He was then employed by the king to make the statue of La Fontaine, which is reckoned his masterpiece in that style. He also executed various bas-relievos for the castle of Rambouillet, and a woman bathing, which is now in the hall of the Senate at Paris, and allowed to be one of the finest specimens of modern art. His last work was the statue of Nicolas Poussin, for the hall of the Institute. This excellent artist died, after a long illness, at Paris in January 1804.

, another able French artist, and a member of the ancient academy of painting, was born in 1736, of poor parents at the village of Carigliano near Locarno in Swisserland, and was first a pupil of Bardon at Marseilles; and afterwards of Carlo Vanloo at Paris, where having gained the prize of the academy, he was sent to the French school at Rome under Natoire. The sight of the ancient and modern works of that city determined him to abandon the manner taught in France, and adopt that of the great masters of Italy. This procured him, among the wits, the name of Julien the apostate, to distingush him from others of the same name, and of the same school. His successes at Rome prolonged his stay there for ten years, after which he returned to Paris, and distinguished himself by various works of great merit. He painted for the hotel of the princess Kinski a St. Dominic, and several decorations for ceilings, mentioned in the “Reeueil des curiosites de Paris,” which attracted the attention of connoisseurs and strangers. Among the works which he exhibited to the academy, when nominated a member, was the “Triumph of Aurelian,” executed for the duke ^le Rochefoucault. In the saloon of St. Louis, he exhibited in 1788, his fine picture, “Study spreading her flowers over Time,” a work of admirable composition. This was sent into England, and engraved. Among other capital performances from his hand may be mentioned his Jupiter and Juno, and Aurora and Titan. His last important work was an altar-piece for the chapel of the archbishop of Paris at Conflans, representing St. Anthony in a trance. Notwithstanding his merit, we have to add that this artist died poor, in 1799.

, was born Oct. 16, 1668, at Dresden. He acquired great knowledge of the belles lettres and medals, and was successively teacher at Schleusingen, Eysenach, and Altenburg, where he died June 19, 1714. He had been admitted a member of the royal society at Berlin in 1711. He left a great number of German translations from ancient authors, and several editions of classic authors, with notes, in the style of those published by Minellius also, “Schediasma de Diariis eruditorum” “Centuria feminarum eruditione et scriptis illustrium” “Theatrurn Latinitatis. universae RegheroJunkerianum,” “Lineoe eruditionis universae et Historiae Philosophical;” “Vita Lutheri ex nummis,” “Vita Ludolphi,” &c. He was historiographer to the Ernestine branch of the house of Saxony. Poverty obliged him to write rather in haste, which may be discovered in his works.

, a learned physician, was born on the 3d of June, 1680, at Londorff, near Gie.ssen, in Hesse. He pursued his medical studies at Marpurg and Erfurt, and afterwards took the degree of M. D. at Halle, in 1718. He became subsequently a distinguished professor in this university, and attained a high reputation as physician to the public hospital. He died at Halle, Oct. 25, 1759. His works, which are chiefly compilations, have been much esteemed, and are still occasionally referred to, especially as they contain the best and most compendious view of the doctrines of Stahl, which he espoused and taught. They are as follows: 1. “Conspectus Medicinas Theoretico-practicoe, Tabulis 137 primaries morbos, methodo Stahliana tractandos, exhibens,” Halle, 17 Is, 4to; 2. “Conspectus ChirurgiaR,” &c. ibid. 1721, 4to 3. “Conspectus Formularum Medicarum,” &c. ibid. 1723, 4to 4. “Conspectus Therapeiae generalis, &c. Tabnlis 20 methodo Stahliana conscriptus,” ibid. 1725, 4to 5. “Conspectus Chemiae Theoretico-practicac in forma Tabularum repraesentatus, &c. Tomus prior,” ibid. 1730, 4to. This is an elementary work on chemistry, according to the principles of Becher and Stahl. 6. “Conspectus Physiologic,” ibid. 1735, 4to; and 7. “Conspectus Pathologiac,” ibid. 1736, 4to. Juncker likewise published many academical theses on medical, chirurgical, and philosophical subjects.

, in Italian Giuntino, a celebrated mathematician and astrologer of the sixteenth century, was born 1523, at Florence. He published Commentaries, in Latin, on the Sphaera of Holywood or Sacro Bosco, 1577 and 1578, 2 vols. 8vi; “Speculum Astrologiae,” Lngd. 1581, 2 vols. fol. and other works relating to astronomy. There is also a treatise written by him in French on the comet which appeared in 1577, 8vi; and another on the reformation of the calendar by Gregory XIII. 8vi, in Latin. He had quitted the Carmelite order, and became a protestant, but returned afterwards to the Catholic church, and spent the chief of his life at Lyons, where his conduct was very irregular. He died 1590. a

, a native of Leipsic, was the first who published an ancient Greek translation of “Caesar’s Commentaries,” Francfort, 1606, 2 vols. 4to, a work much in request and gave a Latin version of the “Pastorals” of Longus, with notes, Han. 1605, 8vi. Some of his letters are also printed. He died August 16, 1610, at Hanau. Lewis Jungerman, his brother, born also at Leipsic, was an excellent botanist, and to him are attributed, “Hortus Eystettensis,” “Catalogus plantarum quae circa Altorfinuui nascuntur,” Altorf, 1646, 8vi; and “Cornucopias Floras Giessensis,” Giessae, 1623, 4to. He died June 7, 1653, at Altorf. Gaspard Jungerman, another brother, was also a man of learning.

, an eminent mathematician, physician, and botanist, the son of a schoolmaster at Lubec, in Germany, was born October 21, 1587. His mother was daughter to a clergyman of the cathedral church at Lubec. Jungius, having unfortunately been deprived of his father very early in life (for he was stabbed one evening upon his return home from a convivial party), was obliged to depend almost entirely upon his own exertions for knowledge; yet in his youth, he became a very subtle logician, and ingenious disputant, and thus prepared his mind for that clearness of investigation and accuracy of judgment, which were so eminently conspicuous in the works which he published at a more advanced period of his life. Selecting the study of medicine as a profession, he travelled over a great part of Italy and Germany, in order to cultivate the acquaintance of the most distinguished physicians of that time. He had previously graduated with distinguished honour at the university of Giessen A. D. 1607, and remained there a few years as mathematical tutor. In 1625 he was chosen professor of physic at Helmstadt, but, on account of the Danish war, he was obliged, soon after his appointment, to fly to Brunswick, whence he soon returned to Helmstadt, and in 1629 was appointed rector of the school at Hamburgh.

Jungius seems to have eminently distinguished himself in the several studies of theology, medicine, mathematics, metaphysics, and botany, upon all which pursuits his opinions and observations are handed down to us in his writings, though the most famous part of his work, entitled “Doxoscopiae Physicze Minores,” is upon the last mentioned subject, botany. This book was first printed at Hamburgh, in 4to, A.D. 1662, and again, in 1679, under the care of Martin Fogel, with this additional title, “Prsecipuarum opinionum physicarum.” A copy of the former edition of this work is in the Linnoean library, having been presented to Linnæus by his pupil, professor P. D. Giseke, of Hamburgh. The botanical part of it, included in the third section of the second part, occupies about 100 pages, and contains many judicious and acute rules for making distinct species of plants, as well as some curious remarks upon genera. He was a great critic in botanical nomenclature; and constructed a variety of terms which agree with those of Linnasus, and his remarks upon botanical discrimination have been of considerable advantage to succeeding botanists, and many of his definitions are repeatedly made use of by our immortal countryman, Ray. He was the first who projected and raised a literary society in Germany, though this institution did not share a better fate than the one which had just before been founded in this country (and which appears to have served for its model) by Hugh Latimer, Thomas Linacre, and others, for the purpose of discussing and illustrating Aristotle’s philosophy. They both Bourished but for a short period, though the Heunetic or Ereunetic society, as it was called, established by professor Jungius, was on a far more comprehensive plan than the other, and may indeed be considered as having, in some measure, embraced the same views with which the royal society was afterwards instituted in Great Britain. The fame of Jungius was originally diffused through this country by his noble pupil, the honourable Charles Cavendish, who appears to have studied under him at Hamburgh. This gentleman was brother to the earl of Newcastle, who had the care of Charles I. when a youth.

After a long life, spent in the acquirement and diffusionof general philosophical knowledge, and having always manifested a strong attachment to the Lutheran church, professor Jungius departed this life September 23, 1657, iind was buried in the church of St. John at Hamburgh, where a handsome tablet was inscribed to his memory by his friend and pupil, Michael Kirsten. The following is a list of his works, as given by Martin Fogel, who edited the second edition of his “Doxoscopise.” 1. “Logica Hamburgensis,” Hamb. 1638, 8vo. 2. “Geometria Empirica,” Rostock and Hamb. 4to. 3. “Doxoscopiae Physicae Minores, sive Isagoge Physica Doxoscopica.” Hamb. 1662, 4to. 4. “Kurzer Bericht von der Didactica oder Lehrkunst Wolfgangi Ratichii, durch Christoph. Helvicum und Joach. Jungium,” Giessen, 1614, 4to. 5. “Disputationes de naturali Dei cognitione de potentia activa de loco Aristotelis, lib. 3. de ccelo, t. 66 de figuris locum replentibus de relationibus de notionibus secundis de demonstratione tritermina: de definitionibus,” &c.

, a learned Hollander, was born, in 1511 or 1512, at Hoorn, of which place his father had been secretary, and five times burgomaster. Having passed through his first studies at Haeriem and Louvain, he fixed Upon physic for his profession, and, for his improvement, resolved to travel abroad. Accordingly, going first to France, he put himself under the care of James Houlier, a celebrated physician at Paris. Thence he went to Bologna in Italy, where he was admitted M. D. and afterwards, passing through several parts of Germany, arrived in England, and became physician to the duke of Norfolk in 1543, and was afterwards retained in that quality by a certain great lady. He continued in England several years, and wrote many books there; among others, a Greek and Latin lexicon, to which he added above 6500 words. He dedicated this work, in 1548, to Edward VI. with the title of king. Edward not being acknowledged such by the pope> our author, who was of that religion, fell under the displeasure of the court of Rome for his dedication, and was prosecuted for it a long time after. His works were put into the “Index Expurgatorius,” where he was branded as a Calvinist, and an author “damnatae memories,” of condemned memory; a disgrace which gave him great uneasiness and concern; and, in order to be freed from it, having laid his case before cardinal Granville, he applied, by the advice of Arias Montanus, directly to the pope, and prepared an apology, shewing the indispensable necessity he was under of giving Edward the title of king, and at the same time protesting he had always been a good catholic.

Before the death of Edward, he returned to his own country, and led a sedentary life, closely pursuing his studies; but, upon the accession of queen Mary, he returned thither; and, being a very good poet, he published, in 1554, an epithalamium on the marriage of Philip II. with that queen, entitled “Philippis.” This address could not fail of introducing him in a favourable light to that court, whence he would probably have made a considerable fortune, had not the turbulent state of those times driven him home again. He confined himself some time in Hoorn, but, after a while, settled at Haeriem; and repaired the disappointment he sustained respecting his finances in England, by marrying a young woman of fortune, which he knew how to improve by making the most of his dedications to his books, of which he published three at Haarlem in 1556. Some years after, he accepted an offer from the king of Denmark, to be his physician, with a considerable salary, and removed to Copenhagen; but neither liking the climate nor genius of the inhabitants, he left the country about 1564, very abruptly, without taking leave of the king. Returning to Haerlem, he practised physic, and was made principal of the college, or great school, in that town. He continued there till the place was besieged by the Spaniards in 1573, when he found means to escape, by obtaining leave to attend the prince of Orange, who desired his assistance as a physician; but lost his library, in which he had left a great many works which had cost him much pains and labour; and the loss was aggravated by this circumstance, that they were almost fit for the press. In this exigency he went to Middleburgh, where the prince had procured him a public salary to practise physic; but the air of the country did not agree with his constitution, and he fell into some disorders, which, with the grief he felt for the loss of his library, put an end to his life in 1575. There was a design to have given him a professorship at Leyden, which university was but just rising when he died. He had a prodigious memory, which enabled him to treasure up a vast stock of learning. Besides his skill in physic, which was his profession, he was an historian, poet, philosopher, and understood perfectly eight languages. His works make up 24 articles, among which are, “Lexicon Graeco-Latinum,” 1548; “Adagiorum ab Erasmo omissorum centuriae octo & dimidia,” 1558 which last was published after his death, as others of his pieces were.

, or Du Jon (Francis), professor of divinity at Leyden, was descended of a noble family, and born at Bourges in 1545. At the age of thirteen he began to study the law, and afterwards went to Geneva, to study the languages; but being restrained in his pursuits for want of a proper support from his family, he resolved to get his bread by teaching school, which he pursued till 1565, when he was made minister of the Walloon church at Antwerp. But as this was both a troublesome and dangerous post, on account of the tumultuous conflicts between the papists and protestants at that time, he was soon obliged to withdraw into Germany. He went first to Heidelberg, where the elector, Frederic III. received him very graciously. He then made a visit to his mother, who was still living at Bourges; after which, returning to the Palatinate, he was made minister of the church of Schoon there. This was hut a small congregation; and, while he held it, he was sent by the elector to the prince of Orange’s army, during the unsuccessful expedition of 1568. He continued chaplain to that prince till the troops returned into Germany; when he resumed his church in the Palatine, and resided upon it till 1579. This year his patron, the elector, appointed him to translate the Old Testament jointly with Tremellius, which employment brought him to Heidelberg. He afterwards read public lectures at Neustadt, till prince Casimir, administrator of the electorate, gave him the divinity-professor’s chair at Heidelberg. He returned into France with the duke de Bouillon; and paying his respects to Henry IV. that prince sent him upon some mission into Germany. Returning to give an account of his success, and passing through Holland, he was invited to be divinity-professor at Leyden; and, obtaining the permission of the French ambassador, he accepted the offer in 1592. He had passed through many scenes of life, and he wrote an account of them himself this year: after which, he filled the chair at Leyden with great reputation for the space of ten years, when he died of the plague in 1602.

He was married no less than four times, and by his third wife had a son, who is the subject of the next article. The titles of his works are sixty-four in number, among which are, “Commentaries” on the first three chapters of Genesis, the prophecies of Ezekiel, Daniel, and Jonah “Sacred Parallels” and “Notes” upon the book of Revelation “Hebrew Lexicon” “Grammar of the Hebrew Tongue” “Notes on Cicero’s Epistles to Atticns.” But what he is chiefly, and almost only, known for now, is his Latin version of the Hebrew text of the Bible, jointly "with Tremellius. He was a man of great learning and pious zeal, and his life by Melchior Adam affords many interesting particulars of him in both characters. In the account of his life written by himself, he relates that in his youth he was sed.uced into atheism, from which he represents himself as almost miraculously redeemed, and this appears. have made a lasting impression on him.

, son of the preceding, was born at Heidelberg in 1589, and received the first elements of his education at Leyden, apparently with a view to letters; but upon the death of his father in 1602, resolving to go into the army in the service of the prince of Orange, he applied himself particularly to such branches of the mathematics as are necessary to make a figure in the military life. He had niade a good progress in these accomplishments at twenty years of age; when the war being concluded by a truce for twelve years in 1609, occasioned a change in his purpose, and inclined him to cultivate the arts of peace by a close application to study. His first literary employment was to collect, digest, and publish some of his father’s writings. After some years spent thus in his own country, he resolved, for farther improvement, to travel abroad. With that view he went first to France, and then to England, in which he arrived in 1620, and having recommended himself by his learning and amiable manners to the literati there, he was taken into the family of Thomas earl of Arundel, in which he continued for the space of thirty years. During his abode there he made frequent excursions to Oxford, chiefly for the sake of the Bodleian and other libraries; where, meeting with several Anglo-Saxon books, he resolved to study the language, which was at that time neglected. He soon perceived that the Anglo-Saxon tongue would be of service to him for discovering many etymologies necessary to clear up the Flemish, Belgic, German, and English, languages; and therefore devoted himself wholly to that study, He afterwards learned the ancient language of the Goths, Francs, Cimbri, and Prisons; by which he discovered the etymology of several Italian, French, and Spanish words; for the Goths, Vandals, French, Burgundians, and Germans, spread their language in the provinces they conquered, of which some vestiges are still left.

After a careful course of these studies and researches, he announced his having discovered that the Gothic was the mother of all the Teutonic tongues; whence sprang the old Cimbrian, transmitted to posterity by the remains of the Runic, as likewise the Swedish, Danish, Norwegian, Icelandish, in which the inhabitants of the country expressed their thoughts at that time. From the AngloSaxon, which itself is either a branch of the Gothic or its sister, and daughter of the same mother, sprang the English, Scotch, Belgtc, and the old language of Friesland. From the Gothic and Saxon languages sprang that of the Francs, which is the mother-tongue of Upper-Germany. He was so passionately fond of this study, that, after thirty years chiefly spent upon it in England, being informed there were some villages in Friesland where the ancient language of the Saxons was preserved, he went thither and lived two years among them. Then, returning into Holland, he met with the old Gothic ms. called the Silver One, because the four gospels are written there in silver Gothic letters. He devoted his whole study in the explication of it, which he completed in a little time, and published it, with notes of Dr. Marshall, in 1665, under the title “Glossarium Gothicum in quatuor evangelia Gothica,” Dordrac, 1665, 4-to. Dr. Marshall’s performance is entitled <e Observationes in evangeliorum versiones per antiquas duas, Gothicam sc. & Anglo-Saxonicam," &c. ibid. Junius returned into England in 1674, in order to peruse such English-Saxon books as had hitherto escaped his diligence, especially those in the Cottonian library. In Oct. 1676, he retired to Oxford. He was now 87, and intended not to leave that beloved university any more. At first he had lodgings opposite to Lincoln college, for the sake of Dr. Marshall, rector of that society, who had been his pupil in the study of the Northern languages, and was then a great critic, as well as Junius, in them. Afterwards, he intended to put some of his notes and collections into order; and, to avoid the interruption of frequent visits, he removed to an obscure house in St. Ebbe’s parish, where he digested some things for the press^ and made a deed of gift of all his Mss. and collections to the public library.

In Aug. 1677, upon the invitation of his nephew, Dr. Isaac Vossius, canon of Windsor, he went to his house, and there died of a fever, Nov. 19 following. His corpse was interred in St. George’s chapel, within the castle, and the following year a table of white marble was fixed to the wall, near his grave, with an inscription in Latin. He was not only very learned, but a man of irreproachable character. As a laborious student, perhaps few have excelled him. He used to rise at four in the morning, both winter and summer, and study till dinner-time, which was at one; after dinner he used some bodily exercise, walking or running, but returned to his studies at three, and did not leave them till eight, when he went to supper, and then to bed. He very seldom stirred abroad, and never but when some business obliged him. Notwithstanding this, he enjoyed a perfect state of health, and was never once sick. Though he spent so long a series of years in this solitary manner, he was a man of a pleasant and social temper, even in his extreme old age. He was free from peevishness, and affable to those who visited him, though he did not like to be interrupted. Besides the “Glossarium Gothicum,” the chief of his printed works are, 1. that intituled “De pictura veterum,” 1637, 4to. and printed again, with large additions, 1694, at Rotterdam, in folio. He printed likewise an English translation, entitled, “The Painting of the Ancients;” in three books, with additions and alterations, Lond. 1638. To the folio edition was prefixed his life, written by Groevius. 2. “Observationes in Willerami Francicam paraphrasin Cantici canticorum,” Amst. 1655, 8vo. 3. Several letters in “Ger. Job. Vossii & clarorum virorum ad eum epistolae,” Lond. 1690, fol. where Vossius styles our author “vir omnifaria doctrina & generis splendore ornatissimus.”

, a French protestant divine, sometimes called by the catholics the Goliah of the protestants, was born Dec. 24, 1637. His father, Daniel Jurieu, was minister of the reformed religion at Mer his mother, the daughter of Peter du Moulin, minister and professor at Sedan. He was sent, after the first rudiments of his education under Rivet in Holland, to his maternal uncle Peter du Moulin, then in England where, having finished his theological studies, he took orders in that church but, upon the death of his father, being called home to succeed him at Mer, and finding what he had done in England disliked by the reformed in his own country, he submitted to a re-ordination by presbyters, according to the form of the foreign protestant churches. After some time, he officiated in the French church of Vitri, where the people were so much pleased with him, that they endeavoured to procure his settlement among them; and here he composed his “Treatise, of Devotion.” Before this, in 1670, he had attracted public attention by refuting a project for reuniting all the sects of Christianity, wrote by d'Huisseau, minister of Saumur. He was afterwards invited to Sedan, where he discharged the office of professor in divinity and Hebrew with great reputation. In 1673 he wrote his “Preservative against Popery,” which he opposed to the exposition of the doctrine of the catholic church by M. de Meaux, bishop of Condom. This treatise did great credit to the author, who endeavoured to prove that the prelate had disguised the doctrine of his church. In 1675, Jurieu. published the first part of his work (the whole of which appeared in 1685), entitled “La Justification de la Morale,” &c. or, “A Vindication of the Morality of the Protestants against the Accusations of Mr. Arnauld,” &c. la 1681, the university of Sedan being taken from the protestants, our professor resolved to accept an invitation sent to him from that of Rouen; but discovering, in the mean time, that the French court knew him to be the author of a work he had published anonymously, under the title of “La Politique du Clerge,” which was a severe satire on the Roman catholics, he was apprehensive of being prosecuted, and therefore retired hastily into Holland, where be almost immediately received an offer of the divinitychair in the university of Groningen; but his friends having founded the same professorship for him at Rotterdam, he preferred this residence to the other; and he was also appointed minister of the Walloon church in the same town. He had not been long in this happy situation, when he produced to the public “Les derniers Efforts de PInnocence afflige'e,” or “The last Efforts of afflicted Innocence.”

At Rotterdam, having nothing to fear, he gave full scope to his imagination, which was naturally too warm and sanguine. Jn this temper he applied himself to study the book of “the Revelations,” and thought he had certainly discovered the true meaning of it by a kind of inspiration, which shewed him, that France was the place of the great city, where the witnesses mentioned in the apocalypse lay dead, but not buried; and that they were to rise to life again in three yeafs and a half, namely, in 1689. He was unalterably fixed and confirmed in this persuasion by the revolution which happened in England in 16SS; and even addressed a letter upon the subject to king William, whom he considered as the instrument intended by God to carry his designs into execution. At home, however, all this was charged upon him as an artifice, only to prepare the people for a much greater revolution; and he was suspected to harbour no other design than that of exciting people to take up arms, and setting all Europe in a flame. The foundation of this belief was his not shewing any signs of confusion after the event had given the lye to his prophecies: they built likewise on this, that, after the example of Comenius, he had attempted to re-unite the Lutherans and Calvinists, in hopes of increasing the number of troops to attack Antichrist. But these accusations were brought only by the Romanists, his constant enemies, while his more indulgent friends attributed his prophecies to enthusiasm, and it is certain, that, under this period of mental delusion, he affected to believe a great number of prodigies, which he maintained were so many presages or forerunners of the accomplishment of the prophecies. Nor is it true that he was indifferent to the ill success of what he had predicted in his “L'accomplissement des Propheties,” Rotterdam, 1686 on the contrary, his chagrin was great; and it was not a little heightened when he thought himself insulted by some of his best friends, who opposed his sen-, timents. This drew him into violent disputes, and particularly with Bayle , who wrote against him. The opposition of Bayle was the more resented by him, as he had been a friend to him, and was instrumental in procuring him the philosophical chair at Sedan in 1675. They seem to have been very intimately connected; for, after the suppression of that university, they were preferred together to different professorships at Rotterdam in 1681; and they both wrote against Maimbourg’s “History of Calvinism” in 1682. But here, it is said, the first seeds of the quarrel between them were sown. Both the pieces excelled in different ways. Jurieu’s was more complete and full than Bayle' s, and he answered Maimbourg with a great deal of strength; but then the reader did not meet there with that easy and natural style, those lively and agreeable reflections which distinguished the latter. The preference given to Bayle was observed by Jurieu with disdain: he began to look upon Bayle as his competitor, conceived a jealousy and hatred for him; and to what length it was carried afterwards may be seen in our article of Bayle. In short, it must not be dissembled, that our author’s conduct was far from being commendable in regard to Bavle, or any of his antagonists. Even those synods, where his authority was the greatest, engaged in the contest, and justified Mr. Saurin, pastor of Utrecht, and other persons of merit, whom Jurieu had not spared to accuse of heterodoxy: nay, the matter was carried so far, that, in some of these church parliaments there passed decrees, in which, though his name was not mentioned, yet the opinions he had advanced upon baptism, justification, and the new system of the church, were absolutely condemned. These troubles continued while he lived, and at length threw him into a lowness of spirits, under which he languished for several years before his death; yet he continued to employ his pen, and revised and printed his history of opinions, and forms of religious worship, “Histoire des dogmes et des cultes,” which he had composed in his youth, a work of very considerable merit. In the two or three last years of his life he wrote only some devotional pieces. At length he sunk under a load of infirmities, at Rotterdam, Jan, 11, 1713. He was unquestionably a man of considerable learning, but peculiar in some of his own notions, and intolerant to those of others. Among his works, not mentioned above, are “Histoire du Calvinisme et du Papisrne mise en parallele,” &c. 1683, 3 vols. “Lettres Pastorales.” These letters are upon the subject of the accomplishment of the prophecies. In one of them, for Jan. 1695, having quoted, as proof of the favourable intentions of the allies, a proposal for peace, drawn up by the diet of Ratisbon, which had been forged by a speculative politician in Amsterdam, he was so ashamed of his having been imposed upon by this fictitious piece, that he instantly printed another edition of his letter, in which he omitted that article, 3. “Parallele de trois Lettres pastorales de Mr. Jurieu, c.” 1696, quoted in a “Dissertation concerning defamatory Libels,” at the end of Bayle’s Diet. 4. “Traite de TumlS del'eglise,” &c. 1688. 5> “Le vray systeme.de l'église et la veritable analyse de la foi,” &c. 1686. 6. “L'Esprit de Mr. Arnauld,” 1684. 7. “Abrege de i'Histoire du Concile de Trente,” &c. 1683. 8. “Les prejugez legitimos centre le papisme,” 1685. 9. “Le Janseniste convaincu de vaine sophistiquerie.” 10. “Le Philosophe de Rotterdam accuse, atteint, et convaincu.” 11. “Traite historique, contenant le jugement d'un Protestant sur la Theologie Mystique,” &c. 1700. 12. “Jugement sur les me*­thodes rigides et relache'es,” &c. 1686. 13. “Traite* de la Nature et la Grace.” 14. “Apologie pour Paccomplissement de Propbe'ties,” 1687. 15. “Quelque Sermons,” &C.

, born in 1684, and a physician of the mathematical sect, was educated in Trinity college, Cambridge, of which he was fellow in 1711. He was afterwards well known in London as an eminent physician; was physician to Guy’s hospital, and was, during several years, an active member and secretary of the royal society, and at the time of his death in 1750, president of the college of physicians. He distinguished himself by a series of ingenious essays, published in the Philosophical Transactions in 1718, 1719, &c. and afterwards printed collectively, in 1732, under the title of “Physico-Mathematical Dissertations,” in which mathematical science was applied with considerable acuteness to physiological subjects. These papers involved him in several controversies; first with Keill, in consequence of his calculations in regard to the force of the contractions of the heart, against which also Senac published some objections, which he answered. To Smith’s System of Optics, published in 1738, Jurin added “An Essay upon distinct and indistinct Vision,” in which he made subtle calculations of the changes necessary to be made in the figure of the eye to accommodate it to the different distances of objects. This paper was commented on by Robins, to whom Jurin wrote a reply. He had likewise controversies with Michelotti respecting the force of running water, and with the philosophers of the school of Leibnitz on living forces. He communicated to the royal society some experiments made with a view to determine the specific gravity of the human, blood, and he contributed much to the improvement of their meteorological observations. He was a warm partisan and an active defender of the practice of inoculation; and in several publications, giving an account of its success from 1723 to 1727, established its utility upon the true foundation of a comparison between the respective mortality of the casual and the inoculated small-pox. Dr. Jurin was also editor of Varenius’s Geography, 2 vols. 8vo, 1712, published at the request of sir Isaac Newton and Dr. Bentley. In “The Works of the Learned” for 1737 S 9, he carried on a controversy with Dr. Pemberton, in defence of Newton, and signed his papers “Philalethes Cantabrigiensis.”

