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

, a protestant divine of great learning, and the editor of a Latin translation of the Bible, was born at Ferrara in 1510. He was the son of a Jew, and was educated with such care as to become a great master in the Hebrew tongue; but was converted to Christianity, first as a Roman catholic, by cardinal Pole, and secondly as a protetant by the celebrated Peter Martyr, and went with him to Lucca. Afterwards, leaving Italy altogether, he went into Germany, and settled at Strasburgh; whence he proceeded to England in the reign of Edward VI. where he lived in intimacy with the archbishops Cranmer and Parker, particularly the latter, and also taught Hebrew at Cambridge; but after the death of the king, he returned to Germany, and taught Hebrew in the school of Hornbach. Thence he was invited to Heidelberg, under the elector palatine Frederic III. where he was professor of the Hebrew tongue, and translated the Syriac Testament into Latin. There also he undertook a Latin translation of the Bible out of Hebrew, and associated Francis Junius to him in that work. His next remove was to Sedan, at the request of the duke of Builloin, to be the Hebrew professor in his new university, where he died, 1580, in his seventieth year.

, a French abb of temporary fame, but who is upon the whole rather faintly praised by his countrymen, was born at St. Malo in Dec. 1697. He was related to the celebrated Maupertuis, who dedicated the third volume of his works to him. His first appearance as an author was in 1717, in his twentieth year, when he published in the French “Mercure,” his “Reflections on Telemachus,” which served to introduce him to La Motte and Fontenelle, who became afterwards not only the objects of his constant esteem, but of a species of idolatry which exposed him to the ridicule of the wits of his day. There are no memoirs of his education and early progress, but it appears that he was treasurer of the church of Nantes, and afterwards archdeacon and canon of St. Malo. For some time he lived in intimacy with cardinal Tencin, and visited Rome with him, but having no inclination to a life of dependence, whatever advantages it might bring, he returned to Paris, and employed his time in literary pursuits. His irreproachable conduct and agreeable manners procured him very general esteem as a man, but as a writer he never ranked high in the public opinion, and although very ambitious of a seat in the French academy, he did not reach that honour until 1761. About six years afterwards he retired to his native place, where he died in March 1770. His principal works were, I. “Essais de litterature et de morale,” 4 vols. 12mo, which have been often reprinted and translated into other languages. These essays, although the author was neither gifted with the elegance of La Bruyere, nor with the penetration of La Rochefoucault, contain much good sense and knowledge of books and men. 2. “Panegyriques ties Saints,” a work feebly written, but to which he prefixed some valuable reflections on eloquence. It was in this work he incurred the displeasure of Voltaire. He in general disliked the poetry of his country, and had not only the courage and imprudence to say that he thought it in general monotonous, but that he was unable to read even the “Henriade” of Voltaire without yawning. Voltaire resented this in a satire, entitled “Le Pauvre Diable,” but afterwards became reconciled to the abbe. 3. “Memoires pour servir a l'histoire de Messieurs de la Motte et de Fontenelle,” Amst. 1761. He was a contributor also to the “Journal des Savans,” and to the “Journal Chretien,” which was established in defence of religion against the infidel writers of that time.

, an eminent canonist, was a native of Sicily, and commonly called Panormitanus, from his being at the head of a Benedictine abbey in Palermo, and afterwards archbishop of that city. He was born probably towards the close of the fourteenth century, some say in 1336, and became one of the most celebrated canonists of his time. He was present at the council of Basil, and had a considerable hand in the proceedings there against pope Eugenius; in recompense for which service he was made a 1 cardinal by Felix V. in 1440. He was afterwards obliged, by the orders of the king of Arragon his master, to return to his archbishopric, where he died of the plague in 1445. There is a complete edition of his works, Venice, 1617, in 9 vols. fol. Dupin mentions as his principal work a treatise on the council of Basil, which was translated into French about the end of the seventeenth century by Dr. Gerbais, of the Sorbonne, and printed at Paris.

In July 1527, Tunstall attended cardinal Wolsey in his pompous embassy into France; and in 1529 was one of the English ambassadors employed to negociate the treaty of Camhray. It was on his return from this last place, that he exerted himself to suppress Tyndale’s edition of the New Testament, by means which will be noticed in our account of that celebrated reformer and martyr. Even in this matter, bishop Burnet observes that judicious persons discerned the moderation of Tunstall, who would willingly put himself to a considerable expence in burning the books of the heretics, but had too much humanity to be desirous, like many of his brethren, to burn the heretics themselves.

When the great question of Henry VIII. 's divorce was agitated, Tti install at first favoured the divorce, and even wrote on that side of the question; but, having reason afterwards to change his sentiments, he espoused the queen’s cause, which many of the Roman catholics then and now consider as the conscientious side. When Henry took the title of Supreme head of the church of England, Tunstall recommended it both in his injunctions, and in a sermon preached at Durham, although he had, in 1531, solemnly protested against that title. He also vindicated the king’s supremacy, in 1538, in a sermon preached before his majesty, upon Palm-sunday, in which he zealously condemned the usurpations of the bishop of Rome. In 1535, he was one of the commissioners for taking the valuation of ecclesiastical benefices, in order to settle the first fruits and tenths. And in 1537, the king commanded him, on account of his learning and judgment, to peruse cardinal Pole’s book of “Ecclesiastical Union,” which occasioned some letters between the cardinal and Tunstall, particularly, a severe one written jointly by him and by Stokesley, bishop of London, against the pope’s supremacy. The year following, he was appointed to confer concerning the reformation, with the ambassadors of the German protestant princes; but matters were not yet ripe for an alteration in this kingdom. In 1541 a new edition of the English Bible was revised by him and Nicholas Heath, bishop of Rochester. Attached as he was to popery, he appears to have taken in many cases a calm and judicious view of the questions agitated in Henry VIII.'s reign, and this led him to concur in some of the measures which were favourable to the reformation; and in that of Edward VI. he yielded obedience to every law which was enacted, and to all the injunctions, at the same time that he protested, in his place in parliament, against the changes in religion, which, Burnet says, he thought he might with a good conscience submit to and obey, though he could not consent to them. In the question of the corporal presence, he adhered to the popish opinion, and wrote on the subject.

, otherwise named Hitchins, one of the first publishers of the Holy Scriptures in English, was born in 1500, about the borders of Wales, in what county is not mentioned. He was brought up from a child in grammar, logic, and philosophy at Oxford, for the most part in St. Mary Magdalen’s hall, where there is still a painting of him, but accounted an indifferent performance. Here he imbibed the doctrine of Luther, and privately taught it to some of the junior fellows of Magdalen college, and to other scholars. His behaviour was such, at the same time, as gained him a high reputation both for morals and learning, so that he was admitted a canon of cardinal Wolsey’s new college, now Christ-church. But as he made his opinions too public to remain here in safety, and, according to Tanner and Wood, was ejected, he retired to Cambridge, where he pursued his studies, and took a degree. After some time he went and lived at Little Sudbury, in Gloucestershire, with sir John Welch, knight, who had a great esteem for him, and appointed him tutor to his children. Here he embraced every opportunity to propagate the new opinions. Besides preaching frequently in and about Bristol, he engaged in disputation with many abbots and dignified clergymen, whom he met at sir John’s table, on the most important points of religion, which he explained in a way to which they had not been accustomed, and by references to the Scriptures, which they scarcely dared to search. Unable to confute him, they complained to the chancellor of the diocese, who dismissed him after a severe reprimand, accompanied with the usual threatenings against heresy.

, one of those pontiffs who deserve some notice on account of his learning, and attention to the interests of literature, was born at Florence in 1568. His family name was Maffei Barbarini, and his family was of the most ancient and honourable. His father dying while Maffei was an infant, he was entrusted to the care of his uncle Francis, a prothonotary of the Roman court, who sent for him to Rome, and placed him for education in the Jesuits’ college. Here he made great proficiency in classical studies under Tursellino and Benci, and was particularly distinguished for his taste for poetry. But as his uncle intended him for active life, he took him from his beloved studies, and sent him to Pisa, where he might acquire a knowledge of the law, so neoessary then to those who would rise to preferment; and here he applied with such diligence, that in his twentieth year the degree of doctor was deservedly conferred upon him. He then returned to Rome, where his uncle received him with the greatest kindness, and having always treated him as his son, bequeathed him, on his death, which happened soon after, a handsome fortune, as his sole heir. His first patron was cardinal Farnese, and by his interest and his own talents he soon passed through the various gradations of preferment which led, in 1606, to the rank of cardinal, bestowed on him by Paul V. In 1623, while cardinal legate of Bologna, he was elected pope, and took the name of Urban VIII. It is not our intention to detail the historical events in which he was concerned. The errors in his government, which were fewer than might have been expected in one so zealous for the church, arose from two circumstances, his early attachment to the Jesuits, and his nepotism, or family partiality. The latter was so powerful, that he bestowed on his relations red hats and temporal employments with a very liberal hand, and often entrusted the management of affairs to them; and the chief errors of his pontificate were imputed to them by the candid, although he only was blamed by the people at large. As a mjjn of learning, and a patron of learned merr, he has generally been praised; but he was no antiquary, and was justly censured for having destroyed some Roman antiquities, which the barbarous nations had spared when masters of Rome; and this gave occasion to the famous pasquinade, “Quod non fecerunt Barbari, fecerunt Barherini.” He wrote many Latin poems in an elegant style, of which an edition was published at Paris in 1642, fol. and a very beautiful one at Oxford, in 1726, 8vo, edited by Joseph Brown, M. A. of Queen’s college, and afterwards provost of that college, with a life and learned notes. Urban’s patronage of learned men was very liberal, and he received those of all nations with equal respect. Among others he extended his patronage to Ciampolo, Cesarini, Herman Hugo, and to Dempster and Barclay, two learned Scotchmen. The latter has celebrated him in his “Argenis” under the name of Ibburranis, the transposition of Barberini. Urban published a remarkable edition of the Romish breviary, aud several bulls and decrees which are in “Cherubini bullarium.” Among the most noticeable is that which abolishes the order of female Jesuits, and certain festivals; and others which relate to image worship; those by which, in compliance with the Jesuits, he condemns Jansenius; and that by which the title of eminence was conferred upon the cardinal-legates, the three ecclesiastical electors, and the grand master of Malta. Among his foundations was the college “De propaganda fide.” In the article of cardinals he was profuse, for he created no less than seventy-four. He died July 29, 1644, and was buried in St. Peter’s, in the stately tomb erected by his own orders by the celebrated Bernini.