, an eminent botanist, was bornat Lyons in 1686. He cultivated, with so much success, a talent for natural history, which discovered itself in his earliest years, that, in 1712, he obtained a place in the academy of sciences. After traversing various parts of Europe, he settled in Paris, where he published various works on the most interesting parts of natural history. He published an. appendix to Tournefort, and methodized and abridged the work of Barrelier, on the plants of France, Spain, and Italy. He also practised physic, and was remarkable on all occasions for charity to the poor, to whom he not only gave advice, but alms. He nevertheless left behind him a very considerable fortune, of which his brother Bernard was the heir. He died of an apoplexy, at the age of seventy-two, in 1758.

, brother of the preceding, was also a native of Lyons, and born in 1699. Like his brother he was a practitioner of physic, and eminent for his botanical skill and researches, and was one of the first botanists who aimed at a natural system of arrangement. He was member of various learned academies in Europe; curator of the plants of the royal garden at Paris, and was invited by the king himself to superintend the arrangement of a botanical garden at Trianon. He was highly esteemed by his royal master, and enjoyed, what was no less honourable, the friendship and confidence of Linnæus. He had numerous pupils, by whom he was much beloved, and died in possession of universal esteem in 1777, in the seventy-ninth year of his age. His only publications were, an edition of Tournefort on the plants which grow near Paris, 1725, 2 vols. 12mo; and “L'ami de Fhumanite, ou, Conseils cTun bon citoyen a sa nation,” octavo, printed after his death. Although a first-rate botanist, he was deterred by excess of modesty from giving his ideas to the world. His nephew, the present A. L. de Jussieu, has given us a plan of the method, according to which he arranged the garden of Trianon in 1759, and which, in fact, laid the foundation of his own celebrated work, published in 1789. The Jussixa, of Linnreus, was so named by that eminent botanist in honour of these two brothers. There was a third brother, however, the youngest, who was born in 1704, and in 1735 went to Peru, in the capacity of a botanist, with the academicians sent there to measure a degree. After continuing in that country thirty-six years, he returned to EVance in very bad health, and almost in a state of childhood, and died in 1779. Some account of his travels and discoveries may be seen in Memoirs of the French Academy; and it was at one time thought that his nephew was preparing an account for publication, but we know not that it has yet appeared.

, counsellor and secretary to the French king, was born at Paris, 1580. Having excellent parts, and a strong bent to letters, he made a great progress; and, as soon as he left the college, applying himself to the study of the councils and ecclesiastical history, he published the “Code of Canons of the Church universal, and the Councils of Africa, with notes.” He held a literary correspondence with the most learned men of his time, as Usher, Salmasius, Blondel, sirHenry Spelman, and others, till his death, which happened at Paris in 1649. He had the character of knowing more of the middle ages than any of his time. Besides the code already mentioned, he published, in 1645, “The Genealogical History of the House of Auvergne;” and several collections of Greek and Latin canons, from Mss. which formed the.“Bibliotheca juris canonici veteris,” published at Paris in 1668, in 2 vols. folio, by William Voel and our author’s son, the subject of the next article.

, was horn at Paris in 1620, and succeeded his father as secretary and counsellor to the king. He was a man of distinguished learning himself, and an encourager of it in others, employing his interest at court in their favour. His house was the usual resort of men of letters, among whom we find Mr. Locke and Dr. Hickes; which shews that it was open to men of all complexions and principles. Mr. Justel had always professed a particular respect for the English nation, and cultivated are acquaintance with many great men there. He foresaw the revocation of the edict of Nantz, several years before it happened, as we are informed by Dr. Hickes. This divine, who, upon his travels abroad, made a considerable stay at Paris, set apart one day in the week for visiting Mr. Justel. In one of these visits, after some discourse about the protestant churches, observed by Dr. Hickes to be in many places demolished, notwithstanding the edict of Nantz, “Alas, sir,” says Mr. Justel, “as I am wont to talk in confidence with you, so I will tell you a secret, that almost none of us knows besides myself our extirpation is decreed we must all be banished our country, or turn papists. I tell it you because I intend to come into England, where I have many friends; and that, when I come to see you among the rest, you may remember that I told it you.” “Upon this,” says Dr. Hickes, “I asked him how long it would be before this sad persecution would be put into execution He answered, within four or five years at most; and remember, says he again, that I foretold the time. After he had been some time in London he made a visit to the doctor at his house on Tower-hill; where, presentlyafter the common forms of congratulating one another (it was about the time that the bill of exclusion was thrown out of the House of Lords), he said, Sir, don't you remember what I told you of the persecution we have since suffered, and of the time when it would begin and you now see all has accordingly come to pass.”

He sent by Dr. Hickes the original ms. in Greek of the “Canones ecclesi* universalis,” published by his father, and other valuable Mss. to be presented to the university of Oxford: upon the receipt of which benefaction, that learned body conferred on him, by diploma, the degree of LL. D. June 23, 1675. He left Paris in 1681, upon the persecution of the protestants; and, coming to London, was, some time after, made keeper of the king’s library at St. James’s, to which is annexed a salary of 200l. per annum, He belcj this place till his death, Sept. 1693, and was then succeeded by Dr. Richard Bentley. He had a very extensive library, particularly rich in Mss. which were always at the service of his learned contemporaries, many of whom acknowledged their obligations to him. He was obliged, however, to dispose of this library before he left France. There is a portrait of him and his arms in the Gent. Mag. 1788, taken from a private print.

, an ancient Latin historian, is known by his abridgment of the large work of Trogus Pompeius, which some think has occasioned the loss of the original; but it is much more probable that the neglect of the original occasioned the abridgment, as commonly happens in the decline of letters. Who Justin was, and when he lived, is altogether uncertain; but he is generally referred to the year 150, in the reign of Antoninus Pius. The abridgment comprises a history of the world from Ninus to Augustus Caesar; and is written with great purity and elegance, excepting here and there a word which savours of encroaching barbarism. It has long been employed as a school book, and is held in great estimation by foreign critics. La Mothe le Vayer thinks “his manner of writing so excellent as to be worthy the age of Augustus rather than that of the Antonines.” Justin has been illustrated by the best annotators, particularly Graevius; and there are numerous editions, of which the preference is given to those of Grsevius; of Hearne, 1705, 8vo of Gronovius, 1719, and 1760; of Fischer, 1757, &c.

, one of the earliest writers of the Christian church, was born at Neapolis, the ancient Sichem of Palestine, in the province of Samaria. His father Priscius, being a Gentile Greek, brought him up in his own religion, and had him educated in all the Grecian learning and philosophy. To complete his studies he travelled to Egypt, the usual tour on this occasion, as being the seat of the more mysterious and recondite literature at this time he was shewn, as he tells you, at Alexandria, the remains of those cells where the seventy translators of the Bible performed what is called the Septuagint version. He had, from his first application to philosophy, disliked the stoic and peripatetic; and chose the sect of Plato, with whose ideas he was enamoured, and of which he resolved to make himself master. He was prosecuting this design in contemplation and solitary walks by the sea-side, as he informs us in his “Dialogue with Trypho,” when there met him one day a grave and ancient person of a venerable aspect, who, falling into discourse upon the subject of his thoughts, turned the conversation, by degrees, from the fancied excellence of Platonism to the superior perfection of Christianity; and performed his part so well, as to raise an ardent curiosity in our Platonist to inquire into the merits of that religion, the result of which was his conversion, which happened about the 16th year of Trajan’s reign, A. C. 132.

Several of his old friends among the heathens were not a little troubled at the loss of so eminent a person: for their satisfaction, therefore, he drew up an account of his conduct, with the reasons of it, in order to bring them into the same sentiments. Still, however, from an affection to the studies of his youth, he retained the ancient dress; preaching and defending the Christian religion under his old philosophic garb, the pallium, or cloak of the Grecian philosophers. About the beginning of Antoninus Pius’s reign he went to Rome, and there strenuously endeavoured to defend and promote the Christian cause: in which spirit finding the heretic Marcion very busy in propagating his pernicious principles, he resolved particularly to oppose him. This heretic was the son of a bishop born in Pontus, and, for deflowering a virgin, had been excommunicated. Upon this he fled to Rome, where he broached his errors; the chief of which was, “That there are two Gods, one the creator of the world, whom he supposed to be the God of the Old Testament, and the author of evil; the other a more sovereign and supreme being, creator of more excellent things, the father of Christ, whom he sent into the world to dissolve the law and the prophets, and to destroy the works of the other deity, whom he styled- the God of the Jews.” Justin encountered this heretic both in word and writing, and composed a book against his principles, which he also published. In the same spirit, when the Christians came to be more severely dealt with, traduced, defamed, and persecuted, by virtue of the standing laws of the empire, Justin drew up his first Apology about the year 140, and presented it to the emperor Antoninus Pius, with a copy of his predecessor Adrian’s rescript, commanding that the Christians should not be needlessly and unjustly vexed. This address was not without its success: the emperor, being in his own nature of a generous disposition, was moved to give orders that the Christians should be treated more gently, and more regularly proceeded against.

Not long afterwards, Justin made a visit into the East; and, among other parts, went to Ephesus. Here he fell into the company and acquaintance of Trypho, a Jew of great note, with whom he engaged in a dispute that held for two days: the substance of which he afterwards wrote in a piece ^entitled his “Dialogue with Trypho.” By the conclusion we learn he was then ready to set sail to Ephesus. He returned at last to Rome, where he had frequent conferences with one Crescens, a philosopher of some repute in that city; a man who had endeavoured to traduce the Christians, and represent their religion under the most infamous character. Justin now presented his second Apology to Marcus Antoninus Philosophus, the successor of Pius, and a determined enemy to the Christians. The immediate occasion of this second Apology, as he himself Infoniis the emperor, was this: A woman at Rome had, together with her husband, lived in all manner of wantonness, and, from a vicious course of life, had been converted to Christianity; and being reclaimed herself, very naturally sought also to reclaim her husband, but at length, finding him quite obstinate, she procured a bill of divorce. The man, enraged at this, accused her to the emperor of being a Christian. She, however, putting in a petition for leave to answer it, he relinquished that prosecution; and, falling upon her converter, one Ptolomeus, procured his imprisonment and condemnation. On that occasion, Lucius, a Christian, being present, presumed to represent how hard it was that an innocent and virtuous man, charged with no crime, should be adjudged to die merely for bearing the name of a Christian: a proceeding that must certainly be a reflection upon the government. These words were no sooner spoken than he, together with a third person, were sentenced to the same fate. The severity of these proceedings awakened Justin’s solicitude and care for the rest of his brethren; and he immediately drew up his second apology, in which, among other things, he made heavy complaints of the malice and envy of his antagonist Crcscens. The philosopher, irritated at this charge, procured him to be apprehended, with six of his companions, and brought before the praefect of the city. After their ex amination, this sentence was pronounced, that “TheJ who refuse to sacrifice to the gods, and to obey the imperial edicts, be first scourged, and then beheaded, according to the laws:” which was put in execution upon Justin and the rest. This happened, according to Baronius, A. C. 165, not long after Justin had presented his second Apology; which is said, therefore, in the language of those times, to have procured him the crown of martyrdom.

He was the first Christian, after the days of the apostles, who added to an unquestionable zeal and love of the gospel, the character of a man of learning and philosophy, both which were employed in propagating and defending his principles. He stands at the head of the Christian Platonists, or those who endeavoured to reconcile the Platonic principles with the dictates of Christianity; and the consequence of this attempt was his holding some opinions not altogether agreeable to the genius of the gospel. There are several valuable editions of his works, the first of which was that of Rob. Stephens, Paris, 1551, fol. and the best are those of Maran, printed at Paris, 1742, fol. and of Oberthur, at Wurtzburg, 1777, 3 vols. 8vo. There is an edition of his second Apology by Hutchinson, Oxon. 1703, 8vo; of his Dialogue with Trypho, by Jebb, London, 1719, 8vo; of his Apologies, by Ashton, Cambridge, 1768, 8vo; of his ftrst Apology, by Grabe, Oxon, 1700; and of both Apologies, and his Dialogue, by Thirl by, London, 1722, fol.

, the first Roman emperor of his name, and more celebrated for his code of laws, was nephew of Justin I. and succeeded his uncle in the Imperial throne Aug. 1, 527. He began his reign with the character of a most religious prince, publishing very severe laws against heretics, and repairing ruined churches; in this spirit,- he actually declared himself protector of the church. While he was thus re-establishing Christianity at home, he carried his arms against the enemies of the empire abroad, with so much success, that he reinstated it in its ancient glory. He was very happy in having the best general of the age, Belisarius, who conquered the Persians for him in 528, 542, and 543; and in 533 exterminated the Vandals, and took their king Gillimer prisoner. He also recovered Africa to the empire by a new conquest vanquished the Goths in Italy and, lastly, defeated the Moors and the Samaritans. But, in the midst of these glorious successes the emperor was endangered by a potent faction at home. Hypalius, Pompeius, and Probus, three nephews of the emperor Anastasius, the immediate predecessor of Justin, combining together, raised a powerful insurrection, in order to dethrone Justinian. The conspirators formed two parties, one called the Varti, and the other Veneti, and at length became so strong, that the emperor, in despair of being able to resist them, began to think of quitting the palace; and had certainly submitted to that disgrace had not the empress Theodosia, his consort, vexed at his betraying so much tameness, reproached him with his pusillanimity, and induced him to fortify himself against the rebels, while Belisarius and Mundus defended him so well, that the conspiracy was broken, and the ringleaders capitally punished.

The empire being now in the full enjoyment of profound peace and tranquillity, Justinian made the best use of it, by collecting the immense variety and number of the Roman laws into one body. To this end, he selected ten of the most able lawyers in the empire; who, revising the Gregorian, Theodosian, and Hermogenian codes, compiled out of them one body, called “The Code,” to which the emperorgave his own name. This may be called the statute law, as consisting of the rescripts of the emperors: but the compilation of the other part was a much more difficult task. It was made up of the decisions of the judges and other magistrates, together with the authoritative opinions of the most eminent lawyers; all which lay scattered, without any order, in above 2000 volumes. These, however, after the labour of ten years, chiefly by Tribonian, an eminent lawyer, were reduced to the number of 50; and the whole design was completed in the year 533, and the name of “Digests,” or “Pandects,” given to it. Besides these, for the use chiefly of young students in the law, Justinian ordered four books of “Institutes” to be drawn up, by Tribonian, Dorotheus, and Theophilus, containing an abstract or abridgement of the text of all the laws: and, lastly, the laws of modern date, posterior to that of the former, were thrown into one volume in the year 541, called the “Noveilx,” or “New Code.” This most important transaction in the state has rendered Justinian’s name immortal. His conduct in ecclesiastical affairs was rash and inconsiderate. On one occasion, when Theodotus, king of Italy, had obliged pope Agapetus to go to Constantinople, in order to submit and make peace with the emperor, Justinian received him very graciously, but enjoined him to communicate with Anthenius, patriarch of Constantinople. That patriarch being deemed a heretic at Rome, the pontiff refused to obey the command; and, when the emperor threatened to punish his disobedience with banishment, he answered, without any emotion, “I thought I was come before a Christian prince, but I find a Diocletian.” The result was, that the hardiness and resolution of the pope brought the emperor to a submission. Accordingly Anthenius was deprived, and an orthodox prelate put into his place.

After this, Justinian, resolving to take cognizance of the difference between the three chapters, published a rescript for that purpose, in form of a constitution, which created great disturbances in the empire. He also exerted his authority against the attempts of the popes Sylverius and Vigilius, both before and after the celebration of the fifth general council held in the year 553. Towards the latter end of his life, he fell into an erroneous opinion concerning Christ’s body; which he maintained had never been corruptible, nor subject to the natural infirmities of a human body. He carried it so far as to prepare an edict against those who maintained the contrary opinion, and intended to publish it; but was prevented by his death, which happened suddenly, in 565, at the age of 83, and after a reign of 39 years. It was this emperor who abolished the consulate. He built a great number of churches, and particularly the famous Sancta Sophia, at Constantinople, esteemed a master-piece of architecture. But the increasing jealousies, and the heavy burdens which Justinian imposed upon his subjects, had, some time before his death, destroyed all attachment to his person; and he who, in many respects, deserved the title of the last Roman emperor, left the stage unlamented and tinhonoured. The editions of his “Code,” “Institutions,” &c. are too many to be enumerated, but the best of them occur in almost every catalogue.

, the first patriarch of Venice, was descended of a noble family, and born there, 1381. He took the monk’s habit in the monastery of St. George, in Alga, before he was a deacon; and in 1424 became general of that congregation, to whom he gave an excellent set of rules, which were afterwards observed, and made him esteemed as one of their founders. Pope Eugenius IV. gave him the bishopric of Venice, of which he was the first patriarch, from 1451. This prelate died Jan. 8, 1455, and was canonized in 1690 by Alexander VIII. He left several works of piety, which were printed together at Brescia, 1506, 2 vols. folio; and again at Venice, 1755, folio; to which is prefixed his life, by his nephew.

, nephew of the above, was born at Venice in 1408. He pursued his first studies under Guarini of Verona, and continued them at Padua, where he took his doctor’s degree. Notwithstanding he put on the senator’s robe at the age of nineteen, yet he still prosecuted his studies under Francis Philelphi and George de Trebisonde, whom he took into his house, and retained there, till pope Calixtus III. sent for him to Rome, and employed him in several commissions. Upon his return to Venice, he was sent ambassador to Lewis XI. of France, who made him a knight in 1461. He went afterwards several times ambassador to Rome from the republic; and, in 1467, was made commandant of Padua. He afterwards became a member of the council of ten, and bore the dignity of Sage Grand no hers than twenty times. In 1474, he was elected procurator of St. Mark, a post next to that of doge. He died in 1489.

His speeches on different occasions have been printed, with his letters, and “History of Venice,” Venice, 1492, folio. This history, which has been admired as the first regular attempt of the kind, and which comes down to 809, may be frequently found without the other pieces, which have been suppressed. He also left “Vita B. Laurentii Justiniarii,” 1475, 4to. His life in Latin by Antonio Stella was printed at Venice, 1533, 8vo. Of the same famrly, which is still honourably distinguished in Italy, was the marquis Vincent Justiniani, who employed Blomuiaert, Alillan, and others, to engrave his gallery, Rome, 1642, 2 vols. fol. Of this splendid work some impressions, much inferior to the old ones, were taken since 1750. Another branch of the same family was the abb Bernardo Justiniani, who wrote the “Origin of the Military Orders,” Venice, 1692, 2 vols. fol. in Italian, from whence the “History of the Military Orders,” Amsterdam, 1721, 4 vols. 8vo, has been extracted; to which is added, “The History of the Religious Orders,” Amsterdam, 1716, 4 vols. 8vo.

, bishop of Nebo or Nebbio, one of the most learned men of his time, was descended from a branch of the same noble family with the former; and born at Genoa, in 1470. After having resided some time at Valencia, in Spain, he entered into the order of St. Dominic, at Paris, in 1488; when he took the name of Augustin in the room of Pantaleon, which he received at his baptism. Soon after he distinguished himself by his learning, and knowledge in the languages, which he acquired in a very short time; so that Leo X. named him to the bishopric of Nebo, in the island of Corsica, in which capacity he assisted in the fifth council of Lateran, where he opposed some articles of the concordat between France and the court of Rome. The revenue of his diocese being small, he petitioned the pope for a better; but Francis I. who was a patron of learned men, drew him to France, by making him his almoner, with a good pension; and he was also regius professor of Hebrew for five years at Paris. Returning to Genoa in 1522, he found every thing in confusion, by the sedition of the Adornes; on which he went to visit his diocese, and discharged all the duties of a good prelate, till 1531. In a voyage from Genoa to Nebc, he perished, together with the vessel in which he was embarked, 1536. By his last will, he left his library to the republic of Genoa.

He composed some pieces, the most considerable of which is, “Psalterium Hebraeum, Graecum, Arabicum, & Chaldaeum, cum tribus Latinis interpretationibns.& glossis.” This was the first psalter of the kind which had appeared in print, and he intended it as a prelude to a similar edition of the whole Bible, but he lived only to execute this part, which appeared at Genoa in 1516. Tiraboschi, forgetting the Complutensian polyglott, calls this the first attempt of the kind. It is not a work of very rare occurrence, there being 2000 copies printed, and 50 upon vellum, which, however, hear a high price. There came out also “Annales de Republica Genoensi,” at Genoa, in 1537; but this was posthumous, and imperfect. There is likewise ascribed to him a translation of Maimonidis “Moreh Nevochim.” He was the editor of “Porcheti Victoria adversus impios Hebraeos,” Paris, 1520, fol.

, the Roman satirist, was born about the beginning of the emperor Claudius’s reign, at Aquinum, a town in Campania, since famous for the birth-place of Thomas (thence styled) Aquinas. Juvenal’s father was probably a freed man, who, being rich, gave him a liberal education; and, agreeably to the taste of the times, bred him up to eloquence. In this he made a great progress, first under Fronto the grammarian, and then, as is generally conjectured, under Quintilian; after which he attended the bar, where he made a distinguished figure for many years, as we learn from some of Martial’s epigrams. In this profession he had improved his fortune and interest at Rome, before he turned his thoughts to poetry the very style of which, in his satires, speaks a long habit of declamation “subactum redolent declamatorem,” say the critics. He is supposed to have been above forty years of age, when he recited his first essay to a small audience of his friends; but, being encouraged by their applause, he ventured a publication, in which Paris, a player, and Domitian’s favourite, was satirized; this minion complained to the emperor, who sent the poet into banishment, under pretence of giving him the command of a cohort, in the army quartered at Pentapolis, a city upon the frontiers of Egypt and Lybia. After Domitian’s death, he returned to Rome, cured of his propensity to attack the characters of those in power under arbitrary princes, and indulge in personal reflections upon living characters. His 13th satire, addressed to Calvinus, was written U. C. 8T1, in the 3d year of Adrian, when Juvenal was above seventy years old; and as it is agreed that he attained to his eightieth year, he must have died about the 11th year of Adrian.

In his person he was of a large stature, which made some think him of Gallic extraction. We meet with nothing concerning feis morals and way of life; but, by the whole tenor of his writings, he seems to have been a man of acute observation, and a friend to liberty and virtue, but at the same time may be justly charged with a licentious boldness in his expressions. In point of classical merit, he is the last of the Roman poets, and after him Roman poetry rapidly degenerated. The most valuable edition of this poet, without Persius, is that of Ruperti, printed at Leipsic, in 1801, 2 vols. 8vo. But most generally Juvenal and Persius are printed together, of which there are many valuable editions, particularly the Variorums, the Delphin, those by Henninius, Hawkey, Sandby, &C.

, one of the first Christian poets, was born of an illustrious family in Spain, and lived, according to Jerom, in the time of Constantine, about the year 330. He wrote the “Life of Christ,” in Latin verse, in four books, following the four evangelists faithfully, and almost word by word; but his poetry is in a bad style, and his Latin not pure. This work, which is entitled “Historiae Evangelicse, lib. iv.” may be found in the library of the Fathers, the “Latin Poets” of Venice, 1502, 4to, and the “Corpus Poetarum.” The best edition of it separately is that of Rome, 1792, 4to.

, a loyal and worthy English prelate, the son of Richard Juxon of Chichester in Sussex, was born in 1582, and educated, upon the foundation, at Merchant Taylors’ school, whence he was elected a fellow of St. John’s college, Oxford, in 1598. Here, as his intentions were for the bar, he studied civil law, and took the degree of bachelor in that faculty, July 5, 1603, having before entered himself a student in Gray’s-inn. But for some reasons not assigned by his biographer, he entirely changed his mind, and after having gone through a course of divinity studies, took orders, and in the latter end of 1609 was presented by his college, which stands in that parish, to the vicarage of St. Giles’s, Oxford. Here he was much admired for his plain, practical style of preaching. In 1614, we are told, he left this living, probably on being presented to the rectory of Somerton in Oxfordshire, in the east window of the chancel of which church are his arms; but it is equally probable that he might hold both. It is certain that his connexion with Oxford continued; and when, in 1621, Dr. Laud resigned the office of president of St. John’s college, Mr. Juxon was chosen in his room, chiefly by his influence. In December of the same year, he proceeded doctor of laws, and in 1626 and 1627 served the office of vice-chancellor of the university. About this time his majesty Charles I. appointed him one of his chaplains in ordinary, and collated him to the deanery of Worcester, along with which he held a prebend of Chichester. In all these promotions, he was chiefly indebted to Dr. Laud, then bishop of London, who had a high regard for him, and, as dean of the king’s chapel, recommended him to be clerk of the closet, into which office Dr. Juxon was sworn July 10, 1632. Laud’s object in this last promotion is said to have been, that “he might have one that he might trust near his majesty, if he himself grew weak or infirm.” By the same interest Dr. Juxon was elected bishop of Hereford in 1633, and was made dean of the king’s chapel, but before consecration was removed to the bishopric of London, in room of Laud, now archbishop of Canterbury, and was also sworn of the privy council. He entered on his bishopric Nov. 5 of the above year, and although his diocese was much displeased with the conduct of his predecessor, bishop Juxon, by his mild temper and urbanity, obtained the respect of all parties.

It was, however, his misfortune, that the archbishop carried his esteem for him too far, and involved him in a scheme which Laud vainly fancied would raise the power and consequence of the church. This was no other than to place churchmen in high political stations;.and by way of experiment, he prevailed on the king to appoint bishop Juxon to the office of lord high treasurer, to which he was accordingly promoted in 1635. This office no churchman had held since the time of Henry VII. and although that was not such a very distant period, as not to afford something like a precedent to the promotion, yet the sentiments of the nation were now totally changed, and the noble families, from which such an officer was expected to have been chosen, were not more astonished than displeased to see the staff put into the hands of a clergyman scarcely known out of the verge of his college until called to the bishopric of London, which he had not filled two years. Notwithstanding this, it is allowed un all hands that Dr. Juxon conducted himself in such a manner, as to give no offence to any party; while, in the management of official concerns, he was so prudent and oeconomical, as considerably to benefit the exchequer. There cannot, indeed, be a greater proof of his good conduct than this, that when the republican party ransacked every office for causes of impeachment, sequestration, and death, they found nothing to object to bishop Juxon. He was not, however, made for the times; and when he saw the storm approaching which was to overset the whole edifice of church and state, he resigned his office May 17, 1641, just after the execution of the earl of Strafford, in consequence of the king’s passing the bill of attainder, contrary to Juxon’s express and earnest advice.

On his resignation, he retired to his palace at Fulham, where he continued for some time, not only undisturbed, but. sometimes visited by the greatest persons of the opposite party, although he remained firm in his loyalty to the king, who consulted him upon many occasions. Sir Philip Warwick, being employed on one of those occasions, desired he might bring the bishop himself to his majesty, for fear of a mistake in the message, or lest the bishop should not speak freely to him. To which the king replied, “Go as I bid you if he will speak freely to any body, he will speak freely to you. This I will say of him I never got his opinion freely in my life, but, when I had it, I was ever the better for it.” Bishop Juxon also attended upon his majesty at the treaty in the Isle of Wight in 1643, by the consent of the parliament; and by the king’s particular desire, waited upon him at Cotton-house in Westminster on Jan. 21 following, the day after the commencement of his trial. During the whole of this trial, he attended the king, who declared that he was the greatest support and comfort to him on that occasion. He followed his royal master also to the scaffold, and when he was preparing himself for the block, Juxon said to him, “There is, sir, but one stage more, which, though turbulent and troublesome, is yet a very short one. Consider, it will soon carry you a great way; it will carry you from earth to heaven; and there you shall find, to your great joy, the prize to which you hasten, a crown of glory.” “I go,” said the king, “from a corruptible to an incorruptible crown, where no disturbance can be.” “, You are exchanged,” replied the bishop, “from a temporal to an eternal crown; a good exchange.” It was remarked by the regicides, that the king, the moment before he stretched out his neck to the executioner, said to J uxon, with a very earnest accent, the single word Remember. Great mysteries were consequently supposed to be concealed under that expression; and the generals vehemently insisted with the prelate, that he should inform them of the king’s meaning. Juxon told them, that the king having frequently charged him to inculcate on his son the forgiveness of his murderers, had taken this opportunity, in the last moment of his life, when his commands, he supposed, would be regarded, as sacred and inviolable, to reiterate that desire; and that his mild spirit thus terminated its present course, by an act of benevolence towards his greatest enemies. Dr. Uuxon was also one of those who accompanied the king’s body to "Windsor, but was not permitted to read the funeral service.

Some months after this, when the commonwealth was established, he was deprived of his bishopric, and retired to his private estate, the manor of Little Compton, in Gloucestershire, where he passed his time free from molestation, and in the occasional enjoyment of field sports, to which he was rather more addicted than became his rank in the church. At the restoration he was nominated archbishop of Canterbury, in Sept. 1660, and at the coronation placed the crown on the head of Charles II. He was a man of a liberal and princely spirit. During the short period that he enjoyed the archbishopric, he expended in building and repairing Lambeth and Croydon palaces, nearly 15,000l.; and augmented the vicarages, the great tithes of which were appropriated to his see, to the amount of 1103l. In the decline of life he was much afflicted with the stone, of which he at length died June 4, 1663, in his eighty-first year, and was interred with the greatest solemnity in the chapel of St. John’s college, Oxford, near the remains of archbishop Laud. To this college he had ever been a friend, and was at last a munificent benefactor, bequeathing 7000l. to be laid out in the increase of fellowships. His other charitable bequests amounted to 5000l. His contemporaries unite in praising his piety, learning, charity, moderation of temper, and steady loyalty. As a divine he has left little by which we can appreciate his merits. There is but one sermon of his extant entitled “The Subjects’ sorrow or Lamentations upon the death of Britain’s Josiah, king Charles,” 1649, 4to, and “Some considerations upon the Act of Uniformity; with an expedient for the satisfaction of the clergy within the province of Canterbury. By a Servant of the God of peace,” Lond. 1662, 4to. It is also said that he was the author of " A Catalogue of the most vendible books in England,' 1 a well-known 4to, printed in 1658, and signed W. London, in the dedication; but whoever peruses that dedication will perceive it cannot be from the pen of our prelate.

, an ingenious and learned writer, and a judicious and useful preacher, son of the rev. Mr. Thomas Ibbot, vicar of Swaffham, and rector of Beachamwell, co. Norfolk, was born at Beachamwell in 1680. He was admitted of Clare-hall, Cambridge, July 25, 1695, under the tuition of the rev. Mr. Laughton, a gentleman justly celebrated for his eminent attainments in philosophy and mathematics, to whom the very learned Dr. Samuel Clarke generously acknowledged himself to be much indebted for many of the notes and illustrations inserted in his Latin version of “Rohault’s Philosophy.” Mr. Ibbot having taken the degree of B. A. 1699, removed to Corpus-Christi in 1700 and was made a scholar of that house. He commenced M.A. in 1703, and was elected into a Norfolk fellowship in 1706, but resigned it next year, having then happily obtained the patronage of archbishop Tenison. That excellent primate first took him into his family in the capacity of his librarian, and soon after appointed him his chaplain. In 1708 the archbishop collated Ibbot to the treasurership of the cathedral church of Wells. He also presented him to the rectory of the united parishes of St. Vedast, alias Foster’s, and St. Michael le Querne. George I. appointed him one of his chaplains in ordinary in 1716; and when his majesty visited Cambridge, in Oct. 4 1717, Mr. Ibbot was by royal mandate created D. D. In 1713 and 1714, by the appointment of the archbishop, then the sole surviving trustee of the hon. Robert Boyle, our author preached the course of sermons for the lecture founded by him, and desired in his last will, that they should be printed. They bear evident marks of the solidity of his judgment, and are well adapted to his professed design of obviating by just reasoning, the insidious suggestions and abusive censures of Collins, in his “Discourse of Freethinking.” In these sermons the true notion of the exercise of private judgment, or free-thinking in matters of religion, is fairly and fully stated, the principal objections against it are answered, and the modern art of free-thinking, as treated by Collins, is judiciously refuted. Some time after, he was appointed assistant-preacher to Dr. Samuel Clarke, and rector of St. Paul’s, Shadwell. Upon his being installed a prebendary in the collegiate church of St. Peter, Westminster, in 1724, he retired to Camberwell, for the recovery of his health, which had been impaired by the fatigue of constant preaching to very numerous congregations, at a considerable distance from each other. Here he died April 5, 1725, in the forty-fifth year of his age, and was buried in Westminster- abbey. His sermons at Boyle’s lecture, were published in 1727, 8vo, and “Thirty Discourses on Practical Subjects” were selected from his manuscripts by his friend Dr. Clarke, and published for the benefit of his widow, 2 vols. 8vo, for which she was favoured with a large subscription. In 1719, Dr. Ibbot published a translation of Puffendorff’s treatise “De habitu religionis Christianas ad vitain civilem,” or of the relation between church and state, and how far Christian and civil life affect each other; with a preface giving some account of the book, and its use with regard to the controversies in agitation at that time, particularly the Bangorian. In 1775 were published, “Thirty-six discourses on Practical Subjects,” 2 vols. 8vo. This is a re-publication of the thirty discourses selected by Dr. Clarke, with the addition of six occasional discourses, and a life of the author, by Dr. Flexman. There are some verses of Dr. Ibbot’s, in Dodsley’s Collection, vol. V. entitled “A fit of the Spleen,” in imitation of Shakspeare.

, one of the apostolical fathers of the church, was born in Syria, educated under the apostle and evangelist St. John, intimately acquainted with some other of the apostles, especially St. Peter and St. Paul; and being fully instructed in the doctrines of Christianity, was, for his eminent parts and piety, ordained by St. John; and confirmed about the year 67, bishop of Antioch by these two apostles, who first planted Christianity in that city, where the disciples were first called Christians. In this important seat he continued to sit upwards of forty years, both an honour and safeguard to the Christian religion; in the midst of very stormy and tempestuous times, undaunted himself, and unmoved with the prospect of suffering a cruel death. So much seems to be certain in general, though we have no account of any particulars of his life till the year 107, when Trajan the emperor, elated with his victory over the Scythians and Daci, came to Antioch to prepare for a war against the Parthians and Armenians. He entered the city with the pomp and solemnities of a triumph; and, as he had already commenced a persecution against the Christians in other parts of the empire, he now resolved to carry it on here. However, as he was naturally mild and humane, though he ordered the laws to be put in force against them, if convicted, yet he forbad any extraordinary means to be used for discovering or informing against them.

In this state of affairs, Ignatius voluntarily presented himself to the emperor; and it is said, there passed a long conversation between them, in which the emperor expressing a surprise how he dared to transgress the laws, the bishop took the opportunity to assert his own innocence, and the power which God had given Christians over evil spirits; declaring that “the gods of the Gentiles were no better than daemons, there being but one supreme Deity, who made the world, and his only begotten son Jesus Christ, who, though crucified under Pilate, had yet destroyed him that had the power of sin, that is, tue devil, and would ruin the whole power and empire of the daemons, and tread it under the feet of those who carried God in their hearts.” For this bold avowal of his principles, combined with a defiance of heathenism, he was cast into prison, and sentence passed upon him, that he should be carried bound by soldiers to Rome, and there thrown as a prey to wild beasts. It may seem strange that they should send an old man by land, at a great expence, attended with soldiers, from Syria to Rome, instead of casting him to the lions at Antioch; but it is said, that Trajan did this on purpose to make an example of him, as of a ringleader of the sect, and to deter the Christians from preaching and spreading their religion; and for the same reason he sent him to be executed at Rome, where there were many Christians, and which, as it was the capital of the world, so was it the head-quarters of all religious sects. After all, this part of his sentence was a particular cruelty, and above what the laws required, and consequently such as might not be expected from Trajan. But, in our martyr’s case, he might not improbably be persuaded to act contrary to his natural disposition by those about him, who began to perceive that Christianity, if it prevailed, would prove the ruin of their religion. Ignatius was so far from being dismayed, that he heartily rejoiced at the fatal decree. “I thank thee, O Lord,” says he, “that thou hast condescended to honour me with thy love, and hast thought me worthy, with thy apostle St. Paul, to be bound in iron chains.” With these words he cheerfully embraced his chains; and having frequently prayed for his church, and recommended it to the divine care and providence, he delivered up himself into the hands of his keepers. These were ten soldiers, by whom he was first conducted to Seleucia, a port of Syria, at about sixteen miles distance, the place where Paul and Barnabas set sail for Cyprus. Arriving at Smyrna, in Ionia, Ignatius went to visit Polycarp, bishop of that place, and was himself visited by the clergy of the Asiatic churches round the country. In return for that kindness, he wrote letters to several churches, as the Ephesians, Magnesians, Trallians, besides the Romans, for their instruction and establishment in the faith; one of these was addressed to the Christians at Rome, to acquaint them with his present state and passionate desire not to be hindered in that course of martyrdom which he was now hastening to accomplish.

His guard, a little impatient at their stay, set sail with him for Troas, a noted city of the lesser Phrygia, not far from the ruins of old Troy; where, at his arrival, he was much refreshed with the news he received of the persecution ceasing in the church of Antioch. Hither atlso several churches sent their messengers to pay their respects to him, and hence too he dispatched two epistles, one to the church of Philadelphia, and the other to that of Smyrna; and together with this last, as Eusebitfs relates, he wrote privately to Polycarp, recommending to him the care and inspection of the church of Antioch. All this while his keepers used him very cruelly and barbarously. He complains of it himself: “From Syria even to Rome,” says he, “both by sea and land, I fight with beasts; night and day I am chained to 1 the leopards, which is my military guard, who, the kinder I am to them, are the more cruel and fierce to me.” And yet it is evident, that they suffered him to be visited by Christians, and to give them instructions; and write epistles in several cities through which he passed. But his own account of the matter explains this apparent difficulty; the words implying, that these ruffians made money of him this way, being handsomely rewarded for this permission by the Christians who resorted to him, although their savage tempers induced them to use him the worse for it. From Trcras they sailed to Neapolis, a maritime town in Macedonia, thence to Philippi, a Roman colony, where they were entertained with all imaginable kindness and courtesy, and conducted forwards on their journey, passing on foot through Macedonia and Epirus, till they came to Epidaurum, a city of Dalmatia, where again taking shipping, they sailed through the Adriatic, and arrived at Rhegium, a port town in Italy; directing their course thence through the Tyrrhenian sea to Pu'teoli, whence Ignatius desired to proceed by land, ambitious to trace the same way by which St. Paul went to Rome; buC this wish was not complied with. In about twenty-four hours, however, a brisk wind conveyed them to Ostia at the mouth of the Tiber, about sixteen miles from Rome.

The Christians at Rome, d'aiiy expecting his arrival, had come out to meet and entertain him, and accordingly received him with an equal mixture of joy and sorrow: but when some of them intimated, that possibly the populace might be dissuaded from desiring his death, he expressed a pious indignation, in treating them to Cast no obstacles in his way, nor do any thing that might hinder him, now he was hastening to his crown. The interval before his martyrdom was spent in prayers for the peace and prosperity of the church. That his punishment might be the more pompous and public, one of their solemn festivals, the Saturnalia, was chosen for his execution; when it was their custom to entertain the people with the conflicts of gladiators, and the hunting and fighting with wild beasts. Accordingly, Dec. 20, in the year 107, or as some think in 116, he was brought out into the amphitheatre; and the lions, being let loose upon lum, quickly dispatched their meal, leaving nothing but a few of the hardest of his bones. These remains were gathered up by two deacons who had been the companions of his journey, transported to Antioch, and interred in the cemetery, without the gate, but afterwards, by command of the emperor Theodosius, were removed to the Tycheon, a temple within the city, now consecrated to the memory of Ignatius. Thus far all historians concur; but the pretended translation of these relics to Rome, and other places, must be classed among the fables of the early Romanists.

, professor of rhetoric and politics in the university of Upsal, was born in March 1707, and on account of the early death of his father, chiefly educated under his grandfather, then archbishop of Upsal. In 1730 he set out on his travels to improve himself by the company and conversation of learned men. In 1733 he returned to Upsal, where he was elected a member of the academy of sciences. In 1737 he was made public professor of poetry, and in 1748 he was appointed by the king professor of rhetoric and politics; an office, the duties of which he discharged for forty years with great reputation, In 1756 king Adolphus Frederic raised him to the rank of a counsellor of the chancery; two years after to that of patrician; and in 1759 conferred on him the order of the polar star. He died in 1780. In 1756 he undertook a Sueco-Gothic Lexicon, and began to arrange the materials which he had been preparing for the purpose. In 1766 he published a “Lexicon Dialectorum,” in which he explained and illustrated obsolete words, still used in the provinces; and in 1769 his “Glossarium Sueco-Gothicum” was published in 2 vols. folio. He was the author also of an explanation of the old catalogue of the Sueco-Gothic kings, to which are added the old West- Gothic Laws. In his dissertations “De Runorum Antiquitate, Patria, Origine, et Occasu,” he asserts that the Runic writing was formerly used in the greater part of Europe, was introduced into Sweden about the sixth century, and became entirely extinct in the beginning of the fifteenth. He was possessed of a sound judgment and a retentive memory; and so clearly were his ideas arranged, that he had never any need to correct what he had composed.

, was a printer, and a son of a printer; but he applied himself to letter-cutting in 1730, and carried on a foundery and a printing-house together. He was an expeditious compositor, and was said to know the letters by the touch; but being not perfectly sound in mind, produced some strange works. In 1751 he published a pretended translation of “The Book of Jasher;” said to have been made by one Alcuin of Britain. The account given of the translation is full of glaring absurdities; but the publication, in fact, was secretly written by him, and printed off by night. He published, in 1733, an Oration, intended to prove the plurality of worlds, and asserting that this earth is hell, that the souls of men are apostate angels, and that the fire to punish those confined to this world at the day of judgment will be immaterial. This was written in 1729, and spoken afterwards at Joiners- hall, pursuant to the will of his mother, who had held the same extraordinary opinions. In this strange performance the author unveils his deistical principles, and takes no small liberty with the sacred Scriptures, especially the character of Moses. Emboldened by this first adventure, he determined to become the public teacher of infidelity, or, as he calls it, “The religion of nature.” For this purpose, he hired the use of Carpenters’-hall, where, for some considerable time, he delivered his orations, which consisted chiefly of scraps from Tindal, and other similar writers. In the course of the same year, 1733, appeared a second pamphlet called “A Dialogue between a Doctor of the Church of England and Mr. Jacob Hive, upon the subject of the oration.” This strange oration is highly praised in HolwelPs third part of “Interesting Events relating to Bengal.” For publishing “Modest Remarks on the late bishop Sherlock’s Sermons,” Hive was confined in Clerkenwell- bridewell from June 15, 1756, till June 10, 1758; during which period he published “Reasons offered for the Reformation of the House of Correction in Clerkenwell,” &c. 1757, and projected several other reforming treatises, enumerated in Gough’s “British Topography;” where is alsjo a memorandum, communicated by Mr. Bowyer, of Hive’s attempt to restore the company of Stationers to their primitive constitution. He died in 1763,

, but who Latinized his name into Flaccus Illyricus, because a native of Albona or Albana in Illyria, was born March 3, 1520. He was instructed in grammar and the classics b.y Egnatius at Venice, and gave the preference to divinity as a profession. Not being able, however, to maintain the cxpences of university education, he intended to throw himself into a monastery, but happening to consult with a relation of his mother’s, who was provincial of the Cordeiiers, and who had begun to see through the errors of popery, this person prevailed with Flacius to lay aside all thoughts of the monastic life, and go into Germany, where his knowledge of Greek and Hebrew would procure him a maintenance until he had completed his theological studies. Flacius accordingly took this advice, went to Basil in 1539, and, after a few months stay, went to Tubingen, where he remained until 1541, and theft removed to Wittenberg, to complete his studies under Luther and Melancthon, the latter of whom found him some employment in the university, and was the means of relieving his mind from anxious doubts respecting some of the fundamental principles of the reformed religion, respecting the nature of sin, the wrath of God, and predestination.

He was thus employed when all the schools of Saiony were dispersed by the war, on which, Flacius went to Brunswick, where he acquired great reputation by his lectures. In 1547 he returned to his former employment at Wittenberg, and here first began his differences with his brethren on the subject of the Interim, that famous edict of Charles V. which was to be observed with the articles of religion then in dispute, until they should be determined by a council, and therefore was called interim. But as it retained most of the doctrines and ceremonies of the Romanists, though expressed for the most part in the softest words, or in scriptural phrases, or in terms of studied ambiguity, excepting that of marriage, which was allowed to priests, and communion, which was administered to th6 laity under both kinds, most of the Protestants rejected it, and none with more warmth than Flacius. This involved him also with Melancthon, against whom he wrote with so much intemperance, that the latter called him “Echidna Illyrica,” the Illyrian viper. Flacius, however, that he might be at liberty to oppose popery in his own way, retired, in 1549, to Magdeburg, which town was at that time proscribed by the emperor. Here he published several books, and began that ecclesiastical history which we have mentioned in the article Judex, called the “Centuries of Magdeburg,” of which he had the chief direction. Of this work the first four centuries, and part of the fifth, were composed at Magdeburg. The fifth was finished at Jena. The sixth was written in the place to which the authors had retired on account of the persecution of their two coadjutors, Gallus and Faber. The seventh was composed in the country of Mecklenburgh, and the remaining in the city of Wismar, in the same country. The first three centuries were published in 1559, though dated in 1560, according to the booksellers’ custom, with a dedication to queen Elizabeth, earnestly exhorting her to establisn the pure, uncorrupt religion, and particularly the doctrine of the corporal presence in the sacrament. The best edition of this work is that of Basil, 1624, 3 vols. folio. This is the most considerable of Flacius’s works, and employed him during the whole of his lite, at such times as he could spare from his public employments and controversies, which last he carried on with too much violence.

In 1557 he accepted the offer made to him, of the Hebrew and divinity professorship in the new university of Jena, where he had read lectures for five years, and where he engaged in a dispute with his colleague, Strigelius, on the nature of original sin, which Strigelius held to be accidental of the soul, and Flacius maintained that it was of the soul’s substance and essence. This dispute was held before the duke of Saxony at Weimar, and carried on to thirteen meetings, the acts of which were published, with a preface by Musaeus, one of Flacius’s followers. His opinion on this subject, however, was so unpalatable, that he was obliged to leave Jena and go to Ratisbon, where he published some more works, and was in such reputation among the adherents to the Au^sburgh confession, that, in 1567, he was called into Brabant, to establish churches there according to that rule of faith; but these new churches were soon dispersed by the persecution arisen in that country, which obliged him to fly to Antwerp and Strasburg, and finally to Francfort. Here he maintained his opinion on original sin with such rigid adherence as to be charged with Manicheism on this point, which greatly injured his reputation, and deprived him of many of his followers. He died in this city, March 11, 1575. He is said to have been a man of extensive learning, but of a controversial turn, which frequently embroiled him with his brethren; but on the other hand he must be allowed to have been a powerful agent in promoting the Reformation. His works were numerous. Teissier, in his “Eloges des homines savans,” has given the titles of seventy-eight treatises, the greater part of which are also enumerated by Niceron. The principal are his “Clavis Scripturae,” 2 vols. fol. of which there have been seven editions, the last at Leipsic in. 1695; no inconsiderable test of its merit. To this may be added his “Catalogus testium veritatis,” of which there have been several editions in 4to and fol.; and an edition of the “Ancient Latin Mass,” Strasburg, 1557, 8vo. He thought this work would assist the common cause; but the Lutherans, perceiving the contrary, did all they could to suppress it, which is the reason of its scarceness; nor has the republication in P. le Cointe’s “Annals,” and in cardinal Bona’s “Liturgies,” reduced the very high price. In the edition of Sulpicius Severus, published by him ut Basil, 1556, 8vo, there is an “Appendix to the Latin Mass,” which may be added to it. There is another very rare work of his, entitled “Varia doctorum piorumque virorum de corrupto ecclesise statu, Poemata,” Basil, 1557.

, a very famous genealogist, born of a noble family at Nuremberg, in 1651, was a lawyer in that city, and one of its senators. He was considered as having a profound knowledge of the interests of princes, the revolutions of states, and the history of the principal families in Europe. He died in 1728. His works were, L “Genealogies excellentium in GaHia familiarum,” Norimb. 1687, folio. 2. “Genealogise familiarum Bellomaneriae,” &c. Norimb. 1638, folio. 3. “Historia Genealogica Regum Magnae Britanniae,” Norimb. 1690, folio. 4. “Notitia procerum 5. R. imperil,” Tubingen, 1693, folio. 5. “Historia Italiae et Hispaniae genealogica,” Norimb. 1701, folio. 6. “Corpus Historic genealogicae Italiae et Hispaniae,” Norimb. 1702, folio. 7. “Recherches Historiques et Genealogiques des Grands d'Espagne,” Amst. 1708, folio. 8. “Stemma regium Lusitanicum,” Amst. 1708, folio. 9. “Genealogiae 20 illustrium in Hispama famiharum,” Leipsic, 1720, folio.

, a famous cardinal, was born April 26, 1651, of an illustrious family at Genoa. He was appointed general of the mint, then treasurer of the apostolical chamber, afterwards cardinal, February 13, 1690. The popes employed him in the most important affairs, and he was within one vote of being elected pope in the conclave 1730. His probity, talents, and love of learning, made him universally esteemed. He died January 4, 1737, at Rome, aged 86. He ordered, by will, that his noble library should be made public, of which a catalogue was printed at Rome in 1711, fol. by Justus Fontanini. This library was long one of the ornaments of Rome.

, a learned German, was born in 1584 at Vienna. He entered the Jesuits’ society at Rome 1607, and taught philosophy, mathematics, and theology, at Messina, where he published a Latin treatise in 1629, fol. which made much noise, and shows no little ercdulity. It was reprinted at Viterbo, 1632, fol. In this work he says that the pretended “Letter from the Blessed Virgin Mary to the people of Messina” is genuine; and he was therefore obliged to go to Rome and clear himself from the accusation brought against him in consequence of this work; but it ended in his being only compelled to change the title of his book, and to make some small alterations in it. He spent several years at Rome, and died at Milan, September 28, 1648, leaving a “Treatise on the Motion of the Earth and Sun,” 1633, 4to; “De sacra Latinitate,” 1635, 4to; < Historia trium Magorum,“1639, 4to;” Annalium Ecclesiasticorum Regni Hungariae,“torn. 1. fol. This is a valuable work, but has not been finished. He wrote also the funeral oration of Nicholas Richard, a Dominican, master of the Sacred P ilace, 4to; and a satire against the government of the Jesuits, entitled '< Monarchia Solipsorum,” is also attributed to him, but was more probably written by Julius Clement Scotti, an ex-Jesuit. On its first appearance it was ascribed to Sciopins, but that opinion is now given up. It was, however, dedicated to Leo Allatius, and was reprinted at Venice, 1652, with Inchofer’s name. Bourgeois, in his account of the book cwi “Frequent Comm mion,” page 89, enters into a large detail respecting Inchofer, and the “Monarchia Solipsorum,” and as he was at Rome when the work first came out, and was acquainted with Inchofer, to whom he ascribes it, his testimony must be allowed to have considerable weight.

, a divine of the seventeenth century, vvas a fellow of Etnanuel college, Cambridge, and admitted fellow of Queen’s college by the parliamentary visitors, by whose interest likewise he probably became a fellow of Eton in 1650. He was re-admitted to the same in 1660. He published three Sermons in 1639 and 1677, and wrote a religious romance in folio, entitled “Bentivolio and Urania,” Lond. 1660. He died in August 1683, and his epitaph is in Eton college chapel, where he was buried. In April 1739, were published “Nineteen Letters from Henry Hammond, D. D. to Mr. Peter Stanny nought and Dr. Nathaniel Ingelo,” many of them on very curious subjects.

, an eminent physician and chemist, was born at Breda in 1730. In 1767 he came to England with a view of obtaining information on the Suttonian method of inoculation for the small-pox, and in the following year he went, on the recommendation of the late sir John Pringle, to Vienna, to inoculate the archduchess Theresa- Elizabeth, only daughter of Joseph II. and the archdukes Ferdinand and Maximilian, brothers of the emperor. For these services he obtained rewards and honours: he was made body-physician aJid counsellor of state to their imperial majesties, with a pension of 600l. per annum. In the following spring he went to Italy, and inoculated the grand duke of Tuscany. After this he returned to England, to which he was much attached, where he spent his time in scientific pursuits. He published a very valuable work, entitled “Experiments on Vegetables, discovering their great power of purifying the common air in sunshine, but injuring it in the shade or night.” This work was first published in 1779, and was translated into the French and German languages, and highly esteemed by all the experimental philosophers of that period. He ascertained, that not only from the green matter found on stagnant waters, but likewise from the leaves of vegetables, from the green branches and shoots, even from the entire vegetable, when placed under water and exposed to the solar light, oxygen gas, in a state generally of great purity, is evolved; and as the result of his numerous experiments he adopted the conclusion, that oxygen is elaborated in the leaves and other organs of vegetables, by a vital action excited and sustained by the solar light. The doctor, through the whole of life, was fond of exhibiting among his friends, particularly young persons, experiments of this kind, which required scarcely any apparatus, excepting a bell glass and a phial or two; and with the oxygen gas which he obtained from cabbage-leaves or other vegetables, he would exhibit the combustion of iron-wire, which is a striking and very brilliant experiment. Dr. Ingenhouz was author of many papers inserted in the Transactions of the Royal Society, of which body he was an active and useful member. Of these papers we may notice the following: Experiments on the Torpedo. Methods of measuring the diminution of bulk taking place on the mixture of nitrous with common air. Experiments on the Electrophorus. New Methods of suspending Magnetic Needles. Considerations on the influence of the Vegetable Kingdom on the Animal Creation. He died in 1799, highly esteemed for the simplicity of his manners, and for the discoveries which he had made in the several departments of experimental philosophy.

, an eminent Italian scholar, was born in 1470. He descended from a noble family of Volterra, where, in the commotions which took place in 147,2, his father lost his life, and the surviving members of the family, among whom was Tomaso, then only two years of age, sought a shelter in Florence. Being there received under the immediate protection of Lorenzo de Medici, and having closely attended to his studies, he was induced, by Lorenzo’s advice, to pay a visit to Rome in his thirteenth year, where he made such rapid progress in his acquirements, as to obtain an early celebrity. He obtained the name of Fedra, or Piledra, by a singular instance of talents and promptitude. Having undertaken, with some of his learned friends, to perform Seneca’s “Hyppolytus,” in which he acted the part of Phaedra, and a part of the machinery having by accident been broken, which interrupted the performance, he alone entertained the audience whilst the injury was repaired, by the recital of extemporary Latin verse; on which account he was saluted, amidst the applauses of his hearers, by the name of Phaedra, which he afterwards retained and used as his signature.