, an eminent classical scholar and antiquary, was the illegitimate son of a commander of the order of Malta, of the Ursin family, and was born at Rome Dec. 2, 1529. His education would probably have been neglected, as his mother and himself were turned out of doors by the unnatural father, and were in great poverty, had not some early appearance of talents recommended him to the notice of a canon of the Lateran, Gentilio Delfini, who took him under his protection, and instructed him in classical literature; after which, by this benevolent patron’s interest, he obtained considerable preferment in the church of St. John of Lateran. His talents afterwards made him be taken into the service of the cardinals Ranutius and Alexander Farnese, who rewarded him liberally; and by this means an opportunity was afforded him of collecting a great number of books and ancient manuscripts, and employing them for the benefit of literature. He was in habits of correspondence with the most eminent literary characters of Italy, and he contributed much valuable assistance to the authors of that period. He had attained to great skill in discovering the antiquity and value of Mss., which he seems to have considered as an important secret. Cardinal Frederic Borromeo, being once in his company, requested Ursinus to point out from a book that lay before them, the rules by which he distinguished ancient from modern manuscripts; but he immediately shut the book, and turned the discourse. He died at Rome Jan. 18, 1600, at the age of seventy. He was author of several learned works, as “De Familiis Romanis;” and an Appendix to Ciaconio’s treatise “De Triclinio.” He also published notes oti Sallust, Cecsar, Livy, and most of the Roman historians, the writers de Re Rustica, Cicero, &c. He also caused engravings to be made of a large collection of statues, busts, and other monuments of antiquity, and published them under the title of “Imagines et Elogia Virorum illustrium et eruditorum ex antiquis lapidibus et numismatibus expressa, cum annotationibus Fulvii Ursini.” Mr. Pinkerton, however, says that this work is not to be depended on, and prefers that of Canini, which is better, although far from perfect. Ursinus, in order to keep together the books which, with great labour and at vast expence, he had accumulated, bequeathed them to the Vatican. Castalio published a Life of Ursinus, at Rome, 1657, 8vo. In his will, which is appended to this Life, be bequeaths two thousand crowns to Delfini, bishop of Camenuo, probably a near relation of his early patron.

In the beginning of 1640 he came into England with his family, intending (as before) to return in a year or two at farthest. Soon after his arrival he went to Oxford for the more convenience of pursuing his studies: but these were unhappily interrupted by the urgent necessity of the times, which put him upon writing some pieces that were published at Oxford in 1641, on the subject of episcopacy: These were, 1. “The Judgment of Dr. Reynolds concerning the original of Episcopacy defended.” 2. “The Original of Bishops, or a chorographical and-historical disquisition touching the Lydian and proconsular Asia, and the seven metropolitan churches contained therein.” The design of this treatise is to prove, from Acts xix. 17, supported by Rev. ii. 1. and confirmed by ecclesiastical history, that bishops and metropolitans were instituted by the apostles; meaning only with regard to their superiority in degree; for he did not hold episcopacy to be a superior order to presbytery. He also endeavours to prove that the bishop of Ephesus was not only the metropolitan of the proconsular Asia, but the primate, or exarch, of all the provinces that were comprehended within the compass of the whole Asian diocese; and that he acted suitably to the patriarchal jurisdiction, which was in effect conferred upon him, In the prosecution of the argument he shews, 1. That the stars described in the Revelations are the angels of the seven churches. 2. That these angels were the several bishops of those churches, and not the whole college of presbyters. 3. That each of these seven churches was at that time a metropolis. 4. That these bishops were ordained by the apostles as constant permanent officers in the church, and so in a sortjwe (Tivino, not to be dispensed with except in cases of necessity. These tracts were printed, with others on the same subject, under the title “Certain brief Treatises,” &c. Oxf. 1641, 4to. It was about this, time also that he drew up his treatise on “The Power of the Prince and the Obedience of the Subject,” which, as we have mentioned in our account of his grandson, James Tyrrell, was published after the restoration. Archbishop Usher was a man of too much note, and of too high a station, not to. be < deeply involved in and affected with the succeeding troubles. He is charged by some writers with having advised the king to consent to the bill against the earl of Stratford, but is cleared by others; and Dr. Parr tells us, that when the primate lay extremely ill, and expected death at St. Donate’s castle in 164-5, he asked his grace concerning it, who flatly denied it, and said it was wrongfully laid to his charge; for, that he neither advised nor approved it. In the rebellion in Ireland he was plundered of everything except his library and some furniture in his house at Drogheda, whence the library was conveyed to England. On this the king conferred on him the bishopric of Carlisle, to be holden in commendam; the revenues of which, however, were reduced to almost nothing by the Scots and English armies quartering upon it. When all the lands belonging to the English bishoprics were seized by the parliament, they voted him a pension of 400l. per annum; which yet he never received above once or twice. It is said that he was invited into France by cardinal Richelieu, with a promise of the free exercise of his religion, and a considerable pension; and likewise by the States of Holland, who offered him the place of honorary professor at Leyden. Dr. Smith, one of his biographers, seems to doubt these facts, especially the first. But Dr. Parr thinks it not unlikely, from an instance of respect which Richelieu had before shewn to the archbishop, by sending him, in return for a copy of the “Antiquity of the British Churches,” which the author had presented to his eminence, a letter of much kindness and esteem, accompanied with a gold medal, which Dr. Bernard says “is still preserved.” It was in possession of the Tyrrell family in 1738, and was then exhibited to the society of antiquaries. The date is 1631. In 1642 the archbishop removed to Oxford, not lon before the king came thither, and preached every Sunday at some of the churches, principally All Saints. In 1643 he was nominated one of the assembly of divines at Westminster, but refused to sit among them: and this, together with some of his sermons at Oxford, in which he had spoke against their authority, giving offence to the parliament, they ordered his library to be seized, and it would have been sold, had not Dr. Featly, who sat among those divines while his heart was with the church and king, obtained it by means of Mr. Selden for his own use, and so secured it to the right owner, or at least the greater part, but some valuable articles were stolen, and never recovered. In 1644 he published at Oxford his valuable edition of “Polycarpi et Ignatii Epistolae.”

Usher left his library, being the chief part of his property, as a portion to his only daughter, who had been the mother of a numerous offspring. It was first bought by the officers and soldiers of Cromwell’s army in Ireland, and lodged in Dublin-castle, where it lay, though not without being much pillaged, till the restoration; which bringing it into the possession of king Charles II. he gave it, according to the primate’s first intention, to Dublincollege, where it now remains. This, in truth, had been the primate’s first intention; but, upon the loss of every thing else except his books, he was compelled to consider the necessities of his family, his daughter having before had nothing from him except some pieces of gold presented to him by Mr. Selden’s executors and other pqrsons of quality. The library consisted of ten thousand volumes printed and manuscript, and cost the primate many thousand pounds. Both the king of Denmark and cardinal Mazarine offered a good price for it by their agents here; but the executors were forbidden, by an order from Oliver and his council, to sell it to any one without his consent; so it was at last bought by the soldiers and officers of the then army in Ireland, who, out of emulation to the former noble action of queen Elizabeth’s army, were incited by some men of public spirit to the like performance, and they had it for much less than the real worth, or what had been offered for it before by the agents above mentioned. They had also with it all the manuscripts which were not of his own hand-writing, and a choice though not numerous collection of ancient coins. But, when this library was carried over into Ireland, the usurper and his son, who then commanded in chief there, would not bestow it upon the college, lest perhaps the gift should not appear so considerable there as it would do by itself; and therefore they gave out that they intended it for a new college or hall which they said they intended to build and endow. But it proved that, as these were not times, so they were not persons capable of any such noble or pious work; and this library lay in the castle of Dublin till Cromwell’s death; and, during the anarchy and confusion that followed, the rooms where it was kept being left open, many of the books, and most of the best manuscripts, were stolen away, or else embezzled by those that were intrusted with them.