Soon after the accession of Alexander VI. he was nominated by that pontiff a canon of St. Peter’s, and dignified with the rank of a prelate. In 1495 he was sent as papal nuncio into the Milanese, to treat with the emperor-elect, Maximilian, on which embassy he obtained not only the approbation of the pope, but also the favour of the emperor, who soon after the return of Inghirami to Rome, transmitted to him from Inspruck an imperial diploma, by which, after enumerating his various accomplishments, and particularly his excellence in poetry and Latin literature, he created him count palatine and poet-laureat, and conceded to him the privilege of adding the Austrian eagle to his family arms. Nor was he less favoured by Julius II. who, besides appointing him librarian of the Vatican, conferred on him the important office of pontifical secretary, which he afterwards quitted for that of secretary to the college of cardinals. Leo X. also enriched him with many ecclesiastical preferments, and continued him in his office of librarian until his death, which was occasioned by an accident in the streets of Rome, Sept. 6, 1516, when he had not yet completed the forty- sixth year of his age. To this unfortunate event it is probably owing, that so few of his writings have reached the present times. From the testimony of his contemporaries, it is well known that he was the author of many books. Among these are enumerated a defence of Cicero a compendium of the history of Rome a commentary on the poetics of Horace and remarks on the comedies of Plautus; but these works were left at his death in an unfinished state, and have since been dispersed or lost. It has been supposed that he was the author of the additions to the “Aulularia” of Plautus, printed at Paris, 1513.

, a lady celebrated for her skill in calligraphy, in queen Elizabeth’s and king James’s time, appears to have lived single until the age of forty, when she became the wife of one Bartholomew Keilo, a native of Scotland, by whom she had a son, Samuel Kello, who was educated at Christ-church, Oxford, and was minister of Speckshall in Suffolk. His son was sword-bearer of Norwich, and died in 1709. All we know besides of her is, that she was a correspondent of bishop Hall, when he was dean of Worcester in 1617. Various specimens of her delicate and beautiful writing are in our public repositories, and some in Edinburgh-castle. In the library of Christchurch, Oxford, are the Psalrns of David, written in French by Mrs. Inglis, who presented them in person to queen Elizabeth, by whom they were given to the library. Two manuscripts, written by her, were also preserved with care in the Bodleian library: one of them is entitled “Le six vingt et six Quatrains de Guy de Tour, sieur de Pybrac, escrits par Esther Inglis, pour son dernier adieu, ce 21e jour de Juin, 1617.” The following address is, in the second leaf, written in capital letters: “To the right worshipful my very singular friende, Joseph Hall, doctor of divinity, and dean of Winchester, Esther Inglis wisheth all increase of true happiness. Junii xxi. 1617.” In the third leaf is pasted the head of the writer, painted upon a card. The other manuscript is entitled “Les Proverbes de Salomon; escrites en diverses sortes de lettres, par Esther Anglois, en Francoise. A Lislehourge en Escosse,” 1599. Every chapter of this curious performance is written in a different hand, as is also the dedication. The manuscript contains near forty different characters of writing. The beginnings and endings of the chapters are adorned with beautiful head and tail-pieces, and the margins, in imitation of the old manuscripts, curiously decorated with the pen. The book is dedicated to the earl of Essex. On one of the first pages are his arms neatly drawn, with all their quarterings. In the fifth leaf, drawn with a pen, is the picture of Esther Inglis, in the habit of the times: her right hand holds a pen, the left rests upon an open book, on one of the leaves of which is written, “DC l'Eternel Je biert, de moi le mal, ou rien.” A music-book lies open before her. Under the picture is a Latin epigram by Andrew Melvin, and on the following page a second by the same author, in praise of Mrs. Inglis. In the royal library, D. xvi. are “Esther Inglis’s fifty Emblems,” finely drawn and written: “A Lislebourg en Escosse, Panne 1624.”

, a worthy English divine, was born March 9, 1726-7, at Beverley in Yorkshire, and educated at Beverley school, from whence he was sent to Corpus Christi college, Cambridge, of which he became felloe, and took there his degrees in arts, B. A. in 1749, and M. A. in 1753. His first preferment was the perpetual curacy of Bridhurst, in Kent, to which he was presented in 17.59, by Dr. Green, bishop of Lincoln, after which he obtained successively the small vicarage of Orston in Nottinghamshire, and the vicarages of Wormington and Boxted, in Essex. He died Aug. 3, 1804, leaving behind him a high character for simplicity of manners, great integrity, and genuine benevolence He had a high sense of the dignity and importance of the clerical functions, and for fifty years of his life was indefatigable in his attention to professional duties. He was author of “A View of the great events of the seventh plague, or period, when the mystery of God shall be finished.” “Accounts of the ten tribes of Israel being in America, originally published by Manasseh Ben Israel,” &c. 1792. “A complete and uniform explanation of the prophecy of the seven vials of wrath, or seven last plagues contained in the Revelation of St. John,” &c. 1804.

, an eminent physician and medical writer, a native of Sicily, was born in 1510. He studied medicine at Padua, where he took the degree of doctor in medicine in the year 1537, with singular reputation; insomuch that he soon received several invitations to professorships from different schools in Italy. He accepted the chair of medicine and anatomy at Naples, which he occupied for a number of years, lecturing to the most crowded audiences drawn by his fame from all parts of the country. He possessed peculiar qualifications for the office, having united a consummate knowledge of the writings of the ancient physicians with great practical skill and a sound judgment, which led him to- estimate justly the merits and defects of those fathers of the art. A singular testimony of his talents and unremitting attention to the improvement of his pupils was given by thektter, who caused his portrait to be placed in the schools of Naples with the following inscription: “Philippo Jngrassias Siculo, qui veram medicinae artem et anatomen, publiee etiarrando, Neapoli restituit, Discipuli memorise causa P. P.” At length he quitted his situation at Naples, in order to return to his native island, where he settled at Palermo. Here also he received many marks of public distinction. The rights of citizenship were conferred upon him; and, in 1563, Philip II. king of Spain, appointed him first physician for Sicily and the adjacent isles. By virtue of the powers attached to this office he restored order in, the medical constitution of the country, by preventing all persons, unqualified by their education and abilities, from practising there. His zeal for the credit of his profession rendered him rigid and severe in his examination of candidates; and he exercised his art himself in the most honourable manner. When the plague raged at Palermo in 1575, he adopted such excellent regulations as to put a stop to the calamity, and restore the city to health, and was hailed by all the citizens, the Sicilian Hippocrates. The magistrates were so grateful for his services, that they voted him a reward of two hundred and fifty gold crowns a month; but he disinterestedly declined to accept any more than what served for the maintenance and decoration of the chapel of St. Barbe, which he had built in the cloister of the Dominican convent of Palermo. He died, greatly regretted, in 1580, at the age of 70 years.

Ingrassias cultivated anatomy with great assiduity, and is esteemed one of the improvers of that art, especially in regard to the structure of the cranium, and the organ of hearing. He discovered the small bone of the ear, called the stapes, which has been claimed as the discovery of others, but is admitted even by Fallopius to have been his. He described minutely the cavity of the tympanum, the fenestra rotunda and ovalis, the cochlea, semicircular canals, mastoid cells, &c. and Eloy thinks, from a view of his plates, that he was acquainted with the muscle of the malleus, the discovery of which is ascribed to Eustachius. He is said also to have discovered the seminal vesicles. He was author of the following works: 1. “Jatropologia Liber quo multa adversus Barbaros Medicos disputantur,” Venice, 1544, 1558, 8vo. 2. “Scholia in Jatropologiam,” Naples, 1549, 8vo. 3. “De Tumoribus practer naturam,” ibid. 1553, folio, vol. I. This is properly a commentary on some of the books of Avicenna. 4. “Raggionamento fatto sopra Tinfermita epidemica dell* anno 1558,” Palermo, 1560, 4to, together with “Trattato di due mostri nati in Palermo in diversi tempi.” 5. “Constitutiones et Capitula, necnoh Jurisdictiones Regii Proto-Medicatds officii, cum Pandectis ejusdem reformatis,” Palermo, 1564, 1657, 4to. 6. “Quxstio de Purgatione per meclicamentum, atque obiter etiam de sanguinis missione, an sextd die possit fierii” Venice, 1568, 4to. 7. “Galeni Ars Medica,” ibid. 1573, folio. 8. “De frigidye potu post medicamentum purgans Epistola,” ibid. 1575, “4 to, reprinted at Milan, 1586. 9.” Informatione del pestifero e contagioso morbo, &c.“Palermo, 1576, 4to. This work was translated into Latin by Joachim Camerarius, and published under the title of” Methodus curandi pestiferum contagium,“at Nurimberg, 1583. 10.” In Galeni librum de ossibus doctissima et expertissima Commentaria," a posthumous publication, printed at Messina, in 1603, under the inspection of his nephew, Nicholas Ingrassias. This, which may be deemed the principal work of Ingrassias, contains the text of Galen, in Greek and Latin, with a very diffuse and learned commentary, in which there is much minute and accurate description, particularly of the parts belonging to the organ of hearing. The figures are those of Vesalius. The author defends Galen as far as he is able, but riot against the truth of modern discovery.

, an exemplary and learned bishop of Carpentras, at which place he was born in 1683, was first a Dominican, and in that order he successfully pursued his theological studies; but, thinking the rule of the Cistertians more strict and perfect, he afterwards took the habit of that order. His merit quickly raised him to the most distinguished offices among his brethren, and being dispatched on some business to Rome, he completely gained the confidence and esteem of Clement XII. By that prelate he was named archbishop of Theodosia in partibus, and bishop of Carpentras in 1733. In this situation he was distinguished by all the virtues that can characterize a Christian bishop; excellent discernment, and knowledge, united with the completest charity and humility. His life was that of a simple monk, and his wealth was all employed to relieve the poor, or serve the public. He built a vast and magnificent hospital, and established the most extensive library those provinces had ever seen, which he gave for public use. He died in 1757, of an apoplectic attack, in his seventy-fifth year. This excellent man was not unknown in the literary world, having published some original works, and some editions of other authors. The principal of these productions are, 1. “Genuinus character reverendi admodiim in Christo Patris D. Armandi Johannis Butillierii Rancsei,” Rome, 1718, 4to. 2. An Italian translation of a book entitled “Theologie Religieuse,” being a treatise on the duties of a monastic life, Rome, 1731, 3 vols. folio. 3. An Italian translation of a French treatise, by father Didier, on the infallibility of the pope, Rome, 1732, folio. 4. An edition of the works of Bartholomew of the Martyrs, with his Life, 2 vols. folio. 5. “La Vie separee,” another treatise on monastic life, in 2 vols. 1727, 4to.

, abbot of Croyland, and author of the history of that abbey, was born in London about 1030. He received the first part of his education at Westminster, and when he visited his father, who belonged to the court of Edward the Confessor, he was so fortunate as to engage the attention of queen Edgitha, who took a pleasure in the progress of his education, and in disputing with him in logic, and seldom dismissed him without some present as a mark of her approbation. From Westminster he went to Oxford, where he applied to the study of the Aristotelian philosophy, in which he made greater proficiency than many of his contemporaries, and, as be says, “clothed himself down to the heel in the first and second rhetoric of Tully.” When he was about twenty-one years of age, ho was iotroduced to> William duke of Normandy (who visited the court of England in 105 l) y and made himself so agreeable to that prince, that be appointed him his secretary, and carried him with him into his. Owt dominions. In a little time he became the prime favourite of his prince, and the dispenser of all preferments; but he himself confesses that he did not behave in this station with sufficient modesty and prudence, and that he incurred the envy and hatred of the courtiers, to avoid which he obtained leave from the duke to go on a pilgrimage to the Holy Land. In the course of this journey, his attendant pilgrims at one time amounted to seven thousand, but either from being attacked and killed by the Arabs, or other disasters, twenty only of this goodly company were able to return home, and those half-starved, and almost naked. Ingulph now resolved to forsake the world, and became a monk in the abbey of Fontanelle in Normandy, of which he was in a few years made prior. When his old master William of Normandy was preparing for his memorable expedition into England, in 1066 r lagulphus was sent by hiw abbot with one hundred: marks in money, and twelve young men, nobly mounted and completely armed, as a present their abbey. In consequence of this, William raised him afterwards to the government of the rich abbey of Croyland in Lincolnshire, in 107S. Here Ingulphus spent the last thirty-four years of his life, governing that society with great prudence, and protecting their possessions from the rapacity of the neighbouring barons by the favour of his royal master; and here he died Dec. 1, 1109. He wrote, but in a homely Latin style, a very curious and valuable history of Croyland abbey from its foundation, in the year 664 to 1091. It was printed by sir H. Saville,' London, 1596, and is among Gale’s “Scriptores.” There is also an edition of Francfort in 1601, and one of Oxford, 1684, which last is thought the most complete.

, author of the “Illustrations of Hogarth,” was born at the Trench farm, near Wem, in Shropshire, in a house which had been rendered somewhat remarkable, by having been the birth-place and country residence of Wycherley the poet, and whose widow is said to have adopted Mr. Ireland, when a child; but this lady dying without a will, left him unprovided for. He was descended by the mother’s side from two eminent dissenting clergymen; his mother being the daughter of the rev. Thomas Holland, and great-grand-daughter of the rev. Philip Henry. In his youth he discovered a strong predilection to the arts, and such literature as is immediately connected with them, but as his parents were unable to give him a regular education, and as he had a turn for mechanics, h was brought up to the business of a watchmaker. Although he carried on this for some time with good connexions, it was not upon the whole successful, and during a considerable part of his life, he subsisted by trafficking in pictures, prints, &c. for which he had a correct taste, and in which he was probably assisted by the artists and print-sellers. He amassed a good collection of ^iortimer’s and Hogarth’s works, and lived on intimate terms with many men of eminence in the literary world, and particularly with the artists Mortimer and Gainsborough, and Henderson the actor, whose “Memoirs” he published in 1786. This actor had lived in Mr. Ireland’s house for some time after coming to London, but their intimacy had for some reason abated, and at the period of Henderson’s death was, if we are rightly informed, quite dissolved. His Life of Henderson is said to have been his first publication, and certainly was not very successful, nor very interesting. He was more fortunate afterwards in being employed by the Messrs. Boydell in the “Illustrations of Hogarth,” 3 vols. 8vo, a work in which he displays a correct knowledge of the arts, and a vein of humourous remark and anecdote not ill suited to the subjects he had to illustrate. As Mr. Ireland was a man of integrity, he often felt himself very much hurt as being mistaken for Samuel Ireland, the proprietor of the Shakspeare forged manuscripts, who had also published a volume of scraps and anecdotes relating to Hogarth. Our author, therefore, thought proper to disclaim, in the preface to his third volume, all connexion and relationship with his namesake. For several years Mr. Ireland had been afflicted with a complication of disorders, which had rendered society irksome to him, and occasioned him to remove to the neighbourhood of Birmingham, where he died in November 1808. He was a man of pleasant and inoffensive manners, and full of literary anecdote, which he liberally dispensed around, whether in a coffee-house among strangers, or at the social table among his friends.

, mentioned in the preceding article, and we trust more unfortunate than accessary in the possession of the forged Mss. of Shakspeare, was originally a mechanic in Spitalfields, but taking advantage of the taste of the age for literary curiosities, commenced a speculator in scarce books, prints, and drawings. He had some skill in drawing and engraving, and endeavoured to turn it to account, by combining it with description, under the name of “Travels.” With this view he published in 1790, “A Picturesque tour through Holland, Brabant, and part of France, made in the autumn of 1789,” 2 vols. 8vo, illustrated with aqua-tinta and other prints. This succeeded well, although his descriptions were common-place, and his information seldom new. Encouraged, however, by the sale of the work, he produced in 1792, “Picturesque Views on the river Thames,” 2 vols. 8vo, and in 1793 “Picturesque Views on the river Medway,” in 1 vol. In 1794 he published his “Graphic Illustrations of Hogarth,” consisting of anecdotes of that eminent artist, and engraved Copies of many of his lesser and fugitive works, such as shop-cards, tickets, &c. In 1796, he was an accomplice in that fraud which eventually proved fatal to his character and comfort. This was the production of a large quantity of manuscripts, pretended to be in the hand-writing of Shakspeare and consisting of poems, letters, and one entire play. These were exhibited at his house in Norfolkstreet for the inspection of the public, and for some time divided their opinions. Connoisseurs, however, in ancient writings, and particularly in the genius and history of Shakspeare, soon detected the fraud, which, although it did for a time impose on some gentlemen in the literary world, was executed in the most slovenly and clumsy manner. A more full account of this imposition, and the controversies to which it gave rise, may be seen in our authorities: it is scarcely worth reviving in this work. After complete detection, it appeared that Mr. Ireland had been himself the dupe of a near and worthless relation; but his obstinacy in maintaining the authenticity of these papers long after he ought to have given them up, injured his character, and it is thought hastened his death, which took place in July 1800. We have to add to his works “Picturesque Views of the Severn and Warwickshire Avon,” and a “History of the Inns of Court,” the latter a posthumous work. The Mss. of Shakspeare were published under the title of “Miscellaneous papers and legal instruments, under the hand and seal of William Shakspeare, including the tragedy of King Lear, &c.” at the price of four guineas to subscribers. What was yet more absurd, a play pretended to be Shakspeare’s, entitled “Vortigern,” was actually performed on Drury-lane theatre, but hooted from the stage the first night.

, bishop of Lyons in France, was undoubtedly by birth a Greek, and, not improbably, born at or near the city of Smyrna. He was trained in the studies of philosophy and human learning: in the doctrines of Christianity, two disciples of St. John the apostle, Papias and Polycarp, were his masters. The latter he is said to have accompanied in his journey, about the Paschal controversy, to Rome; where, by his and Anicetus’s persuasioiij he was prevailed upon to go to France; great numbers of Greeks residing in some parts of that kingdom, especially about Marseilles, and the church there beginning to be disturbed by several pernicious heresies. In his journey, arriving at Lyons, he continued several years there, in the station of a presbyter, under the care add government of Pothinus, the bishop of that city; and, by his behaviour, distinguished himself so much, that, about the year 177, he was chosen to draw up the judgment and opinion of the churches of Lyons and Vienna, which were sent to those in Asia, in order to compose the differences lately raised by Montanus and his followers, who pretended to the prophetic spirit. In the same letter, they took occasion also to give an account of the persecution, which then raged peculiarly among them, under Marcus Antoninus. The opinions of the confessors in. those times were always received with esteem and veneration. The same churches therefore sent other letters about these controversies to Eleutherius, bishop of Rome, which were probably carried by Irenseus, who undertook that journey at their request. Two years after, in the year 174, upon the martyrdom of Pothinus at Lyons, Irenaeus succeeded to that chair, in a troublesome and tempestuous time, when the church was assaulted by enemies from without, and betrayed by heretics from within. These circumstances required both courage and conduct in the governors, and our new bishop gave conspicuous proofs of his qualifications in both respects. He is said to have held a provincial synod at Lyons, where, by the assistance and suffrage of twelve other bishops, he condemned the heresies of Marcion, Valentinus, and Basilides. He had personally encountered some of these ringleaders among the Gnostics, and read the books of others; when, at the request of many who importuned him, he set about the elaborate work “against Heresies,” part of which is still extant under his name. It was composed in the time of Eleutherius; upon whose decease, Victor, succeeding to the see of Rome, headed afresh the dispute abput the time of celebrating Easter, and endeavoured imperiously to oppose the Roman custom upon the Asiatics. To heal the sclmrn, synods were called in several places; and, among the rest, Irenaeus convened one of the churches of France under his jurisdiction;. where, having determined the matter, he wrote a synodical epistle to pope Victor, and told him, that they agreed with him in the main of the controversy, but withal advised him to take heed how he excommunicated whole churches, for observing the custom derived down to them from their ancestors. He observed, that there was as little agreement in the manner of the preparatory fast before Easter, as in the day itself, some thinking they were to fast but one day, others two, others more, and some measuring the time by a continued fast of forty hours; and that this variety was of long standing, and had crept into several places, while the governors of the church took less care about these different customs than about maintaining a sincere and mutual love and peace towards one another; putting him in mind too of Anicetus and Polycarp, who, though they could not agree about their different usages, did yet mutually embrace, orderly receive the communion together, and peaceably part from one another. Irenaeus wrote also, to the same effect, to several other bishops, for allaying this unhappy difr fere nee.

The church had, for some years, enjoyed those calm and quiet days from without, which had been abused by animosities and contentions from within, when the emperor Severus, hitherto favourable, began a bitter and bloody persecution against the Christians, and prosecuted them with great severity in all parts of the empire. He had once governed the province of Lyons himself; 'and, probably, then taking peculiar notice of Irenaeus, and the flourishing state of the church in that city, might therefore give more particular orders for proceeding against them in this place. The persecution, which in other parts picked out some few to make examples of, was here more indiscriminate; and Irenaeus, having been prepared by several torments, was beheaded. It is not easy to assign the certain date of his martyrdom, whether it was when the emperor published this edict, about A. C. 202; or in. his expedition to Britain A. C. 208, when he took Lyons in his way.

, called also Wernerus, or Guarnerus, a celebrated German lawyer, was born at Bologna, about the middle of the eleventh century. After studying the law at Constantinople, he taught it at Ravenna, where a dispute arising between him and his colleagues about the word “al,” he sought for the meaning of it in the Roman law; and thence took a liking to it, applied to the study of it, and at last taught it publicly at Bologna in 1128. He had a great number of disciples, became the father of the Glossators, and had the title of “Lucerna Juris.” Thus he was the restorer of the Roman law, which had been destroyed by the invasion of the barbarians. He had great credit in Italy with the princess Matilda; and, having engaged the emperor Lotharius to order, by an edict, that Justinian’s law should resume its ancient authority at the bar, and that the code and digest should be read in the schools, he was the first who exercised that profession in Italy: his method was to reconcile the “responsa jurisprudentum” with the “leges,” when they seemed to clash.

It is also said, that he prevailed with Lotharius, whose chancellor he was, to introduce into the universities the creation of doctors, and that he drew up the form of that ceremony; which had its commencement at Bologna, and extended soon to all other universities, and passed from the faculty of law to that of divinity. The university of Paris having adopted these degrees, they were used for the first time, in the person of Peter Lombard, master of the sentences, who was created, in this form, D. D. Irnerius died some time before 1150, and was interred at Bologna, the law school of which was afterwards rendered very famous by his disciples, and the Roman law was thenceforth taught by Italian professors, not only in Italy, but in England and France. One Vacarius, a native of Lombardy, was invited to England for that purpose about the middle of the twelfth century.

, a rabbi, was one of those Jews who left Spain on an edict of Ferdinand and Isabella, in 1492, which obliged the Jews to quit their dominions within four months, or else embrace Christianity. Karo went first to Portugal; and, travelling thence to Jerusalem, he lost his children and his books on the road. He lived in great solitude and, to console himself, composed a book, entitled “Toledot Jiskach, the Generations of Isaac.” It is a commentary upon the Pentateuch, partly literal and partly cabbalistical, in which he examines the sentiments of other commentators. It has gone through several editions: the first was printed at Constantinople in 1518; afterwards at Mantua, and Amsterdam in 1708. Buxtorf ascribes to our rabbi a ritual entitled “Eben Haheser, the Rock of Support.”

, a celebrated Grecian orator, of Chalcis, in Syria, the d isciple of Lysias, and master of Demosthenes, was born probably about 418 B.C. He taught rhetoric with reputation at Athens; and sixty-four orations are attributed to him, but he composed only fifty, and we have but ten of them remaining in the “Greek Orators” of Stephens, 1575, fol. of which we have an excellent translation by sir William Jones, in 1779, 4to. Isaeus took Lysias for his model, and has so well imitated his style and elegance, that he might be easily confounded with the other but for the figures of speech, which Isaeus is the first orator who makes frequent use of. He was also the first who applied eloquence to political subjects, in which his pupil Demosthenes followed him. He must be distinguished from another celebrated orator named Is^us, who lived at Rome in the time of the younger Pliny, about the year 97, by whom he is highly extolled. A sketch of his life is drawn by Philostratus, but he had nothing in common with the Athenian orator, except the volubility of his language, and his name, which last sir William Jones thinks might be assumed, as that of Isocrates also was taken by one of the later sophists, who wrote the instructions to Demonicus. The best of the recent editions of Isseus is that of Reiske, in the “Orat. Graec.” Leipsic, 1770 75, 8vo.

, in Latin Iselius, a learned antiquary, was born at Basil, in 1681. He was made professor of history and eloquence at Marpurg, in 1704; but was recalled to Basil, to teach history and antiquity, in 1707, where he was also promoted to the divinity-chair in 1711. He went to Paris in 1717, intending to visit Holland and England but, being nominated rector of the university of Basil, was obliged to return into his own country. Shortly after, the academy of inscriptions and belles lettres at Paris made him an honorary foreign member, in the room of M. Cuper. Iselin was also librarian at Basil, where he died in 1737. He published a great number of books, of which the principal are, 1. “De Gailis Rhenum transeuntibus Carmen Heroicum/ 7 2.” De Historicis Latinis melioris aevi dissertatio." 3. Dissertations and orations upon various subjects.

, sumamed Pelusiota or Damietta, from his retiring into a solitude near the town which bears both these names, was the most celebrated of the disciples of John Chrysostom, and flourished in the fifth century. He professed the monastic life from his youth, and retired from the world; but appears to have been more useful to the church and to society, than might have been expected from a monk. This appears by his letters, of which, Suidas says, he wrote no less than 3000; and Nicephorus assures us that he composed several works, and mentions particularly ten chiliads of his epistles. Sixtus Senensis also adds, that he saw in the library of St. Mark at Venice, a ms. containing 1184 of such epistles, which are not now extant. He agrees with the orthodox in the leading doctrines of the gospel, but his great excellence is his practical rules. He died about the year 440. We have remaining 2012 of his letters, in five books: they are short; but there are important things in them about many passages of Scripture, as well as theological questions, and points concerning ecclesiastical discipline; they are written in good Greek, and in an agreeable florid style. The best edition of St. Isidore’s works is that of Paris, 1638, folio, in Greek and Latin. In 1737, Christ. Aug. Heumann attacked the authenticity of some of his epistles in a tract entitled “Epistolas Isidoras Pelusiotae maximam partem esse confictas.”

of Seville, was born at Carthagena, in Spain, the son of Severian, governor of that city, and was educated by his brother Leander, bishop of Seville, whom he succeeded in the year 601. St. Isidore was the oracle of Spain during thirty-five years, and died April 4, 636, leaving the following works: Twenty books of “Origines,” or Etymologies, Paris, 1601, fol., or Cologn, 1617, fol.; a “Chronicle” ending at the year 626, useful for the history of the Goths, Vandals, and Suevi “Commentaries” on the historical books of the Old Testament a treatise “on Ecclesiastical Writers” “a Rule for the Monastery of Honori;” a “Treatise on Ecclesiastical Offices,” containing many very important passages relating to Ecclesiastical Discipline, and in which he mentions seven prayers of the sacrifice. These prayers may still be found in the Mosarabic.mass, which is the ancient Spanish liturgy, and of which this saint is known to have been the principal author. The edition of the Missal, 1500, fol. and of the Breviary, 1502, fol. printed by cardinal Ximenes’ order, are very scarce; a Treatise on this Liturgy was printed at Rome, 1740, fol. The “Collection of Canons” attributed to St. Isidore, was not made by him. In the Rule above mentioned, he speaks of the monks as follows: “The monks shall every year at Pentecost make a declaration that they keep nothing as their own. A monk ought to work with his hands, according to the precept of St. Paul, and the example of the patriarchs. Every one ought to work, not only for his own maintenance, but for that of the poor. Those who are in health, and do not work, sin doubly, by idleness, and setting a bad example. Those who chuse to read without working, show that they receive no benefit from what they read, which commands them to work.” This Rule of St. Isidore prescribes about six hours work every day, and three hours reading. This Isidore is frequently ranked among musical writers. In his treatise on the divine offices, much curious information occurs concerning canto fermo, and music in general; but particularly its introduction into the church, the institution of the four tones by St. Ambrose, and the extension of that number to eight by St. Gregory. In treating of secular music, he has a short chapter on each of the following subjects of music, and its name of its invention its definition of its three constituent parts, harmonics, rhythm, and metre; of musical numbers; of the three-fold divisions of music; 1st, Of the harmonical division of music; 2dly, Of the organic or instrumental division; 3dly, Of the rhythmical division. These chapters are very short, and contain little more than compressed definitions of musical terms. In enumerating the seven liberal arts, cap. II. he ranks them in the following manner: grammar, rhetoric, logic, arithmetic, music, geometry, astronomy.