, or Valeriano Bolzam, an ingenious and learned Italian, was born at Belluno, in the state of Venice, about 1477. He lost his father at nine years of age, and was reduced with his mother and brethren to great poverty, which so retarded his studies that he was fifteen years old before he learned to read; but his uncle Urbanus Bolzanius (see vol. VI. p. 36), who was afterwards preceptor in the Greek language to Leo X. took him under his protection, and had him liberally educated. He studied the Latin and Greek tongues under Valla and Lascaris; and made so wonderful a progress, that he was accounted one of the most learned men of his age. Going to Rome under the pontificate of Julius II. he became the favourite of John de Medicis (afterwards Leo X.), who committed to his care the conduct and instruction of two nephews; and the cardinal Julius de Medicis, who entered upon the pontificate in 1523, under the name of Clement VII. shewed him the same regard. He offered him first the bishopric of Justinople, and then that of Avignon; but Valerianus refused them both, being fully satisfied with the place of apostolic notary. He was in imminent danger, when Rome was taken in 1527; and the year after retired to Belluno, for the sake of that tranquillity which he had never found at court. Yet he suffered himself to be drawn from his retirement by Hypolite de Medicis, one of his pupils; who, being made a cardinal in 1529, chose him for his secretary. He continued in this office till the death of the cardinal in 1535; and seems to have passed the next two years with his other pupil Alexander de Medicis, who had been made first duke of Florence in 1531. Upon the death of Alexander, in 1537, he retired to Padua; where he spent the remainder of his life among his books, and died in 1558.

, a learned prelate, was born April 7, 1531, at Venice, descended from one of the best families in that city. After having made a rapid progress in his studies, he was admitted among the Savii deir Ordini, a small society of five 5'oung men of the highest rank at Venice, who had access to the college where affairs relative to the republic were debated, that they might be trained up to the science of government. Valerio took a doctor’s degree in divinity and in canon law, became professor of philosophy at Venice, 1558, and having afterwards chosen the ecclesiastical profession, was appointed bishop of Verona, on the resignation of his uncle, cardinal Bernardo Naugerio, 1565. He discharged the duties of the episcopal station with great prudence, and to the edification of his diocese, and formed a friendship with St. Charles Borromeo. Pope Gregory XIII. created him cardinal, 1583, invited him to Rome, and placed him at the head of several congregations. Valerio acquired universal esteem by his skill in public affairs, his learning and virtue. He died at Rome, May 24, 1606, aged 75, and although so advanced, his death is supposed to have been hastened by chagrin, occasioned by the interdiction under which pope Paul V. had laid the republic of Venice. This learned bishop left several excellent works: the most known are, “The Rhetoric of a Preacher,” “De Rhetoric* Ecclesiastica libri tres,” Venice, 1574, 8vo, composed by the advice and according to the plan of his intimate friend, St. Charles Borromeo. This was so popular as to be printed eight times in the author’s life, besides being translated into French, of which there is an edition so late as 1750, 12mo, nor, say the French writers, can the study of it be too strongly recommended to young ecclesiastics. His other works are on subjects of philosophy and history. In 1719, appeared in 4to, a work entitled “De cautione adhibenda in edendis Libris,” which contains a complete list of Augustine Valerio’s other works both printed and ms.

Rubens, discovering in his pupil an amiable temper joined to the most promising talents, took a pleasure in cultivating both, by not concealing from him any part of that knowledge which he had himself attained by long experience. Vandyck was yet young when he was capable of executing pictures, which astonished, as much from the facility with which they were painted, as the general knowledge which reigned throughout the whole. Rubens, at this time, gave him two pieces of advice; the first was, to devote himself to portraits, in which he foresaw he would excel; and the second to make the tour of Italy, where he would have an opportunity of extending his studies. Vandyck accordingly, after making Rubens presents of two or three historical paintings, and a portrait of that artist’s wife, esteemed one of his best, set out for Italy, and made his first residence at Genoa, where he painted many excellent portraits. From thence he went to Venice, where he so deeply imbibed the tints of Titian, that he is allowed to approach nearer to the carnations of that master than even Rubens. He then went to Rome and lived splendidly, avoiding the low conversation of his countrymen, and was distinguished by the appellation of the Pittore Cavalieresco. Soon after his arrival there, he had an opportunity of exercising his abilities upon the portrait of cardinal Bentivoglio, which is justly esteemed the mostiperfect of the kind that ever came from the pencil of this- artist. While at Rome he received an invitation to Palermo, and there he painted prince Philibert of Savoy, the viceroy, and a paintress Angosciola (see Angosciola, vol. II.) then at the age of ninety-one. But the plague soon drove him from Sicily, and he returned to Genoa, where he had gained the highest reputation, and left many considerable works in the Balbi, Durazzo, and other palaces.

, an artist, though better known as the biographer of his profession, was born at Arezzo, in 1512, and was taught the rudiments of drawing by his father, and the first principles of painting by William of Marseilles, a Frenchman, and a painter on glass; but being taken to Florence by cardinal da Cortona, he improved himself under Michael Angelo, Andrea del Sarto, and other eminent masters. By the cardinal he was introduced into the Medici family, but in 1527, when they were driven from Florence, he returned to his native city. Finding an epidemic disease prevailing there, he spent his time in the surrounding country, improving himself by painting subjects of devotion for the farmers. His father unfortunately died of the contagion, and left a young family unprovided for. Vasari, to contribute more effectually to their support, quitted the uncertain profession of a painter, and applied himself to the more lucrative trade of a goldsmith. In 1529, the civil war, which then existed at Florence, obliged the goldsmiths’ company to remove to Pisa: and there, receiving commissions to paint some pictures both in oil and in fresco, he was induced to resume his former profession, and afterwards through life met with encouragement, that left him neither motive nor desire to change. The dukes of Florence and other distinguished persons were his liberal patrons, and he was constantly employed in works both profitable and honourable to himself.

In 1544, by the friendship of PaulJovius, he was recommended to make designs and paint a hall for the cardinal Farnese, in Rome. While he was executing this work, he attended the cardinal’s evening parties, which were frequented by men of genius. At one of these parties, Jovius, speaking of his own museum, arranged and embellished with inscriptions and portraits of illustrious men, said, “that it had always been his desire to add to it, and make his book of eulogiums more complete, by a treatise on the celebrated artists, from Cimabue down to his own time;” and enlarged upon the subject with much general information. The cardinal then turned to Vasari, and asked him “if he did not think that subject would make a fine work?” Vasari concurred with his eminence, but added, that “it would require the assistance of an artist to collate the materials, and arrange them in their proper order: for although Jo?ius displayed great knowledge in his observations, yet he had not been equally accurate in the arrangement of his facts.” “You can then,” replied the cardinal, “give him assistance, which will be doing an essential service to the arts.” To pay a proper deference to so flattering an opinion, he collected such materials as he thought necessary to the plan then suggested: and the information he contributed was drawn up so much to Jovius’s satisfaction, that he recommended him to enlarge upon it, and make a more complete work, alleging his own want of leisure and capacity to do justice to such an undertaking. Vasari, with reluctance, consented; and with his own industry, and some assistance from others, he fulfilled his task; and, in 1550, published his work in 2 vols, entitled “Vite de piu eccellenti Pittori, Scultori, e Architetti.” In 1571 he reprinted it in 3 vols. 4to, with portraits cut in wood, and with the addition of his own life to the fifty-fifth year of his age. The subsequent editions are, that of Bottari, Rome, 1759 60, 3 vols. 4to, and those printed at Leghorn, 1767 72, 7 vols. 4to; at Sienna, 1791—98, 11 vols. 8vo. There is likewise one printed at Bologna in 1647, 3 vols. 4to, but not esteemed a good one.

, an elegant French writer, was born of an ancient family at Chamberry in 1585. His father Antoine Favre, or Antony Faber, was first president of the senate of Chamberry, and published several learned works upon law-subjects. (See Favre.) Vaugelas was sent to the court very young, and there spent his whole life. He was gentleman in ordinary, and afterwards chamberlain, to the duke of Orleans, whom he attended in all his retreats out of the kingdom, and was afterwards governor to the children of prince Thomas. He had a pension from the crown early settled on him; but it never was paid him till Cardinal Richelieu employed the French academy upon forming a dictionary of the language. On that occasion the academy represented to the cardinal, that the only way to have one well executed, was to commit the chief management of it to Vaugelas. His pension was then re-established and punctually paid. But, although he had other advantages besides this, and a handsome patrimony from his father, and was not a man of luxury or extravagance, yet when he died in 1605, he did not leave enough to satisfy his creditors.

Such was his reputation that he began to distrust the sincerity of the public, and seems to have suspected that there was more fashion than real opinion in the extravagance of their applause. This engaged him in a dangerous experiment, the publication of a poem without his name. But whether the number of his productions had gradually formed the public taste to his own standard of excellence, or that his fertile and irregular genius was singularly adapted to the times, the result of this trial confirmed the former judgment of the public; and his “Soliloquies to God,” though printed under a feigned name, attracted as much notice, and secured as many admirers, as any of his former productions. Emholdened probably by this success, he dedicated his “Corona Tragica,” a poem on the queen of Scots, to pope Urban VIII, who had himself composed an epigram on the subject. Upon this occasion he received from that pontiff a letter written in his own hand, and the degree of doctor of theology. Such a flattering tribute of admiration sanctioned the reverence in which his name was held in Spain, and spread his fame through every catholic country. The cardinal Barberini followed him with veneration in the streets; the king would stop to gaze at such a prodigy; the people crowded round him whereever he appeared; the learned and the studious thronged to Madrid from every part of Spain to see this phoenix of their country, this “monster of literature;” and even Italians, no extravagant admirers in general of poetry that is not their own, made pilgrimages from their country for the sole purpose of conversing with Lope. So associated was the idea of excellence with his name, that it grew in common conversation to signify any thing perfect in its kind; and a Lope diamond, a Lope day, or a Lope woman, became fashionable and familiar modes of expressing their good qualities.

a Dutch painter of great eminence, was descended of a considerable family in Leyden, and born in 1556. He was carefully educated by his parents in the belles lettres, and at the same time learned to design of Isaac Nicolas. In his fifteenth year, when the civil wars obliged him to leave his country, he retired to Liege, finished his studies, and there gave the first proofs of his talents. He was particularly known to cardinal Groosbeck, who gave him letters of recommendation when he went to Rome, where he was entertained by cardinal Maduccio. His genius was so active, that he at once applied himself to philosophy, poetry, mathematics, and painting, the latter under Frederico Zuchero. He acquired an excellence in all the parts of painting, especially in the knowledge of the chiar-oscuro, and he was the first who explained to the Flemish artists the principles of lights and shadows, which his disciple Rubens afterwards carried to so great a degree of perfection. He lived at Rome seven years, during which time he executed several fine pictures; and then, passing into Germany, was received into the emperor’s service. After this the duke of Bavaria and the elector of Cologn employed him: but all the advantages he got from the courts of foreign princes could not detain him there. He had a desire to return into the Low Countries, of which Alexander Farnese, prince of Parma, was then governor. He drew the prince’s picture in armour, which confirmed his reputation in the Netherlands. After the death of that prince, Venius returned to Antwerp, where he adorned the principal churches with his paintings. The archduke Albert, who succeeded the prince of Parma in the government of the Low Countries, sent for him to Brussels, and made him master of the mint, a place which took up much of his time; yet he found spare hours for the exercise of his profession. He drew the archduke and the infanta Isabella’s portraits at large, which were sent to James L of Great Britain: and, to shew his knowledge of polite learning, as well as of painting, he published several treatises, which he embellished with cuts of his own designing. Among these are, 1. “Horatii Emblemata,” Antwerp, 1607, 4to, often reprinted, but this edition has the best plates. 2. “Amoris divini emblemata,” Antwerp, 1615, 4to. 3. “Amorum emblemata,” ibid. 1608, 4to. 4. “Batavorum cum Romanis bellum, &c.” ibid. 1612, 4to, &c. Venius died at Brussels, 1634, in his seventy-eighth year. He had two brothers; Gilbert, who was an engraver; and Peter, a painter; but his greatest honour was his having Rubens for a pupil.

, abbot of St. Cyran, famous in the seventeenth century as a controversial writer, was born in 1581, at Bayonne, of a good family. He pursued his studies at Lou vain, and formed a strict friendship with the celebrated Jansenius, his fellow student. In 1610 he was made abbot of St. Cyran, on the resignation ( of Henry Lewis Chateignier de la Roche-Posai, bishop of Poitiers. The new abbot read the fathers and the councils with Jansenius, and took great pains to impress him with his sentiments and opinions, as well as a number of divines with whom he corresponded; nor did he leave any means untried to inspire M. le Maitre, M. Arnauld, M. d'Andilly, and several more disciples whom he had gained, with the same opinions. This conduct making much noise, cardinal Richelieu, who was besides piqued that the abbot of St. Cyran refused to declare himself for the nullity of the marriage between Gaston, duke of Orleans, the brother of Louis the thirteenth, and Margaret of Lorraine, confined him at Vincennes, May 11, 1638. After this minister’s death, the abbot regained his liberty, but did not enjoy it long, for he died at Paris, October 18, 1643, aged sixtytwo, and was buried at St. Jacques du Haut-Pas, where his epitaph may be seen on one side of the high altar. His works are, 1. “Lettres Spirituelles,” 2 vols. 4to, or 8vo, reprinted at Lyons, 1679, 3 vols. 12mo, to which a fourth has been added, containing several small tracts written by M. de St. Cyran, and printed separately. 2. “Question Royale,” in which he examines in what extremity a subject might be obliged to save the life of his prince at the expence of his own, 1609, 12mo. This last was much talked of, and his enemies drew inferences and consequences from it, which neither he nor his disciples by any means approved 3. “L‘Aumône Chrétienne, ou Tradition de l’Eglise touchant la charité envers les Pauvres,” 2 vols. 12mo. The second part of this work is entitled “L'Aumône ecclesiastique.” M. Anthony le Maitre had a greater share in the last-mentioned book than the abbot of St. Cyran. He published some other works of a similar cast, but his last appears to deserve most notice. It is entitled “Petrus Aurelius,” -and is a defence of the ecclesiastical hierarchy against the Jesuits. He was assisted in this book by his nephew, the abbé de Baicos, and it seems to have done him the most honour of all his works, though it must be acknowledged, says the abbé L'Avocat, that if all the abuse of the Jesuits, and the invectives against their order, were taken from this great volume, very little would remain. L'Avocat is also of opinion that M. Hallier’s small tract on the same subject, occasioned by the censure of the clergy in 1635, is more solid, much deeper, and contains better arguments, than any that are to be found in the great volume of “Petrus Aurelius.” The first edition of this book is the collection of different parts, printed between 1632 and 1635, for which the printer Morel was paid by the clergy, though it was done without their order. The assembly held in 1641 caused an edition to be published in 1642, which the Jesuits seized; but it was nevertheless dispersed on the remonstrances of the clergy. This edition contains two pieces, “Confutatio collections locorum quos Jesuits compilarunt, &c.” that are not in the third edition, which was also published at the clergy’s expence in 1646. But to this third edition is prefixed the eulogy, written by M. Godeau on the author, by order of the clergy, and the verbal process which orders it; whence it appears that their sentiments respecting him, differed widely from those of the Jesuits and their adherents. The abbot de St. Cyran was a man of much simplicity in his manners and practice: he told his beads; he exorcised heretical books before he read them: this simplicity, however, concealed a great fund of learning, and great talents for persuasion, without which he could never have gained so many illustrious and distinguished disciples, as Mess. Arnauld, le Maltre de Sacy, Arnauld d'Andilly, and the other literati of Port Royal, who all had the highest veneration for him, and placed the most unbounded confidence in him. But whatever talents he might have for speaking, persuading, and directing, he certainly had none for writing; nor are his books answerable to his high reputation.

From this time to 1541, Vergerius appeajrs to have remained in Italy. In this last mentioned year, he was commissioned to go to the diet at Worms, where he made a speech on the unity and peace of the church, which he printed and circulated, and in which he principally insisted on the arguments against a national council. On his return to Rome, the pope intended to have rewarded his services with a cardinal’s hat, but changed his purpose on hearing it insinuated that a leaning towards Lutheranism was perceptible in him, from his long residence in Germany. The pope, however, was not more offended than Vergerius was surprized at this charge, which he knew to be absolutely groundless; yet this circumstance, probably arising from personal malice or envy, proved ultimately the means of Vergerius’s conversion. With a view to repel the charge of heresy, he now sat down to write a book, the title of which was to be, “Adversus apostatas Germanise,” against the apostates of Germany; but as this led him to a strict investigation of the protestant doctrines, as found in the works of their ablest writers, he found his attachment to popery completely undermined, and rose up from the perusal of the protestant writers with a strong conviction that they were in the right. He then immediately went to confer with his brother, John Baptist Vergerius, bishop of Pola, in Istria, who was exceedingly perplexed at his change of sentiment, but on his repeated entreaties, joined him in examining the disputed points, particularly the article of justification, and the result was, that both prelates soon preached to the people of Istria the doctrines of the reformation, and even dispersed the New Testament among them in the vulgar tongue. The Inquisition, as well as the monks, soon became alarmed at this, and Vergerius was obliged to seek refuge in Mantua, under the protection of cardinal Hercules Gonzaga, who had been his intimate friend; but Gonzaga was after a short time obliged by remonstrances from Rome to withdraw his protection, and he finally went to Padua, and thence to the Grisons, where he preached the gospel for several years, until invited by the duke of Wirtemberg to Tubingen, and there he passed the remainder of his days. In the mean time his brother, the bishop of Pola, died, and, as suspected, by poison, administered by some of those implacable enemies who were also thirsting for Vergerius’s blood. But he was now out of their reach, and died quietly at Tubingen, Oct. 4, 1566. Verged us, after his conversion, wrote a great many treatises, most of them small, against popery and popish writers, the titles of which are to be found in our authorities, but they are all of rare occurrence, owing to their having been suppressed or strictly prohibited by his enemies. Some are in Italian, and some in Latin. A collection of them was begun to be printed at Tubingen in 1563, but one volume only was published, under the title of “Primus tomus operum Vergerii adversus Papatum,” 4to. A valuable defence of Vergerius was published by Schelhorn, in 1760, “Apologia pro P. P. Vergerio adversus loh. Casam. Accedunt Monumenta inedita, et quatuor epistoltE memorabiles,” 4to.