, was a Spanish Jesuit who on the suppression of his order, went to Italy, and settled at Bologna, where he died in 1783. He is known chiefly as the author of “The History of the famous preacher friar Gerund de Campazas; otherwise Gerund Zotes.” This work was written with a view to correct the abuses of the Spanish pulpit, by turning bad preachers into ridicule. The first volume of the original Spanish was published at Madrid, in 1758, under the assumed name of Francisco Lobon de Salazar, minister of the parish of St. Peter in Villagarcia. It was not only highly applauded by many of the learned in Spain, to whom it had been communicated in manuscript; but even the inquisitors encouraged the publication, and bore testimony in writing to its laudable design, believing that it would in a great measure produce a reformation. One of the revisers for the inquisition says, “It is one of those lucky expedients which indignation and hard necessity suggest, when the best means have proved ineffectual, and we are not to find fault if the dose of caustic and corrosive salts be somewhat too strong, as cancers are not to be cured with rose water.” Notwithstanding this approbation of the inquisition, some orders, particularly the Dominican and Mendicant, represented to the king that such a piece of merciless criticism would too much diminish the respect due to the clergy, and would render all religious orders ridiculous in the eyes of the common people, &c. These arguments, repeatedly urged by the friars, and supported by several of the bishops, obliged the council of Castile to take the book into their serious consideration, which produced a suppression of it. The author had a second volume ready; but, finding it impossible to print it in Spain, presented the copy to Mr. Baretti, by whose means both volumes were printed in English in 1771, with the omission of some tedious and irrelevant parts. In Spain this work was so highly approved, that the author was hailed as a second Cervantes, whom he certainly endeavours to copy; but it would be too liberal to allow him the merit of successful rivalship. Friar Gerund, however, is certainly a work of great humour, and must have appeared to much advantage in Spain, where the subjects of the satirQ are more common and obvious than in this country. Here it cannot be supposed to yield more than mere amusement, unless where it presents us with the customs of the common and middle ranks of Spain, and those are said to be faithfully depicted.

, an eminent Greek orator, was born at Athens, in the 86th olympiad, five years before the Peloponnesian war, and 436 B. C. At an early age he began to study philosophy and rhetoric under Gorgias, Prodicus, and Tiseas, whose doctrines and eloquence about this period astonished all Greece. It is affirmed that he also was a disciple of the celebrated orator Theramenes, whom the thirty tyrants caused to be put to death because he favoured the popular cause. He passionately loved glory; and the desire of distinguishing himself, and of bearing a part in the public administration, animated all his proceedings. In order to this end, besides possessing information and a turn for business, it was necessary to excel in eloquence; but nature having denied him both voice and self-command, he directed his efforts to composition, and confined himself to interesting questions, such as appeared to him calculated to render his country happy, and his fellow-citizens virtuous. His talents corresponded with the grandeur of his views. Youth flocked from all parts to be his pupils, and to form themselves on his lessons. Some of them afterwards became orators, some great statesmen, and others polished and profound historians. He died loaded with glory and wealth, at the age of ninety years, a few days previous to the battle of Chaeronea, B. C. 338.

, a learned professor of divinity at Leipsic, was son of John Ittigius,“professor of physic in the same university, and born there in 1644. He received the first part of his education at Leipsic then went to Rostoc, and lastly to Strasburg, to perfect his studies after which he was admitted a professor in philosophy at Leipsic, and published a treatise upon burning mountains. He then became a minister, and exercised that function in various churches in the same place. In 1680 he was made archdeacon, and licentiate in divinity; and, in 1691, professor extraordinary in the same faculty, and ordinary professor the ensuing year. He furnished several papers published in the Leipsic Acts: besides which we have of his,” Dissertatio de haeresiarchis aevi apostolici ejus proximi;“”Appendix de ha3resiarchis“”Prolegomena ad Josephi opera“” Bibliotheca patrum apostolkorum Graeco-Latina;“” Historia synodorum nationalium in Gallia a reformatis habitarum“” Liber de bibliothecis et catenis patrum“” Exhortationes theologicæ“” Historic ecclesiasticæ primi et secundi seculi selecta capita." Some part of this last did not appear till after the death of the author, which happened April 7, 1710.

, or Yves, in Latin Ivo, the celebrated bishop of Chartres, was born in the territory of Beauvais, in 1035. He was raised to the see of Chartres in 1092 or 1093, under the pontificate of Urban XI. who had deposed Geofroy, our author’s predecessor in the see, for various crimes of which he was accused. Ives particularly signalized his zeal against Philip I. who had put away his wife Bertha, of Holland, and taken Bertrade of Montford, the wife of Fouques de Requin, count of Anjou. This divorce was contrary to the ecclesiastical law; and the affair would have been attended with bad consequences had not the prince’s friends interposed. After this, the bishop employed himself wholly in the functions of his ministry, made several religious foundations, and died 1115. His corpse was interred in the church of St, John in the Vale, which he had founded. Pope Pius V. by a bull, dated Dec. l&, 1570, permitted the monks of the congregation of Lateran to celebrate the festival of St. Ives. We have, of his compiling, “A collection of Decrees;” “Exceptiones ecclesiasticarum regularum;” besides “22 Sermons,” and a “Chronicon;” all which were collected in 1647 by John Baptist Souciet, a canon of Chartres, in one vol. folio, divided into parts. The “Decrees” were printed in 1561, and there has been another edition since. A collection of canons called the “Pannomia,” or “Panormia,” and some other pieces printed in the “Bibliotheca patrum,” are also ascribed to our bishop.

, was the only son of one of the most eminent merchants at Yarmouth, where he was born in 1751. He was entered of Caius college, Cambridge, where he did not long reside; but, returning to Yarmouth, became acquainted -with that celebrated antiquary Thomas Martin of Palgrave, and caught from him that taste for antiquities which he pursued during the short period of his life. He was elected F. S. A. 1771, and F. R. S. 1772; and, by favour of the earl of Suffolk, in him the honour of Suffolk herald extraordinary was revived; an office attended with no profit, but valuable to him by the access it gave to the Mss. muniments, &c. of the heralds college, of which he thereby became an honorary member. His first attempt at antiquarian publication was by proposals (without his name) in 1771, for printing an account of Lothingland hundred in Suffolk; for which he had engraved several small plates of arms and monuments in the churches of Friston, Gorleston, Loud, Lowestoffe, and Somerliton, from his own drawings. His next essay was the short preface to Mr. Swinden’s “History and Antiquities of Great Yarmouth, in the county of Norfolk, 1772,” 4to. Mr. Svvinden, who was a schoolmaster in Great Yarmouth, was a most intimate friend of Mr. Ives, who not only assisted him with his purse, and warmly patronized him while living, but superintended the book for the emolument of the author’s widow, and delivered it to the subscribers . In 1772 he caused to be cut nine wooden plates of old Norfolk seals, entitled “Sigilla antiqua Norfolciensia. Impressit Johannes Ives, S. A. S.” and a copper-plate portrait of Mr. Martin holding an urn, since prefixed to Martin’s “History of Thetford.” On Aug. 16, 1773, by a special licence from the archbishop of Canterbury, he was married at Lambeth church to Miss Kett (of an ancient family in Norfolk), and afterwards resided at Yarmouth.

In imitation of Mr. Walpole (to whom the first number was inscribed), Mr. Ives began in 1773 to publish “Select Papers” from his own collection; of which the second number was printed in 1774, and a third in 1775. Among these are “Remarks upon our English Coins, from the Norman invasion down to the end of the reign of queen Elizabeth,” by archbishop Sharp; sir W. Dugdale’s “Directions for the Search of Records, and making use of them, in order to an historical Discourse of the Antiquities of Staffordshire” with “Annals of Gonvile and Caius college, Cambridge” the “Coronation of Henry VII. and of queen Elizabeth,” &c. &c. In 1774 he published, in 12 mo, “Remarks upon the Garianonum of the Romans the scite and remains fixed and described;” with the ichnography of Garianonum, two plates, by B. T. Pouncey; south view of it, Roman antiquities found there, map of the river Yare, from the original in the corporation chest at Yarmouth, and an inscription on the mantletree of a farm-house. He died of a deep consumption, when he had just entered his twenty-fifth year, June 9, 1776. Considered as an antiquary, much merit is due to Mr. Ives, whose valuable collection was formed in less than five years. His library was sold by auction, March 3 6, 1777, including some curious Mss. (chiefly relating to Suffolk and Norfolk) belonging to Peter Le Neve, T. Martin, and Francis Blomefield. His coins, medals, ancient paintings, and antiquities, were sold Feb. 13 and 14, 1777. Two portraits of him have been engraven. 1

, a French poet, was born of a respectable family at la Fresnaye, a castle near Falaise. He discovered early a taste for poetry and the belles lettres, and, after having distinguished himself as a student at Caen, succeeded his father as lieutenant-general of the city; but the marechal d‘Estrees persuaded him to resign his post and go to court, where he placed him with M. de Vendome, son of the celebrated Gabrielle d’Estrées. It was for this young prince that des Ivetaux wrote his poem of “L'Institution du Prince,” in which he gives his pupil very sensible, judicious, and even religious advice. After this he was preceptor to the dauphin, afterwards Louis XIII; but his licentious way of life displeased the queen, and occasioned him to be excluded from the court a year after Henry IV. died. A pension and several benefices were, however, given him; but he afterwards resigned his benefices, on being reproached by cardinal Richelieu for his libertinism. Thus free from all restraint, des Ivetaux retired to an elegant house in the fauxbourg St. Germain, where he spent the rest of his days in pleasure and voluptuousness, iiving in the Epicurean style. Fancying that the pastoral life was the happiest, he dressed himself like a shepherd, and led imaginary flocks about the walks of his garden, repeating to them his lays, accompanied by a girl in the dress of a shepherdess, whom he had picked up with her Jiarp in the streets, and taken for his mistress. Their whole employment was to seek refinements in pleasures, and every day they studied how to render them more exquisite. Thus des Ivetaux passed his latter years; and it has been said that he ordered a saraband to be played when he was dying, to sooth his departing soul; but M. Huet, on the contrary, affirms, that he repented of his errors at the point of death. However that may be, he died in his ninetieth year, at Brian val, near Germigni, in 1649. Besides the poem above mentioned, des Ivetaux left stanzas, sonnets, and other poetical pieces, in the “Deiices de la Poésie Françoise,” Paris, 1620, 8vo.

, an eminent traveller, was born Sept. 16, 1651, at Lemgow in Westphalia, where his father was a minister. After studying in several towns, and making a quick progress, not only in the learned languages, but also in history, geography, and music, vocal and instrumental, he went to Dantzick, where he made some stay, and gave the first public specimen of his proficiency by a dissertation “De Divisione Majestatis,” in 1673. He then went to Thorn, and thence to the university of Cracow; where, for three years, studying philosophy and foreign languages, he took the degree of doctor in philosophy; and then went to Koningsberg, in Prussia, where he stayed four years. All this while he applied himself very intensely to physic and natural history. He next travelled to Sweden, where he soon recommended himself to the university of Upsal, and to the court of Charles XI. a great encourager of learning; insomuch that great offers were made him, upon condition that he would settle there. But he chose to accept the employment of secretary of the embassy, which the court of Sweden was then sending to the sophi of Persia; and in this capacity he set out from Stockholm, March 20, 1683. He went through Aaland, Finland, and Ingermanland, to Narva, where he met Fabricius the ambassador, with whom he arrived at Moscow the 7th of July. The negociations at the Russian court being ended, they proceeded on to Persia; but had like to have been lost in their passage over the Caspian sea, by an unexpected storm and the unskilfulness of their pilots. During their stay in Georgia, Kaempfer went in search of simples, and of all the curiosities that could be met with in those parts. He visited all the neighbourhood or Siamachi; and to these laborious and learned excursions we owe the many curious and accurate accounts he has given us in his “Amrenitates Exoticae,” published at Lemgow, in 1712. Fabricius arrived at Ispahan in Jan. 1684, and stayed there near two years; during all which time of his abode in the capital of the Persian empire, Ksempfer made every possible advantage. The ambassador, having ended his negociations towards the close of 1685, prepared to return into Europe; but Kaempfer did not judge it expedient to return with him, resolving to go farther into the east, and make still greater acquisitions by travelling. With this view he entered into the service of the Dutch East-India company, in the quality of chief surgeon to the fleet, which was then cruising in the Persian Gulph, but set out for Gamron Nov. 1685, He stayed some time in Sijras, where he visited the remains of the ancient Persepolis, and the royal palace of Darius, whose scattered ruins are still an undeniable monument of its former splendor and greatness. As soon as he arrived at Gamron he was seized with a violent fit of sickness, which was near carrying him off; but, happily recovering, he spent a summer in the neighbourhood of it, and made a great number of curious observations. He did not leave that city till June 1688, and then embarked for Batavia; whither, after touching at many Dutch settlements, in Arabia Felix, on the coasts of Malabar, in the island of Ceylon, and in the gulph of Bengal, he arrived in September. This city having been so particularly described by other writers, he turned his thoughts chiefly to the natural history of the country about it. He possessed many qualifications necessary for making a good botanist; he had a competent knowledge of it already, a body inured to hardships, a great stock of industry, and an excellent hand at designing. In May 1690, he set out from Batavia on his voyage to Japan, in quality of physician to the embassy, which the Dutch East-India company used to send once a year to the Japanese emperor’s court; and he spent two years in this country, making all the while. most diligent researches into every thing relating to it. He quitted Japan in order to return to Europe, Nov. 1692, and Batavia, Feb. 1693. He stayed near a month at the Cape of Good- Hope, and arrived at Amsterdam in October.

His inaugural dissertation, before noticed, and published at Leyden in 1694, is entitled “Decas observationum exoticarum.” Of this an unique copy is preserved in Sir James Smith’s library. The subjects on which it treats are, 1, the agnus Scythicus, or Borometz; 2, the bitterness of the Caspian sea; 3, of the native mumia, or bitumen, of Persia 4, of the torpedo, or electrical fish of the Persian gulph 5, of the drug called dragon’s blood, produced by the fruit of a palm 6, of the dracunculus of the Persians, a sort of worm proceeding from a tumour in the skin; 7, on the andrum, or endemic hydrocele of the Malabars; 8, on the perical, or ulcer of the feet among the same people; 9, on the cure of the colic amongst the Japanese by puncture with a needle; 10, on the moxa, or actual cautery, of the same people and the Chinese. These subjects are, as Haller observes, all of them probably treated more fully, in his “Amcenitates Exoticoe,” so often quoted by Linn Sb us for its botany, as well as other authors for its authentic details, relating to the history and manners of Persia, and other parts of the east. His History of Japan is well known by the English translation in folio, and is extremely valued for its accuracy and fidelity. It was published in 2 vols. fol. Lond. 1728. Kcempfer, we have remarked, was skilled in the use of the pencil; and some botanical drawings of his, made in Japan, are preserved in the British museum. Of these sir Joseph Banks, in 1791, liberally presented the learned world with 59 folio engravings at his own expence. Many of the plants are still undetermined by systematic botanists.

, a learned and indefatigable German writer, and Lutheran divine, was born January 20, 1649, at Wolmar, in the landgraviate of HesseCassel. He was professor of poetry, mathematics, and divinity at Rinteln, and member of the society of Gottingen. He died May 17, 1729, leaving two sons and four daughters. A great number of his “Dissertations” are collected in two volumes, printed at Rinteln, 1700, and 1711, under the title of “Dissertationes Juveniles;” the principal are, “De oceano ejusque proprietatibus et vario motu; De libertate Dei; De terra De reflexione luminis ejusque effectu De imputatione peccati alieni, et speciatim Adamici; De Poligamia,” &c.

, a learned Jesuit, was born in Tirnaw in Hungary, about 1572, was received into the Jesuits’ order at Rome, and returning to his own country, was oanished into Transylvania, with the other members of the society, during the commotions which, at that time, agitated the kingdom. After this he discharged the duty of theological professor in the university of Olmutz, and filled some other important posts in different places. His last retreat was to a college which he built at Presburg, where he died in 1634. He was regarded as one of the most eloquent preachers in Hungary, and published some sermons, but he is chiefly celebrated for having completed a translation of the Bible from the Vulgate into the Hungarian tongue, which was printed at Vienna, in 1626.

, a painter of still life, was born at Amsterdam in 1630, and was a disciple of Hendrick Pot, a portrait and historical painter; of whom he learned the practice of the art, but from whom he varied in the application of it; and applied his talents, which were very considerable, in a close imitation of objects in still life; which he composed with great beauty and effect. In the gallery of the Louvre at Paris, are two exquisite works of his, in which he is said to unite the merits of Rembrandt and Teniers. He possessed an eye informed with the power of Rembrandt’s arrangements and contrast of light and shade, and a hand, that managed the pencil with the neatness and correctness of Teniers. He died in 1693.

, a very celebrated naturalist, was a native of Finland, and was born in 1715. Having imbibed a taste for the study of natural history, it appears that he pursued his inclination with much zeal and industry. His first researches were rewarded by the discovery of many new plants in Sweden, of which he gave some account to the botanical world between the years 1742 and 1746. He was particularly anxious to explore the virtues of plants, both with respect to their uses in medicine, and in the useful arts, so that planting and agriculture occupied some portion of his attention. His reputation as a naturalist caused him to be appointed professor at Abo; and in October 1747, he set out upon his travels, sailing from Gottenburg for America; but, on account of a violent hurricane, was obliged to take shelter in a port of Norway, whence he could not depart till the ensuing February, when he proceeded immediately for London. From hence he went to North America; and having spent two or three years in exploring whatever was worthy of observation in that country, he returned to his professorship at Abo in 1751. The expences of this undertaking appear to have exceeded what was allowed him by the Academy of Sciences, so that our author was obliged to live rather penuriously upon his return; yet he found means to cultivate, in a small garden of his own, several hundred plants, for the use of the university, as there was no public botanical garden at Abo His discoveries in botany very materially enriched the “Species Plantarum” of his great master, and the LinntEan Herbarium abounds with specimens brought home by him, distinguished by the letter K. Haller enumerates a long list of tracts published by Kalm; and his inaugural dissertation appeared in the “Amcenitates Academicae” of Linnæus. He was originally intended for the ecclesiastical profession, but was drawn aside from this pursuit by attending the lectures of Linnæus on natural history, given in the university of Upsal. Indeed, it was through the recommendation of Linnæus that professor Kalm was fixed upon to undertake the voyage to North America, and the account of his voyage was published in English by Forster in 1771. He afterwards made, at his own expence, a very extensive tour into Russia, the history of which never appeared in print, but which is supposed to have furnished considerable matter for the work of a Swedish writer, who published a book of travels in that kingdom. Kalm was a member of the royal Swedish academy of sciences, and died in 1779. His collection of dried plants, made in his various journeys, and doubtless valuable for the purposes of botanical information, is said to remain in the hands of his family in a state of neglect.

, a German writer, who has lately attained extraordinary fame in his own country as the inventor of a new system of philosophical opinions, which, however, are not very likely to reach posterity, was born April 22, 1724, in the suburbs of Konigsberg, in Prussia. His father, John George Kant, was a sadler, born at Memel, but originally descended from a Scotch family, who spelt their name with a C; but the philosopher, the subject of this article, in early life converted the C into a K, as being more conformable to German orthography. Immanuel, the second of six children, was indebted to his father for an example of the strictest integrity and the greatest industry; but he had neither time nor talent to be his instructor. From his mother, a woman of sound sense and ardent piety, he imbibed sentiments of warm and animated devotion, which left to the latest 'periods of his life the strongest and most reverential impressions of her memory on his mind. He received his first instructions in reading and writing at the charity-school in his parish; but soon gave such indications of ability and inclination to learn, as induced his uncle, a wealthy shoe- maker, to defray the expence of his farther education and studies. From school he proceeded to the college of Fridericianum. This was in 1740; and his first teacher was Martin Kautzen, to whom Kant was strongly attached, and who devoted himself with no less zeal to the instruction of his pupil, and contributed very greatly to the unfolding of his talents. His favourite study at the university was that of mathematics, and the branches of natural philosophy connected with them. On the completion of his studies, he accepted a situation as tutor in a clergyman’s family. In this, and in two other similar situations, he was not able to satisfy his mind that he did his duty so well as he ought; he was, according to his own account, too much occupied with acquiring knowledge to be able to communicate the rudiments of it to others. Having, however, acted as a tutor for nine years, he returned to Konigsberg, and maintained himself by private instruction. In 1746, when twenty-two years of age, he began his literary career with a small work, entitled “Thoughts on the estimation of the animal powers, with strictures on the proofs advanced by Leibnitz and other mathematicians on this point,” &c. In 1754 he acquired great reputation by a prize essay on the revolution of the earth round its axis; and the following year was admitted.to his degree of master of arts, and entered immediately upon the task of lecturing, which he performed for many years to crowded audiences, and published several works, the titles of which are now of little importance, compared to his new metaphysical system, the first traces of which are to be found in his inaugural dissertation, written in 1770, when he was appointed to a professor’s chair in the university of Konigsberg; the subject was, “De mundi sensibilis atque intelligibilis forma et principiis.” Seated now in the chair of metaphysics, his subsequent publications were almost entirely of this nature. He pursued this study with unremitting ardour, and entered into all the depths of metaphysical subtlety, in order, as we are told, “to unfold the rational powers of man, and deduce from thence his moral duties.” It was not till 178 J, that the full principles of his system appeared in his “Review of pure reason;” and the system it contains is commonly known under the name of the “Critical Philosophy.” As this work had been variously misrepresented, he published a second part in 1783, entitled “Prolegomena for future Metaphysics, which are to be considered as a science.” In 1786 he was appointed rector of the university, and was a second time called to the same office, in 1788; and in a few months he was advanced to be senior of the philosophical faculty. About 1798, he took leave of the public as an author, and soon after gave up all his official situations. During his latter years, his faculties were visibly decayed, in which state he died Feb. 12, 1804. The character of Kant is said to have been contemplated with universal respect and admiration, and during his life he received from the learned throughout Germany, marks of esteem bordering upon adoration. How far he deserved all this, is very questionable. His language is equally obscure, and his reasonings equally subtle with those of the commentators of Aristotle in the fifteenth century. The truth of this assertion will be denied by none who have endeavoured to make themselves masters of the works of Willich and Nitsch, two of his pupils; and the source of this obscurity seems to be sufficiently obvious. Besides employing a vast number of words of his own invention, derived from the Greek language, Kant uses expressions which have long been familiar to metaphysicians, in a sense different from that in which they are generally received; and we have no doubt that the difficulty of comprehending his philosophy has contributed, far more than any thing really valuaBle in it, to bring it into vogue, and raise the fame of the author. For the following analysis of his system we are indebted to one of our authorities, and we might perhaps deserve blame for the length of the article, if it did not appear necessary that some record should remain of a set of opinions that once threatened to usurp the place of all true philosophy as well as religion. The reader who studies for the practical improvement of his mind, will perceive at once, that it is the object of all such metaphysical projectors to render the world independent of revealed religion.

Pure reason is the faculty of tracing our knowledge “a priori,” to subject it to principles, to trace it from its necessary conditions, till it be entirely without condition, and in complete unity. The great work of Kant is divided into several parts, under the titles, “Of Esthetic transcendental” “Of transcendental Logic” “Of the pure Ideas of the Understanding” “Of the transcendental Judgment” “Of the Paralogism of pure Reason,” &c. We cannot, from the nature of our work, discuss all the parts of the system; but may observe, that the author contends that we know objects only by the manner in which they affect us; and as the impressions which they make upon us are only certain apparitions or phenomena, it is impossible for us to know what an object is in itself. Hence the system of Kant has been compared with that of Berkeley, which maintains that sensations are only appearances, and that there is no truth, only in our reason. But Kant does not go to this length. According to his theory, the understanding, when it considers the apparitions or phenomena, acknowledges the existence of the objects themselves, inasmuch as they serve for the bases of those apparitions; though we know nothing of their reality, and though we can have no certainty but in experience. Truth, according to our author, consists in the agreement of our notions with the objects, in such a manner as that all men are obliged to form the same judgment: belief consists in holding a thing to be true, in consequence of a persuasion which is entirely personal, and has not its basis in an object submitted to experience. There is a belief of doctrine, as, that “there are inhabitants in the planets,” which is not the same as moral belief; because in moral belief there is something necessary. The ordinary mode of teaching the existence of God belongs to the belief of doctrine and it is the same with regard to the immortality of the soul nevertheless, the author was a firm believer in the existence of God, and a future state because, said he, “this persuasion renders immovable my moral principles principles which I cannot reject, without rendering myself contemptible in my own eyes. I wish for happiness, but I do not wish for it without morality; and as it depends on nature, I cannot wish it with this condition, except by believing that nature depends on a Being who causes this connection between morality and happiness. This supposition is founded on the want or necessity of my reason, and not on my duty. We have, however,” says Kant, “no certainty in our knowledge of God; because certainty cannot exist, except when it is founded on an object of experience. The philosopher acknowledges that pure reason is too weak to prove the existence of a being beyond the reach of our senses. The necessity of believing in God is, therefore, only subjective, although necessary and general for all those beings who conform to their duty. The proofs of natural theology, taken from the order and beauty of the universe, are proofs only in appearance. They resolve themselves into a bias of our reason to suppose an infinite Intelligence, the author of all that is possible; but from this bias it does not follow that there really is such an author. To say, that whatever exists must have a cause, is a maxim” a priori;“but it is a maxim applicable only to experience: for we know not how to subject to the laws of our perceptions that which is absolutely independent of them. It is impossible to know that God exists; but we can comprehend how it is possible to act morally on the supposition of the existence of an intelligent Creator, an existence which practical reason forces theoretical reason to adopt. This proof not only persuades, but even acts on the conviction, in proportion as the motives of our actions are conformable to the law of morality. Religion ought to be the means of virtue, and not its object. Man has not in himself the idea of religion, as he has that of virtue. The latter has its principle in the mind it exists in itself, and not as the means of happiness and it may be taught without the idea of God, for the pure law of morality is” a priori.“He who does good by inclination, does not act morally. There are compassionate minds, which feel an internal pleasure in communicating joy around them, and who thus enjoy the satisfaction of others; but their actions, however just, however good, have no moral merit, and may be compared to other inclinations; to that of honour, for example, which, while it meets with that which is just and useful, is worthy of praise and encouragement, but not of any high degree of esteem. According to Kant, we ought not even to do good, either for the pleasure which we feel in doing it, or in order to be happy, or to render others happy; for any one of these motives would be empiric, and injure the purity of our morals. We ought to act after the maxims derived” a priori;" from the faculty of knowledge, which carry with them the idea of necessity, and are independent of all experience; after the maxims which, it is to be wished, could be erected into general laws for all beings endowed with reason.