In this fatal conjuncture, and while the war with Spain was yet kept up, anew war was precipitately declared against France; for which no reasonable cause could ever be assigned. It has been said, that the king was hurried into this war, purely from a private motive of resentment in the duke of Buckingham, who, having bfeen in France to bring over the queen, had the confidence to make overtures of love to Anne of Austria, the consort of Lewis XIII.; and that his high spirit was so fired at the repulse he met with on this extraordinary occasion, as to be appeased with nothing less than a war between the two nations. Whatever was the cause, the fleet, which had been designed to have surprised Cadiz, was no sooner returned without success and with much damage, than it was repaired, and the army reinforced for the invasion of France. Here the duke was general himself, and made that unfortunate descent upon the Isle of Rhee, in which the flower of the army was lost. Having returned to England, and repaired the fleet and the army, he was about to sail to the relief of Rochelle, which was then closely besieged by the cardinal Richelieu; and to relieve which the duke was the more obliged, because at the Isle of Rhee he had received great supplies of victuals and some men from that town, the want of both which he laboured under at this time. He was at Portsmouth for this purpose, when he was assassinated by one Felton, on the 23d of August, 1628, in the thirty-sixth year of his age. The particulars of this assassination are well known, being related, at large by lord Clarendon, to whom we refer the reader; but we may subjoin another account, as being circumstantial and curious, and less known. This is given by sir Simonds D'Ewes, in a manuscript life of himself: “August the 23d, being Saturday, the duke having eaten his breakfast between eight and nine o‘clock in the morning, in one Mr. Mason-’ s house in Portsmouth, he was then hasting away to the king, who lay at Reswicke, about five miles distant, to have some speedy conference with him. Being come to the farthef part of the entry leading out of the parlour into the hall of the house, he had there some conference with sir Thomas Frier, a colonel; and stooping down in taking his leave of him, John Felton, gentleman, having watched his opportunity, thrust a long knife, with a white helfc, he had secretly ahout him, with great strength and violence, into his breast, under his left pap, cutting the diaphragm* and lungs, and piercing the very heart itself. The duke having received the stroke, and instantly clapping his right-hand on his sword-hilt, cried out ` God’s wounds! the villain hath killed me.‘ Some report his last words otherwise, little differing for substance from these; and it might have been wished, that his end had not been so sudden, nor his last words mixed with so impious an expression. He was attended by many noblemen and leaders, yet none could see to prevent the stroke. His duchess, and the countess of Anglesey (the wife of Christopher Villiers, earl of Anglesey, his younger brother), being in an upper room, and hearing a noise in the hall, into which they had carried the duke, ran presently into a gallery, that looked down into it $ and there beholding the duke’s blood gush out abundantly from his breast, nose, and mouth (with which his speech, after those his first words, had been immediately stopped), they brake into pitiful outcries, and raised great lamentation. He pulled out the knife himself; and being carried by his servants unto the table, tha,t stood in the same hall, having struggled with death near upon a quarter of an hour, at length he gave up the ghost, about ten o’clock, and lay a long time after he was dead upon the table.”

He was not however fully satisfied with its success, and thought with reason that he might be more usefully employed in publishing some valuable work, not before given to the world. He had examined the libraries of France for this purpose ineffectually, and formed a project of going to Venice, to search the library of St. Mark, to which he knew that cardinal Bessarion had left his numerous manuscripts. He accordingly set out in 1781, under the patronage of the king, who appointed that the expenses of his journey and residence (to which no limits were fixed) should be defrayed by the government. His researches were not fruitless. In that depository, he soon discovered several inedited works of the rhetoricians and philosophers, and especially grammarians, which he deemed worthy of publication, either entire or in extracts; and these form the celebrated collection which was printed the same year, in 2 vols. 4to, under the title of “Anecdota Graeca e regia Parisiensi et e Veneta 8. Marci bibliotheca deprompta,” Venice. Of this some copies were taken off“in folio, and two on vellum. It was however unfortunate that publication followed so hastily on discovery, for Villoison soon found, but found too late, that a considerable proportion of the first volume of these” Anecdota“had already been given to the public. He made however a very important discovery in the library of Mark, of a ms. of Homer, which he judged to be of the 10th century, and consequently anterior by two centuries to the commentator Eustathius. This precious volume, which does not appear to have been before examined, contained the whole Iliad, enriched with the scholia of the most eminent grammarians of antiquity. The margins also were filled with various marks by which these grammarians distinguished the verses of Homer, which they judged to be supposititious, corrupted, or transposed, from those whose genuineness was universally recognized. He immediately prepared an edition of this valuable treasure, which was published in 1788, fol. accompanied by learned prolegomena, and was regarded as one of the most valuable presents made to the literary world during the last century, and every scholar hastened with his congratulations. But, says his biographer,” the satisfaction which this brilliant success must have given to M. de Villoison was not long unmixed. He could not see, without sentiments of pain, the spirit of system abusing his discoveries to attack the glory of the father of poetry: and perverting the critical marks affixed to a great number of verses in the Iliad, in support of the darling position, that parts of this poem, even entire books, were the work of ancient rhapsodists, and the first editors, &c. and the idea that he had unintentionally furnished the basis on which these conjectures were constructed, and the weapons by which their authors pretended to defend them, troubled him so much, that he almost repented of having published his work.“He had advanced but a little way in printing the Iliad, when he yielded to the invitation of the duke and duchess of Saxe-Weimar, who honoured him with their particular esteem, and quitting Venice, repaired to their capital. While here, he formed the collection of critical letters, printed at Zurich in 1783, under the title of” Epistolse Vinarienses, in quihus multa Graecorum scriptorum ioca emendantur ope librorum Ducalis bibliothecte,“4to. Having found in the library of St. Mark a very liberal translation of part of the Old Testament, made by a Jew in the ninth century, he laboured, during his stay at Weimar, to put it into a state fit for publication; and on his return to France in 1784, he remained some time at Strasburgh for the purpose of having it printed there under his own inspection. He soon after set out for Greece, in quest of other ancient Mss.; but after a tour of two years, found nothing of that description. He had made, however, many observations, and intended, with the aid of these, to have composed a history of ancient and modern Greece, For the same purpose he determined on a fresh perusal of all the Greek and Latin authors extant, and as Paris had now become the scene of the revolution, and all its enormities, he removed to Orleans, in the public library of which he executed his extensive plan of reading, and its fruits were fifteen large quarto volumes of extracts and observations, which were to contribute to his history of Greece. He also prepared during his retreat at Orleans, materials for a new edition of Montfaucon’s” Palasographia Graeca," all of which are now in the royal library.

, one of the revivers of literature, was born at Valentia, in Spain, in 1492. He learned grammar and classical learning in his own country, and went to Paris to study logic and scholastic philosophy, the subtleties and futility of which he had soon the good sense to discover, and when he removed from Paris to Louvain, he there published a book against them, entitled “Contra Pseudo-Dialecticos.” At Louvain he undertook the office of a preceptor, and exerted himself with great ability and success in correcting barbarism, chastising the corruptors of learning, and reviving a taste for true science and elegant letters. This so raised his reputation that he was chosen to be preceptor to William de Croy, afterwards archbishop of Toledo, and cardinal, who died in 1521. In July 1517 he was made, though then at Louvain, one of the first fellows of Corpus Christi college, in Oxford, by the founder; his fame being spread over England, as well on account of his great parts and learning as for the peculiar respect and favour with which queen Catherine of Spain honoured him. In 1522 he dedicated his “Commentary upon St. Augustin de Civitate Dei” to HenryVlII; which, says Wood, was so acceptable to that prince, that cardinal Wolsey, by his order, invited him over to England; but this must be a mistake, for in a letter of the cardinal’s to the university in 1519, mention is made of his being then reader of rhetoric, and that by the cardinal’s appointment. He was also employed to teach the princess Mary polite literature and the Latin tongue: it was for her use that he wrote “De Ratione studii puerilis,” which he addressed to his patroness queen Catharine, in 1523; as he did the same year “De institutione fceminae Christiance,” written by her command. During his stay in England he resided a good deal at Oxford, where he was admitted doctor of law, and read lectures in that and the belles lettres. King Henry conceived such an esteem for him, that iie accompanied his queen to Oxford, in order to be present at the lectures which he read to the princess Mary, who resided there: yet, when Vives afterwards presumed to speak and write against the divorce of Catherine, Henry considered his conduct as criminal, and confined him six months in prison. Having obtained his liberty, he returned to the Netherlands, and resided at Bruges, where he married, and taught the belles lettres as long as he lived. He died in 1537, or, according toThuanus, 1541.