, an eminent mathematician, and professor of mathematics at Gottingen, was born at Leipsic, Sept. 27, 1719. He had part of his education at home, under his father and uncle, both of whom were lecturers on jurisprudence, and men of general literature. In 1731 he attended the philosophical lectures of the celebrated Winkler, and next year studied mathematics under G. F. Richter, and afterwards under Hausen; but practical astronomy being at that period very little encouraged at Leipsic, he laboured for some years under great difficulties for want of instruments, and does not appear to have made any great progress until, in 1742, he formed an acquaintance with J. C. Baumann, and by degrees acquired such helps as enabled him to make several observations. Heinsius was his first preceptor in algebra; and, in 1756, he was invited to Gottingen, to be professor of mathematics and moral philosophy, and afterwards became secretary of the royal society, and had the care of the observatory on the resignation of Lowitz in 1763; but, notwithstanding his talents in astronomy and geography, the services he rendered to the mathematical sciences in general are more likely to convey his name to posterity. He exerted himself with the most celebrated geometers of Germany, Segner, and Karsten, to restore to geometry its ancient rights, and to introduce more precision and accuracy of demonstration into the whole of mathematical analysis. The doctrine of binomials that of the higher equations the laws of the equilibrium of two forces on the lever, and their composition are some of the most important points in the doctrine of mathematical analysis and mathematics, which Kastner illustrated and explained in such a manner as to excel all his predecessors. Germany is in particular indebted to him for his classical works on every part of the pure and practical mathematics. They unite that solidity peculiar to the old Grecian geometry with great brevity and clearness, and a fund of erudition, by which Kastner has greatly contributed to promote the study and knowledge of the mathematics. Kiistner’s talents, however, were not confined to mathematics: his poetical and humorous works, as well as his epigrams, are a proof of the extent of his genius; especially as these talents seldom fall to the lot of a mathematician. How Kastner acquired a taste for these pursuits, we are told by himself in one of his letters. In the early part of his life he resided at Leipsic, among friends who were neither mathematicians nor acquainted with the sciences; he then, as he tells us, contracted “the bad habit of laughing at others;”' but he used always to say, Hanc veniam damns petimusque vicissim.

Kastner died at Gottingen, June 20, 1800. Besides works on the pure and practical mathematics, we are indebted to Kastner for a history of the mathematics, from the revival of literature to the end of the eighteenth century. Vol. I. contains arithmetic, algebra, the elements of geometry, trigonometry, and practical geometry, and was published at Gottingen, 1796, and an appendix in 1797. Vol. II. which appeared at the same time, embraces perspective geometrical analysis, and the higher geometry, mechanics, optics, and astronomy.

, a female artist, well known in this country, was born in 1740, at Coire, the capital of the Grisons, and received the elements of art from her father, who, on some surprising proofs of her early capacity, at the age of fourteen, conducted her to Milan, and, after some years’ practice there and elsewhere, to Rome, where her talents, charms, accomplishments, and graces, soon rendered her an object of general admiration: in 1764 she removed to Venice, and in the following year accompanied lady Wentworth, the wife of the British resident, to England. Here, enjoying royal favour, the arbitress of public taste, loved, esteemed, perhaps envied by artists, decorated with academic honours, opulent and happy, she sunk her own name in that of sir A. Zucchi, a Venetian artist, whom she married, and, after a residence of seventeen years, returned, through her native place, to Italy, and settled at Rome; where, after a new career of success, courted, employed, and rewarded, by rnonarchs, princes, and the most distinguished travellers, she died in 1807, of gradual decay, resigned, regretted, and honoured by splendid obsequies.

Mr. Fuseli, who was honoured by the friendship of Angelica, and cherishes her memory, says, that he “has no wish to contradict those who make success the standard of genius, and as their heroine equalled the greatest names in the first, suppose that she was on a level with them in powers. Angelica pleased, and deserved to please, the age in which she lived, and the race for which she wrought. The Germans, with as much patriotism at least as judgment, have styled her the Paintress of Minds (Seelen Mahlerin): nor can this be wondered at from a nation, who, in A. R. Mengs, flatter themselves to possess an artist equal to Raffaello. The male and female characters of Angelica never vary in form, features, and expression, from the favourite ideal she had composed in her mind. Her heroes are all, the man to whom she thought she could have submitted, though him perhaps she never found; and to his fancied manner of acting and feeling, she, of course, submitted the passions of the subject. Her heroines are herself; and whilst suavity of countenance and alluring graces shall be able to divert the general eye from the sterner demands of character and expression, can never fail to please.”

Angelica painted the lighter scenes of poetry with a grace and taste entirely her own; and happily formed to meet that of an engraver whose labours highly contributed to the growth and perpetuity of her fame. Bartolozzi was the man, who, enjoying at the same time, youth, health, and ingenuity, almost entirely devoted his talents between Angelica and Cipriani. The three were endowed with congenial feelings in arts; which, if not of the highest class, were certainly entitled to rank among the most agreeable.

, a learned English physician and co-founder of Gonvil and Caius college, Cambridge, the son of Robert Kaye, of a Norfolk family, was born at Norwich, Oct. 6, 1510. After having received his school education at Norwich, he was admitted very young of Gonvil-hall, of which he became fellow. While here, among other proofs of literary application, he informs us that at the age of twenty-one, he translated out of Greek into Latin, Nicephorus Callistus’s treatise of “Confession in prayer,” another of Chrysostom, on the “manner of prayer;” and out of Latin into English, Erasmus’s paraphrase on Jude. He also epitomized his book “De Vera Theologia.” The study of divinity might probably have engaged his attention at this time, but we find that when he went afterwards, according to the custom of the age, to Italy, he studied physic under the learned Montanus, and soon became himself so eminent in that faculty, as to read lectures in the university of Padua for some years. We also find him reading lectures on Aristotle at that university about 1542, but he took his doctor’s degree at Bononia. In 1543 he travelled through the greatest part of Italy, Germany, and France, and on his return to England, commenced M. D. at Cambridge, and practised both at Shrewsbury and Norwich with such success, as to be considered one of the ablest physicians in England. It was doubtless this high reputation which procured him the honour of being successively physician to Edward VI. queen Mary, and queen Elizabeth.

In 1547, he was admitted fellow of the college of physicians in London, of which he held all the higher offices, of censor, president, &c. and upon every occasion shewed himself a zealous defender of the college’s rights and privileges, and a strict observer of her statutes, never, even in advanced life, absenting himself from the comitia, or meetings, without a dispensation. He also compiled the annals of the college from 1555 to 1572, entering every memorable transaction in its due time and order. In 1557, being in great favour with queen Mary, and,as it is said, almost an oracle in her opinion, he determined to employ this influence in behalf of literature in general, and accordingly obtained a licence to advance Gonvil-hall, in which he had been educated, into a college. As yet it was not a corporation, or body politic; but, by Caius’s interest at court, it was now incorporated by the name of Gonvil and Caius College, which he endowed with considerable estates, purchased by him on the dissolution of the monasteries, for the maintenance of an additional number of fellows and scholars. He also built, at his own expence, the new square called Caius Court. The first statutes of this new foundation were drawn up by him, and that he might have the better opportunity of consulting its interest, he accepted, and retained, the mastership, almost as long as he lived. Some short time before his decease he caused another master to be appointed in his room, but continued in college as a fellow-commoner, assisting daily at divine service in a private seat in the chapel, which he had built for himself. Here -he died July 29, 1573, amf was buned in the college-chapal, with the short epitaph of “Fui Caius. Vivit post funera virtus.”

Caius’s religious principles have been disputed. The most probable conjecture is, that he had a secret inclination to the principles of his early years, but conformed, at least in outwarcl observances, to the reformation in his latter days. Of his learning there is no difference of opinion. It was various and extensive; and his knowledge of the Greek language, particularly, gave him a superiority over most of hrs contemporaries, the study of that language in this country being then in its infancy. His zeal ibr the interests of learning appears from his munificence to his alma mater, and the same motive led him in 1557 to erect a monument in St. Paul’s cathedral to the celebrated Linacre. As an author, he wrote much; but some of his works have not been published. He revised, corrected, and translated several of Galen’s works, printed at different times abroad. He published also, 1. “Hippocrates de Medicamentis,” first discovered in ms. by him; also “de ratione V ictus,” 8vo. 2. “De medendi methodo,” Basil, 1544, Lond. 1556, 8vo. 3. “De Ephemera Britannica,” or an account of the sweating sickness in England, Lond. 1556, and reprinted so lately as 1721. 4. “De Thermis Britannicis.” 5. “Of some rare Plants and Animals,” Lond. 1570. 6. “De Canibus Britannicis,” Lond. 1570, and inserted entire in Pennant’s “British Zoology.” 7. “De pronunciatione Graecae et Latinae linguae,” Lond. 1574, with several other works, a history of his college, &c. still in manuscript. One only of his works we reserve for a more particular notice. This was his History of the university of Cambridge, occasioned by the appearance of a work written by the subject of our next article, in which it was asserted that Oxford was the most ancient university, founded by some Greek philosophers, the companions of Brutus, and restored by king Alfred in 870, consequently older than Cambridge. Dr. Caius, however, completely defeated his antagonist by going farther back in ancient history, and asserting, that Cambridge was founded by Cantaber, 394 years before Christ, and consequently was 1267 years older than Oxford Strype says that Caius published this work (in 1568, 8vo.) at the motion of archbishop Parker. It is to be regretted that either should have embarked in so ridiculous a controversy.

, the antagonist of Dr. Caius in the antiquity of the universities, was born, as Wood conjectures, in Lincolnshire, but, according to Blomefield, was of a Yorkshire family. He was, however, educated at University college, Oxford, where he entered about the year 1522. In 1525, he was elected fellow of All Souls, where he took his degrees in arts, and at that time was esteemed an excellent Latin scholar, Grecian, and poet, in 1534, he was unanimously chosen registrar of the university; but. in 1552, was deprived of this office for negligence. Soon after the accession of queen Elizabeth, he was made prebendary of Salisbury. In 1561, he was elected master of University college, to which he was afterwards a considerable benefactor; and, in 1563, he was instituted to the rectory of Tredington in Worcestershire. He died in his college, in 1572, and was buried in the church of St. Peter’s in the East. He was well versed in sacred and profane learning, but, according to Smith, negligent and careless in some parts of his conduct. He translated Erasmus’s “Paraphrase on St. Mark,” by command of queen Catherine Parr, Lond. 1548; and likewise made translations from the Greek of Aristotle, Euripides, &e. but which do not appear to have been printed. What preserves his memory is his vindication of the antiquity of Oxford, metitioned in the preceding article, entitled, “Assertio antiquitatis Oxoniensis academic,” printed with Dr. John Caius’s answer, 1568, 1574, and again by Hearne 2 vols. 8vo, 1730. Mr. Smith, in his history of University College, has nearly answered Caius’s arguments respecting Alfred.

, a Baptist divine of considerable note in his day, and some of whose writings are still popular, was born Feb. 29, 1640, at Stokehaman in Buckinghamshire: he appears to have had no regular education, owing to the poverty of his parents, and for some time worked at a trade. He read much, however, in the religious controversies of the times, and entertaining doubts of the validity of infant baptism, was himself re- baptised by immersion, when in his fifteenth year, and joined himself to a congregation of Baptists. Between this and his eighteenth year, he probably studied with a view to the ministry, as at that latter period, he became a preacher, and some time after his settlement in London, attached himself to the particular or Calvinistic Baptists. After the restoration, he frequently was involved in prosecutions, owing to the bold avowal of his sentiments, especially in a little tract called “The Child’s Instructor,” in which he asserted that infants ought not to be baptised; that laymen, having abilities, might preach the gospel, &c. For this he was tried at Aylesbury assizes, Oct. 8, 1664, and sentenced to imprisonment and pillory, the latter of which was executed at the market-place of Winslou-, where he was then a preacher. In 1668 he was chosen pastor of a congregation of Baptists in Goat-yard passage, Horsleydown, Southwark. In 1674 and some following years, he had a controversy, concerning his particular tenets, with Baxter, Burkitt, Flavel, and others, and with some of his own persuasion, concerning certain minute points of discipline. He was in all his opinions sincere, and accounted a man of great piety, and of very considerable knowledge, considering the want of early education and opportunities. He died July Ks, 1704, and was interred in the burialground belonging to the Baptists, in the Park Southwark. He published a great many tracts, some controversial and some practical. His “Travels of True Godliness,” and “Travel-* of Ungodliness,” written in the manner of Bunyan, have passed through many editions, and are still popular; but his ablest works are his “Key to open Scripture Metaphors,” first published in 1682; and his “Exposition of the Parables,” 1704, both in folio.

, a very agreeable English writer, was descended from sir George Hungerford, his great grandfather, by lady Frances Ducie, only daughter of Francis lord Seymour, baron of Trowbridge. He was born, as may be conjectured, about 1729 or 1730, and received his education at Kingston school, under the rev. Mr. Woodeson. From thence he went to Geneva, where he resided some years; and during his stay there, became acquainted with Voltaire, with whom he continued to correspond many years after he returned to England. After finishing the tour of Europe, he settled as a student in the Inner Temple, was called to the bar, and sometimes attended Westminster-hall; though he did not meet with encouragement enough to induce his perseverance in his profession, nor indeed does it seem probable that he had sufficient application for it. His first performance was “Ancient and Modern Rome,” a poem, written at Rome in 1755, and published in 1760, with merited applause. Soon after, he printed “A short Account of the Ancient History, present Government, and Laws of the Republic of Geneva.” This work he dedicated to his friend Voltaire. In 1762 he produced an “Epistle from lady Jane Gray to lord Guildford Dudley;” and in 1763 “The Alps,” a poem, which, for truth of description, elegance of versification, and vigour of imagination, greatly surpasses all his other poetical productions. In 1764 he produced “Netley Abbey;” and in 1765, the “Temple Student, an Epistle to a Friend,” in which he agreeably rallies his own want of application in the study of the law, and intimates his irresistible penchant for the belles lettres. In 1769 he married miss Hudson, of Wanlip, Leicestershire. Some months before which, he had published “Ferney,” an epistle to Mons. de Voltaire, in which he introduced a fine eulogium on Shakspeare, which procured him, soon after, the compliment, from the mayor and burgesses of Stratford, of a standish, mounted with silver, made out of the mulberry-tree planted by that illustrious bard. In 1773 he published “The Monument -in Arcadia,” a dramatic poem, founded on a well-known picture of Poussin; and in 1779, “Sketches from Nature, taken and coloured in a Journey to Margate,” 2 vols. 12 mo, an imitation of Sterne’s “Sentimental Journey” In 1781 he collected his poetical works in two volumes, with a dedication to Dr. Heberden, including a number of new pieces never before printed, and an excellent portrait of himself. Of these pieces, one was “The Helvetiad,” a fragment, written at Geneva, in 1756, He had intended to compose a poem of some length, on the subject of the emancipation of Switzerland from the oppression of the house of Austria, and had even settled the plan of his work, when he acquainted M. Voltaire with his intention, who advised him rather to employ his time on subjects more likely to interest the public attention “For,” said be, “should you devote yourself to the completion of your present design, the Swiss would be much obliged to you, without being able to read you, and the rest of the world would care little about the matter.” Whatever justice there was in this remark, Mr. K. relinquished his plan, and never resumed it afterwards. In 1781, he published an “Epistle to Angelica Kauffman.”

In the next year, 1788, the last of his productions appeared; and the composition was very honourable to his talents and his liberality. In 1782, the Antelope packet was shipwrecked on the Pelew Islands, where the commander, captain Wilson, and his crew lived some time before they could get off. The circumstances attending this extraordinary deliverance having been communicated 10 Mr. Keate, he offered to draw up the narrative of them for the advantage of his friend captain Wilson. This he executed in “An Account of the Pelew Islands, situated in the western part of the Pacific ocean; composed from the journals and communications of captain Henry Wilson and some of his officers, who in August 1783 were there shipwrecked, in the Antelope, a packet belonging to the honourable East India Company,” 4to, a work written with great elegance, compiled with much care, and which, if embellished (as it certainly appears to be) with facts better calculated to have found a place in a novel than a genuine narrative, must be ascribed to the mis-information of those who were actors in the scene, and must first have deceived before they obtained credit. Mr. Keate (whoundertook the task on the most disinterested principle, and derived no advantage whatever from the work) was too sturdy a moralist to have had any hand in the imposition.

Besides the pieces already mentioned, Mr. Keate was the author of many prologues and epilogues, spoken at Mr. Newcomb’s school at Hackney; and of other occasional verses in the literary journals, not, however, of sufficient importance to be enumerated. He had also adapted his friend Voltaire’s “Semiramis” to the stage; but this was superseded, in 1777, at Drury-lane, by captain Ayscough’s translation.

Mr. Keate’s life passed without any vicissitudes of fortune; he inherited an ample estate, which he did not attempt to increase otherwise than by those attentions which prudence dictated in the management of it. He was hospitable and beneficent, and possessed the good will of mank.nd in a very eminent degree. For the last year or two, his health visibly declined; but on the day he died, he appeared to be somewhat mended. His death was sudden, on June 27, 1797. He left one daughter, married in 17 y6 to John Henderson, esq. of the Adelphi. His widow died in 1800. At the time of his death, Mr. Keate was a bencher of the Temple, and a very old member of the royal and antiquary societies, of both which he had been frequently elected one of the council.

, an Irish historian, was born in the province of Munster, of English ancestry, and flourished in the earlier part of the seventeenth century, He was educated with a view to the Roman catholic church, and having received at a foreign university the degree of D. D. he returned to his native country, and became a celebrated preacher. Being well versed in the ancient Irish language, he collected the remains of the early history and antiquities of the island, and formed them into a regular narrative This work, which he finished about the time of the accession of Charles I. commences from the first planting of Ireland, after the deluge, and goes on to the seventeenth year of king Henry II. giving an account of the lives and reigns of one hundred and seventy-four kings of the Milesian race, replete with fictitious personages and fabulous narratives, which, however, it has been said, he gives as such, and does not impose them on his readers as true history. The work remained in ms. in the original language, till it was translated into English by Dermot O'Connor, and published in London in 1723; but a better edition appeared in 1738, with plates of the arms of the principal Irish families, and an appendix, not in the former, respecting the ancient names of places. Keating died about the middle of the seventeenth century, or, as some think, much earlier, about 1625. He wrote some pieces of the religious cast, and two poems, one, an “Elegy on the Death of the Lord Decies,” the other a burlesque on his servant Simon, whom he compares with the ancient heroes.

, an English lawyer, was the son of a lawyer of eminence, during Cromwell’s usurpation, and born in London, 1632. After a proper preparation, he was sent to Jesus -college, Oxford; whence he shortly removed to All-souls, of which he was made fellow by the parliament visitors in 1648. He took the degree of LL. B. in 1644; and, not long after, was admitted student at Gray’s inn, London, and became a barrister about 1658. The following year he went to Paris. After the restoration, he attended the King’s bench bar with extraordinary assiduity, continuing there as long as the court sat, in all the terms from 1661 to 1710, but was hardly ever known to be retained in any cause, or even to make a motion. He died suddenly, under the gate-way of Gray’s-inn, Aug. 1710, just as he was going to take the air in a coach. He was a man of incredible industry, for besides having published several books in his life-time, he left above 100 large folios, and more than 50 thick 4tos in ms. twenty of which are in the library of Gray’s-inn. Writing must have been his delight as well as employment, and became so habitual, that he not only reported the law cases at the King’s-bench, Westminster, but all the sermons at Gray’sinn chapel, both forenoon and afternoon, which amounted at last to above 4000. This was the mode of the times when he was young; and there is a mechanism in some natures, which makes them fond of proceeding as they have set out. He appears to have been a man of a singular turn in other respects, yet regular in his conduct, and very benevolent. The first work he undertook for the public was a new table, with many new references, to the statute-book, in 1674. 2. “An Explanation of the Laws against Recusants, &c. abridged,” 1631, 8vo. 3. “An Assistance to Justices of the Peace, for the easier Performance of their Duty,” 1683, folio; licensed by all the judges. 4. “Reports taken at the King’s-bench at Westminster, from the 12th to the 30th year of the Reign of our late Sovereign Lord King Charles II.” 1685, 3 vols. folio. This work was also licensed by the judges; but not being digested in th'e ordinary method of such collections, and having no table of references, it was not so well received as was expected; and the credit of it being once sunk, could not be retrieved, though the table was added in 1696. Indeed, as a reporter he does not stand high in the opinion of the profession. 5. Two essays, one “On Human Nature, or the Creation of Mankind;” the other, “On Human Actions.” These were pamphlets.

, a very learned man, was born at Dantzic, in Prussia, 1571. He received the first rudiments of learning under James Fabricius, so distinguished by his zeal against Papists, Anabaptists, and other heretics; and in 1589, was sent to the university of Wirtemberg, where he studied philosophy and divinity. Two years after, he removed to the university of Leipsic; whence, after half a year’s stay, he went in 1592, to that of Heidelberg. Here he took a master’s degree, and was so highly esteemed by the governors of the university, that he was first made a tutor and afterwards Hebrew professor there. In 1597, the senate of Dantzic, pleased with the reputation and merit of their countryman, sent him a formal and honourable invitation, by letter, to come and take upon him part of the management of their academy, which he at first refused, but on a second invitation, in 1601, consented, after having first received the degree of D. D. at Heidelberg. As soon as he was settled at Dantzic, he proposed to lead the youth through the very penetralia of philosophy, by a newer and more compendious method than had hitherto been found out, according to which they might, within the compass of three years, finish a complete course. For this purpose he pursued the scheme he had begun at Heidelberg, and drew up a great number of books and systems upon all sorts of subjects; logic, rhetoric, ceconomics, ethics, politics, physics, metaphysics, geography, astronomy, &c. and in this industrious manner he went on till 1609, when, fairly worn out with constant attention to the business of teaching, he died at the early age of thirty-eight. His works were published at Geneva in 1614, 2 vols. fol. The most valuable are his systematic treatises on rhetonc; but they were all for some time used in teaching, and afterwards pillaged by other compilers, without acknowledgment.

, an English prelate, born in 1713, was the younger son of Charles Keene, of Lynn, in Norfolk, esq. sometime mayor of that town, whose eldest son was sir Benjamin Keene, many years ambassador at Madrid, and K. B. who died Dec. 15, 1757, leaving his fortune to the subject of this article. Mr. Edmund Keene was first educated at the Charter-house, and afterwards at Caius college, Cambridge, where he was admitted in 1730. In 1738 he was appointed one of his majesty’s preachers at Whitehall chapel, and made fellow of Peterhouse in 1739. In 1740 he was made chaplain to a regiment of marines; and, in the same year, by the interest of his brother with $ir Robert Walpole, he succeeded bishop Butler in the valuable rectory of Stanhope, in the bishopric of Durham. In 1748, he preached and published a sermon at Newcastle, at the anniversary meeting of the society for the relief of the widows and orphans of clergymen; and, in December following, on the death of Dr. Whalley, he was chosen master of Peterhouse. In 1750, being vice-chancellor, under the auspices of the late duke of Newcastle, he verified the concluding paragraph in his speech on being elected, “Nee tardum nee timidum habebitis procancellarium,” by promoting, with great zeal and success, the regulations for improving the discipline of the university. This exposed him to much obloquy from the younger part of it, particularly in the famous “Fragment,” and “The Key to the Fragment,” by Dr. King, in which Dr. Keene was ridiculed (in prose) under the name of Mun, and in that of the “Capitade” (in verse), under that of Acutus, but at the same time his care and attention to the interests and character of the university justly endeared him to his great patron, so that in Jan. 1752, soon after the expirW tion of his office, which he held for two years, he was nominated to the see of Chester, vacant by the death of bishop Peploe, and was consecrated in Ely-house chapel on Palm Sunday, March 22. With this he held in commendam his rectory, and, for- two years, his headship, when he was succeeded, much to his satisfaction, by Dr. Law. In May following his lordship married the only daughter of Lancelot Andrews, esq. of Edmonton, formerly an eminent linen-draper in Cheapside, a lady of considerable fortune, and a descendant of the family of bishop Andrews. She died March 24, 1776. In 1770, on the death of bishop Mawson, he was translated to the valuable see of Ely. Receiving large dilapidations, his lordship procured an act of parliament for alienating the old palace in Holborn, and building a new one, by which the see has been freed from a great incumbrance, and obtained some increase also of annual revenue. “The bishopric,” it has been humorously observed, “though stripped of the strawberries which Shakspeare commemorates to have been so noted in Holborn, has, in lieu of -them, what may very well console a man not over-scrupulous in his appetites, viz. a new mansion of Portland stone in Dover-street, and a revenue of 5000l. a year, to keep it warm and in good repute.” Bishop Keene soon followed his friend Dr. Caryl, “whom,” he said, “he had long known and regarded, and who, though he had a few more years over him, he did not think would have gone before him.” He died July 6, 1781, in the sixty-eighth year of his age, and was buried at his own desire in bishop West’s chapel, Ely cathedral, where is a short epitaph drawn up by himself. “Bishop Keene,” it is observed by bishop Newton, “succeeded to Ely, to his heart’s desire, and happy it was that he did so; for, few could have borne the expence, or have displayed the taste and magnificence, which he has done, having a liberal fortune as well as a liberal mind, and really meriting the appellation of a builder of palaces. For, he built a new palace at Chester; he built a new Fly-house in London and, in a great measure, a new palace at Ely leaving onjy the outer walls standing, he formed a new inside, and thereby converted it into one of the best episcopal houses, if not the very best, in the kingdom. He had indeed received the money which arose from the sale of old Elyhouse, and also what was paid by the executors of his predecessor for dilapidations, which, all together, amounted to about 11,000l. but yet he expended some thousands more of his own upon the buildings, and new houses require new furniture.” It is chiefly on account of this taste and munificence that he deserves notice, as he is not known in the literary world, unless by five occasional sermons of no distinguished merit.

, an eminent mathematician and philosopher, was born Dec. 1, 1671, at Edinburgh, where he received the first rudiments of learning; and, being educated in that university, continued there till he took the degree of M. A. His genius leading him to the mathematics, he studied that science very successfully under David Gregory the professor there, who was one of the first that had embraced the Newtonian philosophy; and, in 1694, he followed his tutor to Oxford, where, being admitted of Baliol, he obtained one of the Scotch exhibitions in that college. He is said to have been the first who taught Newton’s principles by the experiments on which they are grounded, -which he was enabled to do by an apparatus of instruments of his own providing; and the lectures he delivered in his chambers upon natural and experimental philosophy, procured him very great reputation. The first public specimen he gave of his skill in mathematical and philosophical knowledge, was his “Examination of Burnet’s Theory of the Earth,” which appeared in 1698, and was universally applauded by the men of science, and allowed to be decisive against the doctor’s “Theory.” To this piece he subjoined “Remarks upon Whiston’s New Theory of the Earth;” and these theories, being defended by their respective inventors, drew from Keill, in 1699, another performance entitled “An Examination of the Reflections of the Theory of the Earth, together with ‘ a Defence of the Remarks on Mr. Whiston’s New Theory’.” Dr. Burnet was a man of grea.t humanity, moderation, and candour; and it was therefore supposed that Keill had treated him too roughly, considering the great disparity of years between them. Keill, however, left the doctor in possession of that which has since been thought the great characteristic and excellence of his work: and, though he disclaimed him as a philosopher, yet allowed him to be a man of a fine imagination. “Perhaps,” says he, “many of his readers will be sorry to be undeceived about his Theory; for, as I believe never any book was fuller of mistakes and errors in philosophy, so none ever abounded *vith more beautiful scenes and surprizing images of nature. But I write only to those who might expect to find a true philosophy in it: the*y who read it as an ingenious romance will still be pleased with their entertainment.”

The following year Dr. Millington, Sedleian professor of natural philosophy in Oxford, who had been appointed physician in ordinary to king William, substituted Keill as his deputy, to read lectures in the public schools. This office he discharged with great reputation; and the term of enjoying the Scotch exhibition at Baliol-college, without taking orders, now expiring, he accepted an invitation from Dr. Aldrich, dean of Christ-church, to reside there. In 1701 he published his celebrated treatise, the substance of several lectures on the new philosophy, entitled “Introductio ad veram physicam,” which is supposed to be the best and most useful of all his performances. In the preface he insinuates the little progress that Sir Isaac Newton’s “Principia” had made in the world and says, that “though the mechanical philosophy was then in repute, yet, in most of the writings upon this subject, scarce any thing was to be found but the name.” The first edition of this book contained only fourteen lectures; but to the second, in 1705, he added two more. About 50 years ago, when the Newtonian philosophy began to be established in France, this piece was in great esteem there, being considered as the best introduction to the “Principia;” and a new edition in English was printed at London in 1736, at the instance of M. Maupertuis, who was then in England, and subjoined to it a new hypothesis of his own, concerning the ring of the planet Saturn.