, the greatest literary character which France produced in the last century, was born at Paris, February 20, 1694. His father, Francis Arouet, was “ancien notaire du Chatelet,” and treasurer of the chamber of accounts; his mother, MaryMargaret Daumart. At the birth of this extraordinary man, who lived to the age of eighty-five years and some months, there was little probability of his being ‘reared, and for a considerable time he continued remarkably feeble. In his earliest years he displayed a ready wit and a sprightly imagination: and, as he said of himself, made verses before he was out of his cradle. He was educated under Father Por6, in the college of Louis the Great; and such was his proficiency, that many of his essays are now existing, which, though written when he was between twelve and fourteen, shew no marks of infancy. The famous Ninon de l’Enclos, to whom this ingenious boy was introduced, left him a legacy of 2000 livres to buy him a library. Having been sent to the equity-schools on his quitting college, he was so disgusted with the dryness of the law, that he devoted himself entirely to the Muses. He was admitted into the company of the abb< Chaulieu, the marquis de la Fare, the duke de Sully, the grand prior of Vendo;ne, marshal Villars, and the chevalier du Bouillon; and caught from them that easy taste and delicate humour which distinguished the court of Louis XIV. Voltaire had early imbibed a turn for satire; and, for some philippics against the government, was imprisoned almost a year in the Bastile. He had before this period produced the tragedy of “Oedipus,” which was represented in 1718 with great success; and the duke of Orleans, happening to see it performed, was so delighted, that he obtained his release from prison. The poet waiting on the duke to return thanks: “Be wise,” said the duke, “and I will take care of you.” “I am infinitely obliged,” replied the young man; “but I intreat your royal highness not to trouble yourself any farther about my lodging or board.” His father, whose ardent wish it was that the son should have been an advocate, was present at one of the representations of the new tragedy: he was affected, even to tears, embraced his son amidst the felicitations of the ladies of the court, and never more, from that time, expressed a wish that he should become a lawyer. About 1720, he went to Brussels with Madam de Rupelmonde. The celebrated Rousseau being then in that city, the two poets met, and soon conceived an unconquerable aversion for each other. Voltaire said one day to Rousseau, who was shewing him “An Ode to Posterity,” “This is a letter which will never reach the place of its address.” Another time, Voltaire, having read a satire which Rousseau thought very indifferent, was advised to suppress it, lest it should be imagined that he “had lost his abilities, and preserved only his virulence.” Such mutual reproaches soon inflamed two hearts already sufficiently estranged. Voltaire, on his return to Paris, produced, in 1722, his tragedy of “Mariamne,” without success. His “Artemira” had experienced the same fate in 1720, though it had charmed the discerning by the excellence of the poetry. These mortifications, joined to those which were occasioned by his principles of imprudence, his sentiments on religion, and the warmth of his temper, induced him to visit England, where he printed his “Henriade.” King George I. and particularly the princess of Wales (afterwards queen Caroline) distinguished him by their protection, and obtained for him a great number of subscriptions. This laid the foundation of a fortune, which was afterwards considerably increased by the sale of his writings, by the munificence of princes, by commerce, by a habit of regularity, and by an ceconomy bordering on avarice, which he did not shake off till near the end of his life. On his return to France, in 1728, he placed the money he carried with him from England into a lottery established by M. Desforts, comptroller-general of the finances; he engaged deeply, and was successful. The speculations of finance, however, did not check his attachment to the belles lettres, his darling passion. In 1730, he published “Brutus,” the most nervous of all his tragedies, which was more applauded by the judges of good writing than by the spectators. The first wits of the time, Fontenelle, La Motte, and others, advised him to give up the drama, as not being his proper forte. He answered them by publishing “Zara,” the most affecting, perhaps, of all his tragedies. His “Lettres Philosophiques,” abounding in bold expressions and indecent witticisms against religion, having been burnt by a decree of the parliament of Paris, and a warrant being issued for apprehending the author in 1733, Voltaire very prudently withdrew; and was sheltered by the marchioness du Chatelet, in her castle of Cirey, on the borders of Champagne and Lorraine, who entered with him on the study of the “System” of Leibnitz, and the “Principia” of Newton. A gallery was built, in which Voltaire formed a good collection of natural history, and made a great many experiments on light and electricity. He laboured in the mean time on his “Elements of the Newtonian Philosophy,” then totally unknown in France, and which the numerous admirers of Des Cartes were very little desirous should be known. In the midst of these philosophic pursuits, he produced the tragedy of “Alzira.” He was now in the meridian of his age and genius, as was evident from the tragedy of “Mahomet,” first acted in, 174-1 but it was represented to the “procureur general” as a performance offensive to religion and the author, by order of cardinal Fleury, withdrew it from the stage. “Merope,” played two years after, 1743, gave an idea of a species of tragedy, of which few models have existed. It was at the representation of this tragedy that the pit and boxes were clamorous for a sight of the author; yet it was severely criticised when it came from the press. He now became a favourite at court, through the interest of madam d'Etoile, afterwards marchioness of Pompadour. Being employed in preparing the festivities that were celebrated on the marriage of the dauphin, he attained additional honours by composing “The Princess of Navarre.” He was appointed a gentleman of the bed-chamber in ordinary, and historiographer of France. The latter office had, till his time, been almost a sinecure; but Voltaire, who had written, under the direction of the count d'Argenson, the “History of the War of 1741,” was employed by that minister in many important negociations from 1745 to 1747; the project of invading England in 1746 was attributed to him and he drew up the king ofFrance’s manifesto in favour of the pretender. He had frequently attempted to gain admittance into the academy of sciences, but could not obtain his wish till 1746 , when he was the first who broke through the absurd custom of filling an inaugural speech with the fulsome adulation of Richelieu; an example soon followed by other academicians. From, the satires occasioned by this innovation he felt so much uneasiness, that he was glad to retire with the marchioness du Chateletto Luneville, in the neighbourhood of king Stanislaus. The marchioness dying in 1749, Voltaire returned to Paris, where his stay was but short* Though he had many admirers, he was perpetually complaining of a cabal combined to filch from him that glory of which he was insatiable. “The jealousy and manoeuvres of a court,” he would say, “are the subject of conversation; there is more of them among the literati.” His friends and relations endeavoured in vain to relieve his anxiety, by lavishing commendations on him, and by exaggerating his success. He imagined he should find in a foreign country a greater degree of applause, tranquillity, and reward, and augment at the same time both his fortune and reputation, which were already very considerable. The king of Prussia, who had repeatedly invited him to his court, and who would have given any thing to have got him away from Silesia, attached him at last to his person by a pension of 22,000 livres, and the hope of farther favour . From the particular respect that was paid to him, his time was now spent in the most agreeable manner; his apartments were under those of the king, whom he was allowed to visit at stated hours, to read with him the best works of either ancient or modern authors, and to assist his majesty in the literary productions by which he relieved the cares of government. But this happiness was soon at an end; and Voltaire saw, to his mortification, when it was too late, that, where a man is sufficiently rich to be master of himself, neither his liberty, his family, nor his country, should be sacrificed for a pension. A dispute which our poet had with Manpertuis, the president of the academy at Berlin, was followed by disgrace . It has been said that the king of Prussia dismissed him with this reproof: “I do not drive you away, because I called you hither; I do not take away your pension, because I have given it to you; I only forbid you my presence.” Not a word of this is true; the fact is, that he sent to the king the key of his office as chamberlain, and the cross of the order of merit, with these verses:

, a French painter, very celebrated in his day, was born at Paris in 1582, and bred up under his father, who was a painter also. He knew so much of his art, and was in such repute at twenty years of age, that Mons. de Saucy, who was going ambassador to Constantinople, took him with him as his painter. There he drew the picture of the grand signer; and, though it was impossible to do it otherwise than by the strength of memory, and from a view of him at the ambassador’s audience, yet it proved a great likeness. Thence he went to Venice; and afterwards, settling himself in Rome, became so illustrious* in his profession, that, besides the favours which he received from pope Urban VIII. and the cardinal his nephew, he was chosen prince of the Roman academy of St. Luke. He staid fourteen years in Italy; and then, in 1627, Lewis XIII. who, in consideration of his capacity, hatl allowed him a pension all the while he was abroad, sent for him borne to work in his palaces. He practised both in portrait and history; and furnished some of the apartments of the Louvre, the palaces of Luxemburg and iSt. Germains, the galleries of cardinal Richelieu, and other public places, with his works. His greatest perfection lay in his colouring, and his brisk and lively pencil; otherwise he was but tery indifferently qualified. He had no genius for grand compositions, was unhappy in his invention, unacquainted with the rules of perspective, and understood but little of the union of colours, or the doctrine of lights and shadows. Yet France was indebted to him for destroying the insipid and barbarous manner which then reigned, and for beginning to introduce a better taste. The novelty of Vouet’s manner, and the kind reception he gave all who came to him, made the French painters, his contemporaries, follow it, and brought him disciples from all parts. Most of the succeeding painters, who were famous in their profession, were bred up under him, as Le Brun, Perrier, Mignard, Le Sueur, Dorigny, Du Fresnoy, and several others, whom he employed as assistants in a great number of pictures he drew, and from his instructions they well knew how to execute his designs. He had the honour also to instruct the king himself in the art of designing.

Accordingly, having introduced our divine at court, the bishop took him with him to Rome, where they were lodged in the palace of cardinal Gabriel a Trejo, the bishop’s brother, who employed Wadding in compiling or composing from the libraries and archives of Rome such arguments and proofs as related to the question before them; and he even visited Assisi, Perugia, Naples, and many other places fr the same purpose. Besides this, at the request of some who had perused what he had brought together with great satisfaction, he was induced to write a history of that legation, not indeed with a view to publication, but having intrusted the ms to some who were of opinion it ought not to be concealed, it was at last published by Maximilian de Bouchorne, at Louvaine, under the title “Legatio Philippi III. et IV. Hispaniae regum, ad sanctissimos D. D. Paulum V- et Gregorium XV. et Urbanum VIII. pro definienda controversia conceptions B. Mariae Virginia; per illustrissimum, &c. Anthonium a Trejo,” &c. Lonvain, 1624, folio.