In Feb. 1701 he was admitted a fellow of the royal society; and, in 1708, published, in the “Philosophical Transactions,” a paper “Of the Laws of Attraction, and its Physical Principles.” At the same time, being offended at a passage in the “Acta Eruditorum” at Leipsic, in which Sir Jsaac Newton’s claim to the first invention of the method of fluxions was called in question, he communicated to the royal society another paper, in which he asserted the justice of that claim. In 1709 he was appointed treasurer to the Palatines, and in that station attended them in their passage to New England; and, soon after his return in 1710, was chosen Savilian professor of astronomy at Oxford. In 1711, being attacked by Leibnitz, he entered the lists against that mathematician, in the dispute about the invention of fluxions. Leibnitz wrote a letter to Dr. Hans Sloane, then secretary to the royal society, dated March 4, 1711, in which he required Keill, in effect, to give him satisfaction for the injury he had done him in his paper relating to the passage in the “Acta Eruditorum” at Leipsic. He protested, that he was far from assuming to himself Sir Isaac Newton’s method of fluxions; and desired, therefore, that Keill might be obliged to retract his false assertion. Keill desired, on the other hand, that he might be permitted to justify what he had asserted which he performed to the approbation of Sir Isaac, and other members of the society and a copy of his defence was sent to Leibnitz, who, in a second letter, remonstrated still more loudly against Keill’s want of candour and sincerity; adding, that it was not fit for one of his age and experience to enter into a dispute with an upstart, who acted without any authority from Sir Isaac Newton and desiring that the royal society would enjoin him silence. Upon this, a special committee was appointed who, after examining the facts, concluded their report with “reckoning Mr. Newton the inventor of fluxions; and that Mr. Keill, in asserting the same, had been no ways injurious to Mr. Leibnitz.” In the mean time, Keill behaved himself with great firmness and spirit; which he also shewed afterwards in a Latin epistle, written in 172O, to Bernoulli, mathematical professor at Basil, on account of the same usage shewn to Sir Isaac Newton; in the title-page of which he put the arms of Scotland, viz. a thistle, with this motto, “Nemo me impune lacessit.” The particulars of the contest are recorded in Collins’s “Commercium Epistolicum.”

About 1711, several objections were urged against Sir Isaac Newton’s philosophy, in support of Des Cartes’s notions of a plenum; which occasioned Keill to draw up a paper, which was published in the “Philosophical Transactions,” “On the Rarity of Matter, and the Tenuity of its Compo sition,” in which he points out various phenomena, which cannot be explained upon the supposition of a plenum. But, while he was engaged in this controversy, queen Anne was pleased to appoint him her decipherer; a post for which he was, it seems, very fit. His sagacity was such, that, though a decipherer is always supposed to be moderately skilled in the language in which the paper given him to decipher is written; yet he is said once to have deciphered a paper written in Swedish, without knowing a word of the language. In 1713, the university conferred on him the degree of M. D. at the public act; and, two years after, he published an edition of Commandinus’s “Euclid,” with additions of his own, of two tracts on Trigonometry and the nature of Logarithms. In 1717 he was married to some lady, who recommended herself to him, it is said, purely by her personal accomplishments. The facetious Mr. Alsop wrote some lines on this occasion (Gent. Mag. vol. XXXVIII. 238), which intimate that Keill had been a man of gallantry in his youth; and this appears, indeed, to be confirmed by the writer of his life in the Biographia Britannica. In 1718 he published his “Introductio ad veram Astronomiam:” which treatise was afterwards, at the request of the duchess of Chandos, translated by himself into English; and, with several emendations, published in 1721, under the title of “An Introduction to the true Astronomy, or, Astronomical Lectures read in the Astronomical Schools of the University of Oxford.” This was his last gift to the public; for he was seized this summer with a violent fever, which put an end to his life Sept. 1, 1721, when he was not quite fifty years old.

, an eminent physician of the mathematical sect, and brother to the preceding, was born in Scotland March 27, 1673. Having received the early part of his education in his native country, he went abroad with the view of completing it in the schools of celebrity on the continent; and obtained such a degree of knowledge as distinguished him soon after his return to England. He had early applied to dissections, and pursued th study of anatomy, under Duverney, at Paris; whence he was enabled to give anatomical lectures, with great reputation, in both the English universities. He was honoured with the degree of M. D. by the university of Cambridge. In 1703 he settled at Northampton, and began the practice of his profession, in which he attained considerable fame and success. In 1706 he published a paper in the Philosophical Transactions, No. 306, containing “an account of the death and dissection of John Bayles, of that town, reputed to have been 130 years old.” The circumstances which he detailed very much resembled those that were observed by the celebrated Harvey in the dissection of old Parr. Dr. Keill, like his brother John, was well skilled in mathematical learning, which he applied to the explanation of die laws of the animal economy. His first publication was a compendium of anatomy, for the use of the pupils who attended his lectures, and was entitled “The Anatomy of the Human Body abridged,” Lond. 1698, 12mo, and was taken chiefly from Cowper it went through many editions. In the year 1708, he gave the world a proof of his mathematical skill, in “An Account of Animal Secretion, the quantity of blood in the human body, and muscular motion,” London, 8vi. This work was reprinted in 1717, with the addition of an essay, “concerning the force of the heart in driving the blood through the whole body,” and under the title of “Essays on several parts of the Animal Œconomy.” He likewise published the same treatise in Latin, with the addition of a “Medicina Statica Britannica.” The essay concerning the force of the heart drew him into a controversy with Dr. Jurin, which was carried on in several papers, printed in the Philosophical Transactions of the royal society, of which Dr. Keill had been elected a member; and was continued to the time of the death of the latter, which took place at Northampton, July 16, 1619, in the vigour of his age. He had for some time laboured under a very painful disorder, viz. a cancer in the roof of his mouth, to which he had applied the cautery with his own hands, in order, if possible, to procure some relief, but in vain. He was buried at St. Giles’s church at Northampton. An handsome monument and inscription were placed over him by his brother, John Keill, to whom he left his estate, being never married; but who survived him, as we have seen, little more than two years.

, field-marshal in the king of Prussia’s service, was born in 1696, and was the younger son of William Keith, earl marshal of Scotland. He had his grammar-learning under Thomas Ruddiman, author of the “Rudiments;” his academical, under bishop Keith and William IMeston, in the college of Aberdeen. He was designed by his friends for the profession of the law; but the bent of his genius inclined him to arms, with which they wisely complied. His first military services were employed while a youth of eighteen, in the rebellion of 1715. In this unhappy contest, through the instigation of the counless his mother, who was a Roman catholic, he joined the Pretender’s party, and was at the battle of Sheriffmuir, in which he was wounded, yet able to make his escape to France. Here he applied to those branches of education, which are necessary to accomplish a soldier. He studied mathematics under M. de Maupertuis; and made such proficiency, that he was, by his recommendation, admitted a fellow of the royal academy of sciences at Paris. He afterwards travelled through Italy, Switzerland, and Portugal; with uncommon curiosity examined the several productions in architecture, painting, and sculpture; and surveyed the different fields where famous battles had been fought. In 1717, he had an opportunity of forming an acquaintance with Peter, czar of Muscovy, at Paris, who invited him to enter into the Russian service. This offer he declined, because the emperor was at that time at war with the king of Sweden, whose character Keith held in great veneration. He then left Paris, and went to Madrid; where, by the interest of the duke of Lyria, he obtained a commission in the Irish brigades, then commanded by the duke of Ormond. He afterwards accompanied the duke of Lyria, when he was sent ambassador extraordinary to Russia, and was recommended by him to the service of the czarina, who promoted him to the rank of lieutenant-general, and invested him with the order of the black eagle.

The Turks at this time invaded the Ukrain on the side of Russia, and the empress sent two numerous armies to repel the invaders; one of which marched for Oczakow, under the command of count Munich, which place was invested and taken by the valour and conduct of Keith, to whom the success was chiefly attributed. In the war with the Swedes, he had a command under marshal Lacey, at the battle of Willmanstrand; which he gained by fetching a compass about a hill, and attacking the Swedes in flunk, at a time when victory seemed to declare in their favour. He likewise, by a stratagem, retook from them the isles of Aland in the Baltic, which they had seized by treachery. Afterwards he had no inconsiderable share in the bringing about that extraordinary revolution, which raised the empress Elizabeth, the daughter of Peter, to the throne. He served the Russians in peace also by several embassies: but, finding the honours of that country no better than a splendid servitude, and not meeting with those rewards which his long and faithful services deserved, he left that court for that of Prussia, where merit was better known, and better rewarded.

The king of Prussia received him with all possible marks of honour, made him governor of Berlin, and field marshal of the Prussian armies; to which places he annexed additional salaries. He likewise distinguished him so far by his confidence, as to travel with him in disguise over a great part of Germany, Poland, and Hungary. In business, he made him his chief counsellor; in his diversions, his constant companion. The king was much pleased with an amusement, which the marshal invented, in imitation of the game of chess. The marshal ordered several thousand small statues of men in armour to be cast by a founder: these he would set opposite to each other, and range them in battalia, in the same manner as if he had been drawing up an army: he would bring out a party from the wings or centre, and shew the advantage or disadvantage resulting from the several draughts which he made. In this manner the king and the marshal often amused themselves, and at the same time improved their military knowledge.

This brave and experienced general, after having greatly distinguished himself in the later memorable wars of that illustrious monarch, was killed in the unfortunate affair of Hohkerchen, Oct. 14, 1758, and was buried in the church of that place, the enemy joining in paying respect to his virtues. His character may be given in the few but comprehensive words of his brother, the late lord marshal of Scotland, who on being applied to by M. Formey, who wished to write his eloge, answered, “Probus vixit, fortis obiit.”

, or in Latin Cellarius, was born in 1568, at Seckingen. He entered the Jesuits’ order in 1588, was appointed rector of the college at Ratisbon, afterwards of that at Munich, and was for a long time confessor to prince Albert of Bavaria, and the princess his wife. The elector Maximilian had a particular esteem for him, and frequently employed him in affairs of the utmost importance. Keller disputed publicly with James Kailbrunner, the duke of Neuburg’s most celebrated minister, on the accusation brought against the Lutheran ministers, of having corrupted several passages quoted from the Fathers, in a German work entitled “Papatus Acatholicus;” their dispute was held at Neuburg, 1615. Father Keller died at Munich, February 23, 1631, aged sixty-three, leaving some controversial works, and several political ones, concerning the affairs of Germany, in which he frequently conceals himself under the names of Fabius Hercynianus, Aurirnontius, Didacus Tamias, &c. His book against France, entitled “Mysteria Politica,” 1625, 4to, was burnt. by a sentence of the Chatelet, censured in the Sorbonne, and condemned by the French clergy. It is a collection of eight letters respecting the alliance of France with England, Venice, Holland, and Transylvania. The “Canea Turturis,” in answer to the learned Gravina’s Song of the Turtle, is attributed to Keller.

, alias Talbot (Edward), a famous English alchymist, or, as some have called him, a necromancer, was born at Worcester in 1555, and educated at Gloucesterhall, Oxford. Wood says, that when his nativity was calculated, it appeared that he was to be a man of most acute wit, and great propensity to philosophical studies and mysteries of nature. He belied this prophecy, however, both in the progress and termination of his life; for, leaving Oxford abruptly, and rambling about the kingdom, he was guilty of some crime in Lancashire, for which his ears were cut off at Lancaster; but what crime this was we are not informed. He became afterwards an associate with the famous Dr. Dee, travelled into foreign countries with him, and was his reporter of what passed between him and the spirits with whom the doctor held intelligence, and who wrote down the nonsense Kelley pretended to have heard. Of their journey with Laski, a Polish nobleman, we have already given an account in the life of Dr. Dee. We farther learn from Ashmole, if such information can be called learning, that Kelley and Dee had the good fortune to find a large quantity of the elixir, or philosopher’s stone, in the ruins of Glastonbury abbey; which elixir was so surprisingly rich, that they lost a great deal in making projections, before they discovered the force of its virtue. This author adds, that, -at Trebona in Bohemia, Kelley tried a grain of this elixir upon an ounce and a quarter of common mercury, which was presently transmuted into almost an ounce of fine gold. At another time he tried his art upon a piece of metal, cut out of a warming-pan; which, without handling it, or melting the metal, was turned into very good silver, only by warming it at a fire. Cervantes has given us nothing more absurd in the phrenzy of Don Quixote. This warming-pan, however, and the piece taken out of it, were sent to queen Elizabeth by her ambassador, then residing at Prague. Kelley, afterwards behaving indiscreetly, was imprisoned by the emperor Rodolphus II. by whom he had been knighted; and, endeavouring to make his escape out of the window, fell down and bruised himself so severely that he died soon after, in 1595. His works are, “A Poem of Chemistry,” and “A Poem of the Philosopher’s Stone;” both inserted in the “Theatrum Chymicum Britannicum,” 1652 “De Lapide Philosophorurn,” Hamb. 1676, 8vi; but it is questioned whether he was the author of this. He was, however, certainly the author of several discourses in “A true and faithful Relation of what passed for many Years between Dr. John Dee and some Spirits,” &c. Lond. 1659, folio, published by Dr. Meric Casaubon. There are “Fragmentæ aliquot, edita a Combacio,” Geismar, 1647, 12mo; also “Ed. Kelleii epistola ad Edvardum Dyer,” and other little things of Kelley, in ms. in Biblioth. Ashmol. Oxon.

, an English Roman catholic of considerable eminence as a controversial writer, was born in Northamptonshire, about 1560, and brought up in lord Vaux’s family, whence he was sent for education to the English colleges at Doway and Rheims, and afterwards, in 1582, to Rome, where he remained about seven years, and acquired the reputation of a very able divine. In 1589, he was invited to Rheims to lecture on divinity, and, proceeding in his academical degrees, was created D. D. and, in 1606, had the dignity of rector magnificus, or chancellor of the university, conferred upon him. After being public professor at Rheims for twelve years, he returned to Doway in 1613, and a few months after was declared president of the college, by a patent from Rome. In this office he conducted himself with great reputation, and ably promoted the interests of the college. He died Jan. 21, 1641. Among his works are, 1. “Survey of the new religion/' Doway, 1603, 8vi. 2.” A reply to Sutcliffe’s answer to the Survey of the new religion,“Rheims, 1608, 8vi. 3.” Oratio coram Henrico IV. rege Chris4. “The Gagg of the reformed gospel.” This, the catholics tell us, was the cause of the conversion of many protestants. It was answered, however, by Montague, afterwards bishop of Chichester, in a tract called “The new Gagger, or Gagger gagged/ 7 1624. Montague and he happened to coincide in so many points that the former was involved with some of his brethren in a controversy, they thinking him too favourable to the popish cause. 5.” Examen reformations, prajsertim Calvinisticae,“8vo, Doway, 1616. 6.” The right and jurisdiction of the prince and prelate,“1617, 1621, 8vo. This he is said to have written in his own defence, having been represented at Rome as a favourer of the oath of allegiance. In the mean time the work was represented to king James I. as allowing of the deposing power, and of murdering excommunicated princes, and his majesty thought proper to inquire more narrowly into the matter; the result of which was, that Dr. Kellison held no such opinions, and had explained his ideas of the oath of allegiance with as much caution as could have been expected. 7.” A treatise of the hierarchy of the church: against the anarchy of Calvin,“1629, 8vo. In this treatise, he had the misfortune to differ from the opinion of his own church in some respect. His object was, to prove the necessity of episcopal government in national churches; and he particularly pointed at the state of the catholics in England, who were without such a government. Some imagined that the book would be censured at Rome, because it seemed indirectly to reflect upon the pope, who had not provided England with bishops to govern the papists there, although frequently applied to for that favour; and because it seemed to represent the regulars as no part of the ecclesiastical hierarchy, and consequently not over-zealous in supporting the dignity of the episcopal order. The court of Rome, however, took no cognizance of the matter; but others attacked Dr. Kellison’s work with great fury. The controversy increasing, the bishops and clergy of France espoused his cause, and condemned several of the productions of his antagonists, in, which they had attacked the hierarchy of the church. Dr. Kellison’s other works were, 8.” A brief and necessary Instruction for the Catholics of England, touching their pastor,“1631. 9.” Comment, in tertiam partem Summse Sancti Thomas,“1632, fol. 10.” A Letter to king James I." in ms. Sutcliife and Montague were his principal antagonists among the protestants.

, a dramatic and miscellaneous writer, a native of Ireland, was born on the banks of the lake of Killarney, in 1739. His father was a gentleman of good family in that country, whose fortune being reduced by a series of misfortunes, he was obliged to repair to Dublin, in order to endeavour to support himself by his personal industry. He gave our author, however, some school education; but the narrowness of his finances would not permit him to indulge his son’s natural propensity to study, by placing him in the higher schools of Dublin. He was therefore bound apprentice to 3j stay-maker, an employment but ill suited to his inclination; yet continued with his master till the expiration of his apprenticeship, and then set out for London, in 1760, in order to procure a livelihood by his business. This, however, he found very difficult, and was soon reduced to the utmost distress for the means of subsistence. In this forlorn situation, a stranger, and friendless, he used sometimes to endeavour to forget his misfortunes, and passed some of his heavy hours at a public-house in Russel-street, Covent-garden, much resorted to by the younger players. Having an uncommon share of good-humour, and being lively, cheerful, and engaging in his behaviour, he soon attracted the notice, not only of these minor wits, but of a set of honest tradesmen who frequented that house every evening, and who were much entertained with his conversation. In a little time Mr. Kelly became so well acquainted with the characters of the club, that he was enabled to give a humorous description of them in one of the daily papers; and the likenesses were so well executed as to draw their attention, and excite their curiosity to discover the author. Their suspicions soon fixed on Mr. Kelly, and from that time he became distinguished among them as a man of parts and consideration.

One of the members of the society, in particular, an attorney of some reputation in his profession, being much pleased with Mr. Kelly’s company, made particular inquiry into his history, and thinking him worthy of a better situation, invited him to his house, and employed him in copying and transcribing, an occupation which Mr. Kelly prosecuted with so much assiduity, that he earned about three guineas a week; an income which, compared to what he had been hitherto able to procure, might be deemed affluent. But this employment, though profitable, could not long be agreeable to a man of his lively turn of mind. From his accidental acquaintance with some booksellers, he, in 1762, became the editor of the “Lady’s Museum,” the “Court Magazine,” and other periodical publications, in which he wrote so many original essays, and pieces of poetry, that his fame was quickly spread, and he now found himself fully employed in various branches of periodical literature; in the prosecution of which he exerted himself with the most unwearied industry, being then lately married, and having an increasing family, whose sole dependence was upon his personal labour.

About this time he began to write many political pamphlets, and among the rest “A Vindication of Mr. Pitt’s Administration,” which lord Chesterfield makes honourable mention of in the second volume of his letters, Letter 178. Jn 1767, the “Babbler” appeared in two pocket volumes, which had at first been inserted in “Owen’s Weekly Chronicle” in single papers: as did the “Memoirs of a Magdalene,” under the title of “Louisa Mildmay.” About this time also, perceiving that Churchill’s reputation had been much raised by his criticism of the stage in the “Rosciad,” Mr. Kelly produced his “Thespis,” by much the most spirited of his poetic compositions, in which he dealt about his satire and panegyric with great freedom and acuteness. It is somewhat singular, that while Mr. Kelly was making this severe attack upon the merits of the leading performers at our theatres, which had so great an effect upon the feelings of Mrs. Barry and Mrs. Clive, that they both for some time refused to perform in any of his pieces, he was actually writing for the stage; for, in 1768, his comedy of “False Delicacy” made its appearance, and was received with such universal applause, as at once established his reputation as a dramatic writer, and procured him a distinguished rank among the wits of the age. The sale of this comedy was exceedingly rapid and great, and it was repeatedly performed throughout Britain and Ireland, to crowded audiences. Nor was its reputation confined to the British dominions; it was translated into most of the modern languages, viz. into Portuguese, by command of the marquis de Pombal, and acted with great applause at the public theatre at Lisbon into French by the celebrated madame Ricoboni into the same language by another hand, at the Hague into Italian at Paris, where it was acted at the Theatre de la Comedie Italienne and into German.

The success of this play induced Mr. Kelly to continue to write for the stage; and he soon produced another comedy, entitled “A Word to the Wise,” which, on a report then current, that he was employed to write in defence of the measures of administration, met with a very illiberal reception; for, by a party who had previously determined on its fate, after an uncommon uproar, it was most undeservedly driven from the theatre. Of this treatment he severely complains in an “Address to the Public,” prefixed to an edition of that play, soon after published by subscription, before which above a thousand names appear as his encouragers; and though the pride of the poet was hurt, his fortune was improved, and his friends were considerably increased.

The ill fate of the “Word to the Wise” cast no damp on the ardour of our poet in the prosecution of theatric fame; and as his friends were strongly of opinion, that his genius excelled in the sentimental and pathetic, he was persuaded to make a trial of it in tragedy, and soon after presented the public with “Clementina.” In 1774, uqder the patronage of justice Addington, who kindly helped to conceal the name of the real author, by lending his own to that performance, he produced his “School for Wives.” By this manoeuvre he completely deceived the critics, who had not yet forgot their resentment; for the play was prepared for the stage, and represented, without the least discovery of his relation to it; though they pretended to be perfectly well acquainted with Mr. Kelly’s style and manner of writing. However, after the character of the play was fully established, and any farther concealment became unnecessary, Mr. Addington very genteelly, in a public advertisement, resigned his borrowed plumes, and the real author was invested with that share of reputation to which he was entitled.

But, whilst Kelly was employed in these theatric pursuits, he was too wise to depend solely on their precarious success for the support of his family. He had, therefore, some years before this period, resolved to study the law, had become a member of the society of the Middle Temple, and was called to the bar so early as 1774. His proficiency in that science was such as afforded the most promising hopes that, had he lived, he would in a little time have made a distinguished figure in that profession.

His next production was the farce of a “Romance of an Hour,” which made its appearance about this time. This performance, though borrowed from Marmontel, he so perfectly naturalised, that it bears every mark of an original. The comedy of “The Man of Reason” followed this piece of genuine humour, but was attended with less success than any of his former productions. This was his last attempt, for the sedentary life, to which his constant labour subjected him, injured his health; and early in 1777 an abscess, formed in his side, after a few days illness, put a period to his life February 3d, at his house in Goughsquare, in the 38th year of his age. He left behind him a widow and five children, of the last of which she was delivered about a month after his death. Very soon after his death, his comedy of “A Word to the Wise” was revived for the benefit of his wife and family, and introduced by an elegant and pathetic prologue written by Dr. Johnson, which was heard with the most respectful attention. About the same time an edition of his works was published in 4to, with a life of the author.

, a learned English clergyman, was born Nov. 1, 1750, at Douglas, in the Isle of Man. Descended from a line of forefathers who had from time immemorial possessed a small freehold near that town, called Aalcaer, which devolved on the doctor, he was placed under the tuiton of the rev. Philip Moore, master of the free grammar-school of Douglas, where he became speedily distinguished by quickness of intellect, and the rapidity of his classical progress. From the pupil he became the favourite and the companion of his instructor, whose regard he appears to have particularly conciliated by his skill in the vernacular dialect of the Celtic tongue, spoken in that island. When not seventeen, young Kelly attempted the difficult task of reducing to writing the grammatical rules, and proceeded to compile a dictionary of the tongue. The obvious difficulties of such an undertaking to a school- boy may be estimated by the reflection that this was the very first attempt to embody, to arrange, or to grammaticize, this language: that it was made without any aid whatever from books, Mss or from oral communications; but merely by dint of observation on the conversation of his unlettered countrymen. It happened at this moment that Dr. Hildesley, the then bishop of Sodor and Man, had brought to maturity his benevolent plan of bestowing on the natives of the island a translation of the Holy Scriptures, of the Common Prayer book, and of some religious tracts, in their own idiom. His lordship most gladly availed himself of the talents and attainments of this young man, and prevailed on him to dedicate several years of his life to his lordship’s favourite object. The Scriptures had been distributed in portions amongst the insular clergy, for each, to translate his part: on Mr. K. the serious charge was. imposed of revising, correcting, and giving uniformity to these several translations of the Old Testament; and also that of conducting through the press the whole of these publications. In June 1768 he entered on his duties: in April 1770 he transmitted the first portion to Whitehaven, where the work was printed; but when conveying the second, he was shipwrecked, and narrowly escaped perishing. The ms. with which he was charged was held five hours above water; and was nearly the only article on board preserved. In the course of “his labours in the vineyard,” he transcribed, with his own hand, all the books of the Old Testament three several times. The whole impression was completed, under his guidance, in December 1772, speedily after the worthy bishop died.

In 1776, Mr. Kelly received an invitation from the Episcopal congregation at Air, in North Britain, to become their pastor. On this title he was ordained by the bishop of Carlisle, before whom he preached the ordination sermon. From that time lip continued to reside at Air till 1779, when he was engaged by his grace the duke of Gordon as tutor to his son the marquis of Huntley. The studies of this gallant young nobleman Mr. K. continued to direct at Eton and Cambridge; and afterwards accompanied him on a tour to the Continent. After his return, in 1791, by the interest of his noble patron, Mr. K. obtained from the chancellor the presentation to the vicarage of Ardl< igh near Colchester, which preferment he continued to hold till 1807. Being presented by the chancellor to the more valuable rectory of Copford in the same neighbourhood, Dr. Kelly had the satisfaction of being enabled to resign his vicarage of Ardleigh in favour of his friend and brother-in-law the rev. Henry Bishop.

He was of St. John’s-college, Cambridge, where he proceeded LL. B. 1794, LL. D. 1799. In 1803 he corrected and sent to the press the grammatical notes on his native dialect, above alluded to: these were printed by Nichols and Son, with a neat Dedication to the doctor’s former pupil, under the title of “A Practical Grammar of the ancient Gaelic, or language of the Isle of Man, usually called Manks.”

In 1805 he issued proposals for printing “A Triglot Dictionary of the Celtic tongue, as spoken in the Highlands of Scotland, Ireland, and the Isle of Man;” and bestowed considerable pains in bringing to completion this useful and curious work. It has been the misfortune of Celtic literature, that those learned persons whose maternal tongue happens to have been one of these dialects, faave usually treated it with neglect: but it has been its still greater misfortune to be overlaid and made ridiculous by the reveries of many of those whose “zeal” is utterly u without knowledge" of the subject on which they descant. Dr. Kelly furnished the rare and probably solitary example of a competent skill in these three last surviving dialects of the Celtic. With every aid which could be afforded by a well-grounded knowledge of the learned languages, and of the principal tongues now spoken in Europe, and with every attention to such prior memorials of the tongue as are really useful, Dr. Kelly proceeded, con amore, with his task. As it advanced, it was transmitted to the press: in 1808, 63 sheets were printed; and the first part of the Dictionary, English turned into the three dialects, was nearly or quite completed, when the fire at Messrs. Nichols’s, which we have had such frequent occasion to lament, reduced to ashes the whole i npression. The doctor’s Mss. and some of the corrected proofs, it is understood, remain with the family; but whether the printing may ever be resumed, is doubtful. The doctor gave to the press an Assize Sermon, preached at Chelmsford; and a sermon for the benefit of a certain charitable institution preached likewise at the same place. The former was printed at the instance of chief baron Macdonald; the latter, at the earnest request of the right hon. lord Woodhouse. In 1785 Dr. Kelly married Louisa, eldest daughter of Mr. Peter Dollond, of St. Paul’s church-yard. A short memoir was printed in 1808 of Mrs. Kelly’s grandfather, Mr. John Dollond, which we have already noticed in our account of that ingenious man. Whilst in possession of good health and spirits, with the prospect of many happy and ustful years yet to come, Dr. Kelly was seized by a typhus: after a short struggle, he expired Nov. 12, 1809, very sincerely regretted. To acuteness of intellect, sound and various learning, were added a disposition gentle, generous, and affectionate. His last remains, accompanied to the grave by his parishioners in a body, were interred on the 17th of November in his own parish-church, when an occasional discourse was delivered from the pulpit by the rev. J. G. Taylor, of Dedham near Colchester. Dr. Kelly left an only son, a fellow of St. John’s-college, Cambridge.

, a pious and learned regular canon, and one of the most eminent men in the fifteenth century, was born 1380, at Kemp, a village in the diocese oi Cologn, from whence he took his name. He studied at Deventer, in the community of poor scholars established by Gerard Groot, made great progress both in learning and piety, and in 1399 entered the monastery of regular canons of Mount St. Agnes, near Zwol, where his brother was prior. Thomas a Kempis distinguished himself in this situation by his eminent piety, his respect for his superiors, and his charity towards his brethren; and died in great reputation for sanctity, July 25, 1471, aged ninetyone. He left a great number of religious works, which breathe a spirit of tender, solid, and enlightened piety, of which a collection was printed at Antwerp, 1615, 3 torn. 8vo. The abbe de Bellegarde translated part of his works into French, under the title of “Suite du Livre de I'lmitation,” 24mo, and Pere Valette, under that of “Elevation a J. C. sur sa vie et ses mysteries,” 12mo. The learned Joducus Badius Ascensius was the first who attributed the celebrated book on the Imitation of Jesus Christ to Thomas a Kempis, in which he has been followed by Francis de Tob, a regular canon, who in favour of this opinion quotes the Mss. which may still be seen in Thomas a Kempis’s own hand. On the other hand, Pere Possevin, a Jesuit, was the first who attributed this work to the abbot John Gersen or Gessen, in his “Apparatus sacer,” which opinion has been adopted by the Benedictines of the congregations de St. Maur. M. Vallart, in his edition of the “Imitation,” supposes it to be more ancient than Thomas a Kempis, and that it was written by Gersen. Those who wish to be acquainted with the disputes which arose on this subject between the Benedictines, who are for Gersen, and the regular canons of the congregation of St. Genevieve, who are for Thomas a Kempis, may consult the curious account of them which Dom. Vincent Thuilier nas prefixed to torn. 1. of Mabillon’s and Ruinart’s Posthumous Works, or Dupin’s History, who has also entered deeply into the controversy. The first Latin edition is 1492, 12mo, Gothic. There was at that time an old French translation under the title of ‘L’lnternelle Consolation,“the language of which appears as old as Thomas a Kempis, which has raised a doubt whether the book was originally written in Latin or French. The abbe” Langlet has taken a chapter from this ancient translation, which is not in the Latin versions. Dr. Stanhope translated it into English, and there are numerous editions of it in every known language.

, the deprived bishop of Bath and Wells, was descended from an ancient family seated at Kenplace, in Somersetshire, and born at Berkhamstead, in Hertfordshire, July 1637. At the age of thirteen he was sent to Winchester-school; and thence removed to Newcollege, in Oxford, of which he became a probationerfellow in 1657. He took his degrees regularly, and pursued his studies closely for many years; and in 1666 he removed to Winchester-college, being chosen fellow of that society. Not long after this, he was appointed domestic chaplain to Morley, bishop of that see, who presented him first to the rectory of Brixton, in the Isle of Wight, and afterwards to a prebend in the church of Westminster, 1669. In 1674 he made a tour to Rome, with his nephew Mr. Isaac Walton, then B. A. in Christchurch, in Oxford; and after his return, took his degrees in divinity, 1679. Not long after, being appointed chaplain to the princess of Orange, he went to Holland. Here his prudence and piety gained him the esteem and confidence of his mistress; but in the course of his office, he happened to incur the displeasure of her consort, by obliging one of his favourites to perform a promise of marriage with a young lady of the princess’s train, whom he had seduced by that contract. This zeal in Ken so offended the prince, afterwards king William, that he very warmly threatened to turn him away from the service; which Ken as warmly resenting, requested leave of the princess to return home, and would* not consent to stay till intreated by the prince in person. About a year after, however, he returned to England, and was appointed in quality of chaplain, to attend lord Dartmouth with the royal commission to demolish the fortifications of Tangier. The doctor returned with this nobleman April 1684; and was immediately advanced to be chaplain to the king, by an order from his majesty himself. Not only the nature of the post, but the gracious manner of conferring it, evidently shewed that it was intended as a step to future favours; and this was so well understood, that, upon the removal of the court to pass the summer at Winchester, the doctor’s prebendal house was pitched upon for the use of Mrs. Eleanor Gwyn. But Ken was too pious even to countenance vice in his royal benefactor; and therefore positively refused admittance to the royal mistress, which the king, however, did not take amiss, as he knew the sincerity of the man; and, previous to any application, nominated him soon after to the bishopric of Bath and Wells. A few days after this, the king was seized with the illness of which he died; during which, the doctor thought it his duty to attend him very constantly, and did his utmost to awaken his conscience. Bishop Burnet tells us that he spoke on that occasion “with great elevation of thought and expression, and like a man inspired.” This pious duty was the cause of delaying his admission to the temporalities of the see of Wells; so that when king James came to the crown, new instruments were prepared for that purpose.

When he was settled in his see, he attended closely to his episcopal function. He published “An Exposition of the Church Catechism” in 1685, and the same year, “Prayers for the Use of the Bath.” Nor was he less zealous as a guardian of the national church in general, in opposing the attempts to introduce popery. He did not indeed take part in the popish controversy, then agitated so warmly for he had very little of a controversial turn but from the pulpit, he frequently took occasion to mark and confute the errors of popery; nor did he spare, when his duty to the church of England more especially called for it, to take the opportunity of the royal pulpit, to set before the court their injurious and unmanly politics, in projecting a coalition of the sectaries. For some time he held, in appearance, the same place in the favour of king James as he had holden in the former reign; and some attempts were made to gain him over to the interest of the popish party at court, but these were in vain; for when the declaration of indulgence was strictly commanded to be read, by virtue of a dispensing power claimed by the king, this bishop was one of the seven who openly opposed the reading of it: for which he was sent, with his six brethren, to the Tower. Yet though in this he ventured to disobey his sovereign for the sake of his religion, yet he would not violate his conscience by transferring his allegiance from him. When the prince of Orange therefore came over, and the revolution took place, the bishop retired; and as soon as king William was seated on the throne, and the new oath of allegiance was required, he, by his refusal, suffered himself to be deprived. After his deprivation, he resided at Longleate, a seat of the lord viscount Weyrnouth, in Wiltshire; whence he sometimes made a visit to his nephew, Mr. Isaac Walton, at Salisbury, who was a prebendary of that church. In this retirement he composed many pious works, some of the poetical kind; for he had an inclination for poetry, and had many years before written an epic poem of 13 books, entitled “Edmund,” which was not published till after his death. There is a prosaic flatness in this work; but some of his Hymns and other compositions, have more of the spirit of poetry, and give us an idea of that devotion which animated the author. It is said that when he was afflicted with the colic, to which he was very subject, he frequently amused himself with writing verses. Hence some of his pious poems are entitled “Anodynes, or the Alleviation of Pain.”

Bishop Ken did not mix in any of the disputes or attempts of his party, though it is very probable he was earnestly solicited to it; since we find the deprived bishop of Ely, Dr. Turner, his particular friend, with whom fee had begun an intimacy at Winchester school, so deeply engaged in it. He never concurred in opinion with those nonjurors who were for continuing a separation from the established church by private consecrations among themselves, yet he looked on the spiritual relation to his diocese to be still in full force, during the life of his first successor, Dr. Kidder; but, after his decease in 1703, upon the nomination of Dr. Hooper to the diocese, he requested that gentleman to accept it, and afterwards subscribed himself “late bishop of Bath and Wells.” The queen, who highly respected him, settled upon him a pension of 200l. per annum, which was punctually paid out of the treasury as long as he lived. He had been afflicted from 1696 with severe cholicky pains, and at length symptoms being apparent of an ulcer in his kidneys, he went to Bristol in 1710 for the benefit of the hot wells, and there continued till November, when he removed to Leweston, near Sherborne, in Dorsetshire, a seat belonging to the hon. Mrs. Thynne. There a paralytic attack, which deprived him of the use of one side, confined him to his chamber till about the middle of March; when being, as he thought, able to go to Bath, he set out, but died at Longleate, in his way thither, March 19, 1710-11. It is said that he had travelled for many years with his shroud in his portmanteau; and that he put it on as soon as he came to Longleate, giving notice of it the day before his death, to prevent his body from being stripped.

His works were published in 1721, in four volumes; and consist of devotional pieces in verse and prose. Various reports having been industriously spread that he was tainted with popish errors, and not steadfast to the doctrine of the church of England, it was thought proper to publish the following paragraph, transcribed from his will “As for my religion, I die in the holy catholic and apostolic faith, professed by the whole church, before the disunion of East and West; more particularly, I die in the communion of the church of England, as it stands distinguished from all papal and puritan innovations, and as it adheres to the doctrine of the cross.”

, bishop of St. Andrew’s, Scotland, and founder of the college of St. Salvator there, was the younger son of James Kennedy, of Dunmure, by the lady Mary, countess of Angus, his wife, daughter of Robert III. king of Scotland. He was born in 1405, or 1406, and after some preparatory education at home, was sent abroad for his philosophical and theological studies. Entering into holy orders, he was preferred by James I. to the bishopric of Dunkeld in 1437. In order to be better qualified to reform the abuses which had crept into his diocese, he undertook a journey to pope Eugenius IV. then at Florence, but the schism which then prevailed in the church of Rome prevented his procuring the necessary powers. The pope, however, to show his esteem for him, gave him the abbey of Scoon in commendam. In 1440, while he was at Florence, the see of St. Andrew’s becoming vacant, was conferred upon him: and on his return, after being admitted in due form, he restored order and discipline throughout his diocese. In 1444 he was made lord chancellor, but not finding his power equal to his inclination to do good in this office, he resigned it within a few weeks. The nation being much distracted by party feuds during the minority of James II. and bishop Kennedy finding himself unable to compose these differences, determined to go again abroad, and try what he could do in healing that schism in the papacy which had so long disturbed the quiet of the church. With this view he undertook a journey to Rome, with a retinue of thirty persons; and it being necessary to pass through England, he obtained a safe conduct from Henry VI. dated May 28, 1446.

It does not appear that he was very successful as to the objects of this journey; but on his return home he achieved what was more easy and more to his honour. This was his founding a college, or university, at St. Andrew’s, called St. Salvator’s, which he liberally endowed for the maintenance of a provost, four regents, and eight bursars, or exhibitioners. He founded also the collegiate church within the precincts of the college, in which is his tomb, of exquisite workmanship: a few years ago, six magnificent silver maces were discovered within the tomb, exact models of it. One was presented to each of the three other Scotch universities, and three are preserved in the college. He founded also the abbey of the Observantines, which was finished by his successor, bishop Graham, in 1478, but is now a ruin. During the minority of James III. he was appointed one of the lords of the regency, but in fact was allowed the whole power, and, according to Buchanan and Spotswood, conducted himself with great prudence. Hedied May 10, 1466, and was interred in his collegiate church. In his private character he was frugal, but magnificent in his expences for the promotion of religion and learning. He is, said to have written some political advices, “Monita Politica,” and a History of his own times, both probably lost.

, a native of Scotland, who resided some time in Smyrna, and died at an advanced age, Jan. 26, 1760, is recorded as an antiquary of some abilities, although we know very little of his history. He had a collection of about 200 pictures, amongst which were two heads of himself by Keysing; he had also a very valuable collection of Greek and Latin coins, which, with the pictures, were sold by auction in 1760. Amongst the Roman coins were 256 of Carausius, 9 of them silver, and 89 of Alectus; these coins of Carausius and Alectus were purchased by P. C. Webb, esq. the 256 for 70l. and thp 8$ for 16l. 10s. They were afterwards bought by Dr. Hunter, who added to the number very considerably. Dr. Kennedy, in his “Dissertation on the Coins of Carausius,” as-, serted, that Oriuna was that emperor’s guardian goddess. Dr. Stukeley, in his “Palæographia Britannica, No. III, 1752,” 4to, affirmed she was his wife; to which Dr. Kennedy replied in “Farther Observations,” &c. 1756, 4to and, upon his antagonist’s supporting his opinion in his “History of Carausius,” 1757 59, he abused him in a sixpenny 4to letter.

“Oriuna, on the medals of Carausius,” says Mr. Waipole, in his preface to Historic Doubts, “used to pass for the Moon; of late years it is become a doubt whether she was not his consort. It is of little importance whether she was moon or empress; but how little must we know of those times, when those land-marks to certainty, royal names, do not serve evn that purpose In the cabinet of the king of France are several coins of sovereigns whose country cannot be guessed at.”

, an English writer, and bishop of Peterborough, was the son of the rev. Basil Kennet, rector of Dunchurch, and vicar of Postling, near Hythe, in Kent, and was born at Dover, Aug. 10, 1660. He was called White, from his mother’s father, one Mr. Thomas White, a wealthy magistrate at Dover, who had formerly been a master shipwright there. When he was a little grown up, he was sent to Westminster-school, with a view of getting upon the foundation; but, being seized with the srnall-pox at the time of the election, it was thought advisable to take him away. In June 1678 he was entered of St. Edmund-hall in Oxford, where he was pupil to Mr. Allam, a very celebrated tutor, who took a particular pleasure in imposing exercises on him, which he would often read in the common room with great approbation. It was by Mr. Allam’s advice that he translated Erasmus on Folly, and some other pieces for the Oxford booksellers. Under this tutor he applied hard to study, and commenced an author in politics, even while he was an under-graduate; for, in 1680, he published “A Letter from a student at Oxford to a friend in the country, concerning the approaching parliament, in vindication of his majesty, the church of England, and tfye university:” with which the whig party, as it then began to be called, in the House of Commons, were so much offended, that inquiries were made after the author, in order to have him punished. In March 1681 he published, in the same spirit of party, “a Poem,” that is, “a Ballad,” addressed “to Mr. E. L. on his majesty’s dissolving the late parliament at Oxford,” which was printed on one side of a sheet of paper, and began, “An atheist now must a monster be,” &c. He took his bachelor’s degree in May 1683; and published, in 1684, a translation of Erasmus’s “Morise encomium,” which he entitled “Wit against Wisdom, or a Panegyric upon Folly,” which, as we have already noticed, his tutor had advised him to undertake. He proceeded M. A. Jan. 22, 1684; and, the same year, was presented by sir William Glynne, bart. to the vicarage of Amersden, or Ambroseden, in Oxfordshire; which favour was procured him by his patron’s eldest son, who was his contemporary in the halh To this patron he dedicated “Pliny’s Panegyric,” which he translated in 1686, and published with this title, “An address of thanks to a good prince, presented in the Panegyric of Pliny upon Trajan, the best of the Roman emperors.” It was reprinted in 1717; before which time several reflections having been made on him for this performance, he gave the following account of it in a “Postscript” to the translation of his “Convocation Sermon,” in 1710. “The remarker says, the doctor dedicated Pliny’s Panegyric to the late king James: and, what if he did? Only it appears he did not. This is an idle tale among the party, who, perhaps, have told it till they believe it: when the truth is, there was no such dedication, and the translation itself of Pliny was not designed for any court address. The young translator’s tutor, Mr. Allam, directed his pupil, by way of exercise, to turn some Latin tracts into English. The first was a little book of Erasmus, entitled,” Moriae Encomiumu;“which the tutor was pleased to give to a bookseller in Oxford, who put it in the press while the translator was but an under-graduate. Another sort of task required by his tutor was this ‘ Panegyric of Pliny upon Trajan,’ which he likewise gave to a bookseller in Oxford, before the translator was M. A. designing to have it published in the reign, of king Charles; and a small cut of that prince at full length was prepared, and afterwards put before several of the books, though the impression happened to be retarded till the death of king Charles; and then the same tutor, not long before his own death, advised a new preface, adapted to the then received opinion of king James’s being a just and good prince. However, there was no dedication to king James, but to a private patron, a worthy baronet, who came in heartily to the beginning of the late happy revolution. This is the whole truth of that story, that hath been so often cast at the doctor not that he thinks himself obliged to defend every thought and expression of his juvenile studies, when he had possibly been trained up to some notions, which he afterwards found reason to put away as childish things.”

In 1689, as he was exercising himself in shooting, he had the misfortune to be dangerously wounded in the forehead by the bursting of the gun. Both the tables of his skull were broken, which occasioned him constantly to wear a black velvet patch on that part. He lay a considerable time under this accident; and it is said, that while he was in great disorder both of body and brain, just after he had undergone the severe operation of trepanning, he made a copy of Latin verses, and dictated them to a friend at his bed-side. The copy was transmitted to his patron, sir William Glynne, in whose study it was found, after the author had forgot every thing but the sad occasion: and the writer of his life tells us, that “it was then in his possession, and thought, by good judges, to be no reproach to the author.” He was too young a divine to engage in the famous popish controversy; but he distinguished himself by preaching against popery. He likewise refused to read the declaration for liberty of conscience in 1688, and went with the body of the clergy in the diocese of Oxford, when they rejected an address to king James, recommended by bishop Parker in the same year. While he continued at Amersden, he contracted an acquaintance with Dr. George Hickes, whom he entertained in his house, and was instructed by him in the Saxon and Northern tongues; though their different principles in church and state afterwards dissolved the friendship between them. In September 1691, he was chosen lecturer of St. Martin’s in Oxford, having some time before been invited back to Edmund-hall, to be tutor and vice-principal there; where he lived in friendship with the learned Dr. Mill, the editor of the New Testament, who was then principal of that house. In February 1692, he addressed a letter from Edmund-hall to Brome, the editor of Somner’s “Treatise of the Roman Ports and Forts in Kent,” containing an account of the life of that famous antiquary; which gave him an opportunity of displaying his knowledge in the history of the Saxon language in England. In February 1693, he was presented to the rectory of Shottesbrook, in Berkshire, by William Cherry, esq. the father of one of his fellow-students at college, but he still resided at Oxford, where he diligently pursued and encouraged the study of antiquities. We have a strong attestation to this part of his character from Gibson, afterwards bishop of London, who publishing, in 1694, a translation of Somner’s treatise, written in answer to Chifflet, concerning the situation of the Portus Iccius on the coast of France, opposite to Kent, where Caesar embarked for the invasion of this island, introduced it to the world with a dedication to Mr. Kennet.

On May 5, 1694, he took the degree of B. D. that of D. D. July 19, 1699 and in 1700, was appointed minister of St. Botolph Aldgate in London, without any solicitation of his own. In 1701, he engaged against Dr. Atterbury, in the disputes about the rights of convocation, of which he became a member about this time, as archdeacon of Huntingdon; to which dignity he was advanced the same year by Dr. Gardiner, bishop of Lincoln. He now grew into great esteem by those who were deemed the lowchurch party, and particularly with Tenison the archbishop of Canterbury. He preached a sermon at Aldgate, January 30, 1703, which exposed him to great clamour, and occasioned many pamphlets to be written against it; and in 1705, when Dr. Wake was advanced to the see of Lincoln, was appointed to preach his consecration sermon; which was so much admired by lord chief-justice Holt, that he declared, “it had more in it to the purpose of the legal and Christian constitution of this church than any volume of discourses.” About the same time, some booksellers, having undertaken to print a collection of the best writers of the English history, as far as to the reign of Charles I. in two folio volumes, prevailed with Dr. Kennet to prepare a third volume, which should carry the history down to the then present reign of queen Anne. This, being finished with a particular preface, was published with the other two, tinder the title of “A complete History of England, &c.” in 1706. The two volumes were collected by Mr. Hughes, who wrote also the general preface, without any participation of Dr. Kennet: and, in 1719, appeared the second edition with notes, said to be inserted by Mr. Strype, and several alterations and additions. Not long after this, he was appointed chaplain to her majesty; and by the management of bishop Burnet, preached the funeral sermon on the death of the first duke of Devonshire, Sept. 5, 1707. This sermon gave great offence, and made some say, that “the preacher had built a bridge to heaven for men of wit and parts, but excluded the duller part of mankind from any chance of passing it.” This charge was grounded on the following passage; where, speaking of a late repentance, he says, that “this rarely happens but in men of distinguished sense and judgment. Ordinary abilities may Jt>e altogether sunk by a long vicious course of life: the duller flame is easily extinguished. The meaner sinful wretches are commonly given up to a reprobate mind, and die as stupidly as they lived; while the nobler and brighter parts have an advantage of understanding the worth of their souls before they resign them. If they are allowed the benefit of sickness, they commonly awake out of their dream of sin, and reflect, and look upward. They acknowledge an infinite being they feel their own immortal part they recollect and relish the holy Scriptures they call for the elders of the church they think what to answer at a judgment-seat. Not that God is a respecter of persons, but the difference is in men; and, the more intelligent nature is, the more susceptible of the divine grace.” Of this sermon a new edition, with “Memoirs of the Family of Cavendish,” and notes and illustrations, was published in 1797, which is now as scarce as the original edition, the greater part of the impression having been burnt at Mr. Nichols’s (the editor’s) fire in 1808.

Whatever offence this sermon might give to others, it did not offend the succeeding duke of Devonshire, to whom it was dedicated, who, on the contrary, recommended the doctor to the queen for the deanery of Peterborough, which he obtained in 1707. In 1709, he published “A Vindication of the Church and Clergy of England from some ]ate Reproaches rudely and unjustly cast upon them” and, “A true Answer to Dr. SacheverelPs Sermon before the Lord-Mayor, November 5 of that year.” In 1710, he was greatly reproached, for not joining in the London clergy’s address to the queen. When the great point in SacheverelPs trial, the change of the ministry, was gained, and addresses succeeded, an address was prepared from the bishop and clergy of London, so worded that they, who would not subscribe it, might be represented as enemies to the queen and her ministry. Dr. Kennet, however, refused to sign it, which was announced in one of the newspapers, Dyer’s Letter of Aug. 4, 1710. This zealous conduct in Kennet, in favour of his own party, raised so great an odium against him, and made him so very obnoxious to the other, that very uncommon methods were taken to expose him; and one, in particular, by Dr. Weiton, rector of WhitechapeL In an altar-piece of that church, which was intended to represent Christ and his twelve apostles eating the passover and the last supper, Judas, the traitor, was drawn sitting in an elbow-chair, dressed in a black garment, between a gown and a cloak, with a black scarf and a white band, a short wig, and a mark in his forehead between a lock and a patch, and with so much of the countenance of Dr. Kennet, that under it, in effect, was written “the dean the traitor.” It was generally said, that the original sketch was designed for a bishop under Dr. Welton’s displeasure, which occasioned the elbow-chair, and that this bishop was Burnet: but the painter being apprehensive of an action of Scandalum Magnatum, leave was given him to drop the bishop, and make the dean. Multitudes of people came daily to the church to admire the sight; but it was esteemed so insolent a contempt of all that is sacred, that, upon the complaint of others, (for the dean never saw or seemed to regard it, the bishop of London obliged those who set the picture up to take it down again. But these arts and contrivances to expose him, instead of discouraging, served only to animate him; and he continued to write and act as usual in the defence of that cause which he had espoused and pushed so vigorously hitherto. In the mean time, he employed his leisure-hours in things of a different nature; but which, he thought, would be no less serviceable to the public good. In 1713, he made a large collection of books, charts, maps, and papers, at his own expence, with a design of writing “A full History of the Propagation of Christianity in the English American Colonies;” and published a catalogue of all the distinct treatises and papers, in the order of time as they were first printed or written, under this title, “Bibliothecae Americanae primordia.” About the same time he founded “an antiquarian and historical library” at Peterborough; for which purpose he had long been gathering up pieces, from the very beginning of printing in England to the latter end of queen Elizabeth’s reign. In the rebellion of 1715, he published a sermon upon “the witchcraft of the present Rebellion;” and, the two following years, was very zealous for repealing the acts against occasional conformity and the growth of schism. He also warmly opposed the proceedings in the convocation against Hoadly, then bishop of Bangor which was thought to hurt him so as to prove an effectual bar to his farther advancement in the church nevertheless, he was afterwards promoted to the see of Peterborough, November 1718. He continued to print several things after his last promotion, which he lived to enjoy something above ten years; and then died in his house in James’s-street, December 19, 1728. His numerous and valuable ms collections, which were once in the collection of Mr. West, were purchased by the earl of Shelburne, afterwards marquis of Lansdowne, and sold with the rest of his lordship’s Mss. to the British Museum, where they are now deposited. Among these are two volumes in a large Atlas folio, which were intended for publication under the following comprehensive title “Diptycha Ecclesise Anglicanae sive Tabulae Sacrse in quibus facili ordine recensentur Archiepiscopi, Episcopi, eorumque Suffraganei, Vicarii Generales, et Cancellarii; Ecclesiarum insuper Cathedralium Priores, Decani, Thesaurarii, Praecentores, Cancellarii, Archidiaconi, & melioris notae Canonici, continua serie deducti a Gulielmi I. Conquestu, ad auspicata Gul. III. tempora.”

"Dr. Swift came into the coffee-house, and had a bow from every body but me, who, I confess, could not but despise him. When I came to the an ti- chamber to wait before prayers, Dr. Swift was the principal man of talk and business, and acted as a master of requests. He was soliciting the earl of Arran to speak to his brother the duke of Ormond, to get a chaplain’s place established in the garrison of Hull for Mr. Fiddes, a clergyman in that neighbourhood, who had lately been in gaol, and published sermons to pay fees. He was promising Mr. Thorold to undertake with my lord treasurer, that, according to his petition, he should obtain a salary of 200l. per annum, as minister of the English church at Rotterdam. Then he stopt F. Gwynne, esq. going in with his red bag to the queen, and told him aloud he had somewhat to say to him from my lord treasurer. He talked with the son of Dr. Davenant to be sent abroad, and took out his pocket-book and wrote down several things, as memoranda, to do for him. He turned to the fire, and took out his gold watch, and, telling the time of the day, complained it was very late. A gentleman said, ‘ he was too fast.’ * How can I help it,‘ says the doctor, ’ if the courtiers give me a watch that won‘t go right’ Then he instructed a young nobleman, that the best poet in England was Mr. Pope (a papist), who had begun a translation of Homer into English verse for which ‘ he must have ’em all subscribe' for, says he, the author shall not begin to print till I have a thousand guineas for him. Lord Treasurer, after leaving the queen, came through the room beckoning Dr. Swift to follow him: both went off just before prayers. 11 Nov. 3. I see and hear a great deal to confirm a doubt, that the pretender’s interest is much at the bottom of some

hand in the late book for hereditary right; and that one of them was presented to majesty itself, whom God preserve from the effect of such principles and such intrigues!"

Bishop Kennet took such an active part in the ecclesiastical and political controversies of his time, that whoever examines into the state of these must expect to find his character very differently represented. Upon a fair examination of his conduct, however, as well as his writings, it will probably be found that he did not fall much short of his contemporaries as an able divine and an honest politician. But it is as a historian and antiquary, that we feel most indebted to his labours, and could wish he had been enabled to devote more of his time to the illustration of literary history, to which he was early attached, and had every requisite to become a useful collector and biographer. As to his character in other respects, if we can rely on the rev. William Newton, the writer of his life, there was much that was exemplary. He was always indefatigable in the duties of his sacred function, had a great sense of the worth of souls, and was very solicitous to serve in the most effectual manner those committed to his care.

He was a man of great diligence and application, not only in his youth, but even to the close of his life; and like many other men of eminence, he began early that pursuit, which he more or less followed during the whole of his life. He assisted Anthony Wood in collecting materials for the “Athenae,” and would have probably given a valuable work of that kind to the world, had he found leisure to methodize and complete his collections, by which, however, men of research may yet be benefited. He had a very extensive and valuable library, collected at a great expence, and many of his happiest hours were spent there. He had one practice, into which most men of literary curiosity have fallen; that of writing notes, corrections, additions, &c. to all his books, many of which, thus illustrated, are now in various public and private libraries.