But while this legation was going on, he removed from the cardinal’s palace, as enjoying there a course of life which he thought incompatible with his profession of Franciscan, and took up his residence at the Franciscan-convent of St. Peter, where he was honoured with the respect of many of the dignified ecclesiastics of Rome; and on the departure of the bishop to Spain, when the care of the legation was entrusted to the duke of Albuquerque, the Spanish ambassador at Rome, Wadding was appointed his assistant, and was, says his biographer, the life of the whole negotiation. He wrote three pamphlets on the subject of the immaculate conception, the titles of which we may be excused from giving. During the time he could spare from the business of this legation, he published an edition of some works of St. Francis, from Mss. in the public libraries, under the title of “Opusculorum St. Francisci Libri tres,” Antwerp, 1623. Before this time he performed what will probably be thought a more acceptable service to theological studies, in undertaking to print Calasio’s Concordance (see Calasio). Calasio died at Rome, wliile Wadding was there, leaving this large work in manuscript. Wadding, who saw its merits, regretted that it should be lost; and being unable of himself to defray the expence of printing, applied to pope Paul V. and to Benignus a Genua, the general of the Franciscans, by whose encouragement the whole was published at Rome in 1621, 4 vols, folio, under the inspection of Wadding, who prefixed to it a learned treatise “De Hebraic lingoos origine, praestaiitia et militate.” Pope Paul dying while the work was in the press, he dedicated it to his successor, Gregory XV. He published also, from original Mss. the works of some other Spanish divines, and wrote a life of Thomasius, patriarch of Constantinople, “Vita B. Petri Thomce Aquitani Carmelitse,” &c. Lyons, 1637, 8vo. But the most labourius effort of editorship was his rescuing from obscurity all the manuscript copies of Duns Scotus’s works, transcribing, collating, and correcting, and afterwards publishing the whole, in twelve folio volumes, at Lyons, in 1639.

In the mean time, his reputation had so much increased that in 1630, he was appointed procurator for the Franciscans at Rome, which he held until 1634. In 1645, he was appointed vice-commissary of his order, which it appears he resigned in 1648. He was also, in 1625, the founder of the college of St. Isidore, for the education of Irish students of the Franciscan order, of which he was the first guardian or head. The expenses of this college, the chapel, library, &c. were defrayed by contributions from the people of Rome, out of regard to the founder. He also persuaded cardinal Ludovisius to found a secular college there for six Irish students; and this, and some other institutions, suggested and promoted by him, he lived to see well endowed. His influence, from whatever cause, appears to have been very great; but the worst, and, as his biographers say, the only stain on his character, is the encouragement he gave to the Irish rebellion and massacre in 1641. He died Nov. 18, 1657, and was buried in the chapel of St. Isidore. Not long before his death he had refused the promotion to the rank of cardinal.

That for which archbishop Wake appears to have been most blamed, was the share he had in a scheme of union between the English and Gallican churches; but in this, as in other parts of his conduct, the blame seems to have arisen principally from misrepresentation, at the same time that we are willing to allow that the scheme itself was a weak one, and never likely to produce any good. The outline of the affair, which is related more at large in the Appendix to the last edition of Mosheim’s History, No IV. is this. In 1717 some mutual civilities had passed between the archbishop and the celebrated ecclesiastical historian Dupin, as men of letters, by means of the rev. Mr. Beauvoir, then chaplain to lord Stair, the English ambassador at Paris. In the course of these civilities, Dupin wrote to the archbishop a Latin letter in Jan. 1718, in which, having congratulated the church of England on the enjoyment of so eminent a prelate for its metropolitan, he took occasion to express his desire for an union between the two churches of England and France, and wished to enter into a correspodence with his grace with that view. The archbishop, in return, after thanking him for his compliment, observed, that it was full time both for himself (Dupin) and the rest of his brethren of the Sorbonne, to declare openly their true sentiments of the superstition and ambition of the court of Rome; that it was the interest of all Christians to unmask that court, and thereby reduce it to those primitive limits and honours which it enjoyed in the first ages of the church. In some farther correspondence, the archbishop explained the belief, tenets, and doctrine of the chuch of England, the manner of its beginning to reform and shake off all foreign power and superstition both in church and state, and its acknowledgment that our Lord Jesus Christ is the only founder, source, and head of the church. In all his letters both to Dupin and others, he insisted constantly on this article, and always maintained the justice and orthodoxy of every individual article of the church of England, without making the least concession towards any approbation of the ambitious pretensions of the church of Rome. Some of the doctors of the Sorbonne readily concurred in this scheme, and Dupin drew up an essay towards an union, which was to be submitted for approbation to the cardinal de Noailles, and then to be transmitted to his grace. This essay, which was called a “Commonitorium,” was read by, and had the approbation of the Sorbonne, and in it was ceded the administration of the sacrament in both kinds, the performing of divine service in the vulgar tongue, and the marriage of the protestant clergy; and the invocation of saints was given up as unnecessary. The project engrossed the whole conversation of the city of Paris, and the Engiish ambassador was congratulated upon it by some great personages at court. The regent duke of Orleans himself, and the abbe Du Bois, minister of foreign affairs, and De Fleury, the attorney general, at iirst seemed to acquiesce, or at least not to interfere; but, after all, no considerate person could expect much from the scheme, which was entirely prevented by the Jesuits, who sounded the alarm, and represented the cardinal de Noailles and his friends the Jansenists as about to make a coalition with the heretics.

, a learned divine in the reign of Henry VIII. was born in the north of England, and educated at the university of Cambridge, whence, after taking his degrees in arts, he went abroad to study the Oriental languages. In a few years he made a considerable progress in the Greek, Hebrew, Chaldaic, and Syriac; and taught those languages both in Paris and in Germany. In 1519 he was Hebrew professor at Louvain, but after holding that office only a few months, he returned home, and became chaplain to Dr. Pace, then dean of St. Paul’s, who recommending him to the king as an able linguist, he was sent to Cambridge, and there honoured with the degree of B. D. which qualified him for ecclesiastical preferments. When the controversy relating to king Henry VIII.'s divorce commenced, Wakefield is said to have been of the queen’s party, and thought the divorce unjustifiable, but was afterwards induced to be of the king’s opinion. Dodd says that the reason he gave for changing sides was the circumstance of prince Arthur’s having consummated the marriage, of which he was not before aware; and Dodd adds, that “as the world is apt to judge the worst of things of this nature, Mr. Wakefield was represented as a mercenary writer, especially by those that maintained the queen’s cause.” We have, however, the evidence of another Roman catholic biographer that the world was not much to blame for its unfavourable opinion. Phillips, in his Life of cardinal Pole, assures us, that a letter is extant, “to Wakefield’s eternal infamy,” addressed by secretary Pace to the king, in which he informs him, that “he had treated with Dr. Wakefield of the divorce, and that the doctor was ready to solve the question, either in the negative or affirmative, just as the king thought proper, and in such a manner as all the divines in England should not be able to make any reply.” This letter is dated 1526. Accordingly he soon after wrote a work in favour of the divorce; and in 1530, the king sent him to Oxford, and made him public professor of Hebrew; by which means he had an opportunity of being more serviceable to his majesty. In 1532, he was made a canon of Wolsey’scollege, and incorporated bachelor of divinity. He appears to have been a lover of learning, and when, in 1536, the lesser monasteries were dissolved, he took care to save from destruction several valuable books and Mss. especially such as were in Greek and Hebrew; and, among others, several curious Mss. in Ramsay-abbey, particularly a Hebrew dictionary, which had been lodged there by Robert Holbeach, a monk of that monastery in the reign of Henry IV. Wakefield died at London, Oct. 8, 1537. He left some learned works, as, 1, “Oratio de laudibus et militate trium linguarum, Arabics, Chaidaicae, et liebraicae, atque id -viaicis qua- ii utfoque Testajnr- io niveniuntur,” 15^4, 4to. Thepmuei w. Wynix lie Worde; and the author complains, that he was obliged to omit his whole third part, because the printer had no Hebrew types. Some few Hebrew and Arabic characters, however, are introduced, but extremely rude, and evidently cut in wood. They are the first of the sort used in England. 2. “Koster Codicis,” &c. the same mentioned by Bale and Pits, with the title “De non ducenda fratria,” and is the book he wrote in favour of king Henry’s -divorce, Lond. 1628, 4to. Tanner and Wood attribute other pieces to him, but they are probably in ms. except “Syntagma de Hebraeorum codicum incorruptione,” 4to, without date; and " Paraphrasis in Hbrum Koheleth (Ecclesiasticen) succincta, clara, et fidelis, 4to.

Warham continued to hold his place of chancellor for the first seven years of Henry VIII. but became weary of it when Wolsey had gained such an ascendancy over the king, as to be intrusted with almost the sole administration of public affairs. Warham, says Burnet, always hated cardinal Wolsey, and weuld never stoop to him, esteeming it below the dignity of his see. Erasmus relates of Warham, that it was his custom to wear plain apparel, and that once when Henry VIII. and Charles V. had an interview, and Wolsey took upon him to publish an order, that the clergy should appear splendidly dressed, in silk or damask, Warham alone, despising the cardinal’s commands, came in his usual cloath-s. One misunderstanding between Warham and Wolsey was about the latter’s having the cross carried before him in the province of Canterbury. Warham as primate of all England, had taken umbrage that Wolsey, who was only archbishop of York, should cause the cross to be carried before him in the presence of Warham, and even in the province of Canterbury, contrary to the ancient custom; which was, that the cross of the see of York should not be advanced in the same province, or ia the same place, with the cross of Canterbury, in acknowledgment of the superiority of the latter see. When Warham expostulated with Wolsey on this subject, he appears to have convinced him of the impropriety of his conduct; but rather than desist from it, and lose a dignity he had once assumed, Wolsey contrived how he might, for the future, have a right to it, wkhout incurring any imputation of acting contrary to rule. And though his being a cardinal did not give him the contested right, he knew that he might assume it with a better grace, if he was invested with the legantine character; and therefore he solicited and obtained it, being made the pope’s legate a latere in November 1515. On this, in the following month, the archbishop Warham resigned the seals, and Wolsey was made lord chancellor in his room. There were subsequently many contests between these two great statesmen, in which Warham generally maintained the dignity and independence of his character with great firmness; but Wolsey, as long ag he remained the king’s favourite, was the more powerful antagonist. Still, notwithstanding his superiority, Warham sometimes was enabled to convince him that he stretched his power too far. Of this we have a remarkable instance. Warham had summoned a convocation of the prelates and clergy of his province to meet at St. Paul’s April 20, 1523, and the cardinal had summoned a convocation of his province of York to meet at Westminster at the same time. But as soon as the convocation of Canterbury met, and were about to proceed to business, the cardinal summoned them to attend him April 22, in a legantine council at Westminster. This extraordinary step gave great offence to the prelates and clergy of the province of Canterbury. They indeed obeyed the summons, ljut when they came to treat of business, the proctors for the clergy observed, that their commissions gave them no authority to treat or vote but in convocation. This objection proved unanswerable, and the cardinal, to his great mortification, was obliged to dismiss his legantine council. When, in 1529, Wolsey was deprived of all his honours, the great seal was again offered to Warham, but being now far advanced in years, and displeased with the general proceedings of the court, he declined the offer. In his last year, 1532, he exhibited two instances of weakness, the one in being, with many others however, imposed upon by the pretended visions of Elizabeth Barton, commonly called the Maid of Kent; the other, in a kind of protest, which he left in the hands of a notary, against all the laws that had been made, or that should thereafter be made, by the present parliament, in derogation of the authority of the pope, or the right and immunities of the church. The design of this private protest against those laws to which he had given his consent in public, is not very obvious. Burnet would suggest, that it was a piece of superstitious penance imposed on him by his confessor, in which case it must be accounted an instance of extreme weakness.

In 1655 he proceeded M. A. and was schoolmaster of Dedham near Colchester in Essex, and about the same time married. He was afterwards made master of the freeschool of Tunbridge in Kent, probably about 1660. While here he published his “Dictionarium Minus; a compendious Dictionary English-Latin, and Latin- English,” Lond. 1662, 4to. In 1671 he was elected superior beadle of law in the university of Oxford, and printer or architypographus to the same university. The same year he published “Cicero against Cataline, in four invective orations; containing the whole manner of discovering that notorious conspiracy,” Lond. 8vo. This was followed by “The History of France under the ministry of cardinal Mazarine, written in Latin by Benjamin Priolo,” Lond. 8vo. In 1678 he published at Oxford, “Considerations concerning free-schools as settled in JJngland,” 8vo; and in 1687, “Christopheri Wasii Senarius, sive de legibus et licentia veterum poetarum,” Oxon. 4to. He wrote also “Structurae Nonianse,” and appears to have been concerned in an edition of sir John Spelman’s life of king Alfred. Hearne says he translated it into Latin, and published it at Oxford in a thin folio, with a commentary by Obadiah Walker, master of University-college. He died Aug. 29, 1690, and appears to have been a man of great parts, and a very considerable sufferer for his loyalty. Hearne, at p. 20 of his discourse, prefixed to the eighth volume of Leland’s Itinerary, stiles him “that eminent philologer,” and makes honourable mention of a son of his of the same name, who was fellow of Corpus Christicollege, Oxford. He died, B. D. 1711, and was buried at Corpus, where 1 is an inscription to his memory.

In 1440, when Henry VI. visited Winchester for the purpose of inspecting the discipline, constitution, and progress of Wykeham’s-school, on the model of which he had begun to found one at Eton, he procured the consent of Waynflete to remove thither, with thirty- five of his scholars and five fellows, whose education our founder superintended until December 21, 1442, when he was appointed provost of that celebrated seminary. On the death of cardinal Beaufort in 1447, he was advanced to the see of Winchester, which he held for the long space of thirty-nine years, during which he amply justified the recommendation of the king, being distinguished “for piety, learning, and prudence.” His highness honoured with his presence the ceremony of his enthronement.

learning, and had a good collection are in the possession of Mr. Nichols. “Remark^' a second edition was published the same year. 4.” Excerpta ex Instruments publicis de Juda;is,“consisting of seven pages small 4to. 5.” Short, but true, tate of facts relative to the Jew-Bill, submitted to the consideration of the Public,“three pages small 4to. 6.” Five plates of Records relating to the Jews, engraven at the expence of Philip Carteret Webb, esq.“7.” The Question whether a Jew born within the British dominions was, before the making the late Act of Parliament, a Person capable by Law to purchase and hold Lands to him and his heirs, fairly stated and considered. To which is annexed an Appendix, containing copies of public records relating to the Jews, and to the plates of Records, by a gentleman of Lincoln’s Inn,“1753, 4to. Printed for Roberts, price 2s. 6d.” A Reply“to this, in the same size and at the same price, written, as it is supposed, by Mr. Grove, author of the Life of cardinal Wolsey, was printed for Robinson, Woodyer, and Swan. 8.” A short Account of some particulars concerning Domesday- Book, with a view to promote its being published,“1756, 4to. 9.” A short Account of Danegeld, with some farther particulars relating to William the Conqueror’s Survey,“1758, 4to. 10.” A State of Facts, in defence of his Majesty’s right to certain Fee-farm rents in the county of Norfolk,“1758, 4to. 11.” Ah Account of a Copper Table, containing two inscriptions in the Greek and Latin tongues; discovered in the year 1732, near Heraclea, in the Bay of Tarentum, in Magna Grecia. By Philip Carteret Webb, Esq. Read at a meeting of the Society of Antiquaries the 13th of December, 1759, and ordered to be printed,“1760, 4to. 12.” Some Observations on the late determination for discharging Mr. Wilkes from his commitment to the Tower of London, for being the author and publisher of a seditious libel called ‘ The North Briton, No. 45.’ By a member of the House of Commons," 1763, 4to. He also printed a quarto pamphlet, containing a number of general warrants issued from the time of the Revolution; and some other political tracts, particularly at the time of the rebellion in 1745, on the close of which his abilities, as solicitor on the trials in Scotland, proved of eminent service lo the public. Mr. Webb was twice married; and by his first lady (who died in 'March 12, 1756) left one son of his own name. His second wife was Rhoda, daughter of John Cotes, esq. of Dodiogton, in Cheshire, by Khoda, one of the daughters and coheirs of sir John Huborn, barr. of Warwickshire; but by her he had no issue.

In 1692 he published, in 8vo, “A Defence of Pluralities,” in which the subject is handled with great ingenuity; and the same year was printed, in two volumes folio, his “Anglia Sacra, sive Collectio Historiarum, partim antiquitus, partim recenter, scriptarum, de Archiepiscopis &, Episcopis Anglise, a prima Fidei Christianas susceptione ad annum MDXL.” He has been generally commended for having done great service to the ecclesiastical history of this kingdom by this work yet bishop Burnet, in his “Reflections” on Atterbury’s book of “The Rights, Powers, and Privileges, of an English Convocation,” tells us, that “he had in his hands a whole treatise, which contained only the faults of ten leaves of one of the volumes of the ‘ Anglia Sacra.’ They are, indeed,” adds he, “so many, and so gross.^ that often the faults are as many as the lines: sometimes they are two for one.” This may be perhaps asserting too much, but unquestionably the errors in transcription, from haste, or from employing improper amanuenses, are so considerable as to render it necessary to peruse it with great caution, otherwise it is a truly valuable collection. There is a copy of it in the Bodleian? library, among Mr. Gough’s books, with an immense addition of ms notes by bishop Kennet. Jn 1693, Wharton published, in 4to, “Bedae Venerabilis Opera queedam Theologica, nunc primum edita; nee non Historica antea semel edita:” and the same year, under the name of Anthony Harmer, “A Specimen of some errors and defects in the History of the Reformation of the Church of England, written by Gilbert Burnet, D. D.” 8vo. In the answer to this, addressed by way of letter to Dr. Lloyd bishop of Lichfield and Coventry, Dr. Burnet observes, that “he had not seen any one thing relating to his history which had pleased him so much as this specimen. It is plain,” says he, “that here is a writer, who has considered those times and that matter with much application; and that he is a master of this subject. He has the art of writing skilfully; and how much soever he may be wanting in a Christian temper, and in the decency that one who owns himself of our communion owed to the station I hold in it, yet in other respects he seems to be a very valuable man; so valuable, that I cannot, without a very sensible regret, see such parts and such industry like to be soured and spoiled with so ill a temper.” And afterwards, in his “Reflections’ 1 upon Atterbury’s book just mentioned, he speaks of the specimen in these words” Some years ago, a rude attack was made upon me under the disguised name of Anthony Harmer. His true name is well enough known, as also who was his patron: but I answered that specimen with the firmness that became me; and I charged the writer home to publish the rest of his “Reflections.” He had intimated, that he gave then but the sample, and that he had great store yet in reserve. I told him upon that, I would expect to see him make that good, and bring out all he had to say; otherwise, they must pass for slander and detraction. He did not think fit to write any more upon that, though he was as much solicited to it by some as he was provoked to it by myself.“In 1695 he published, in folio,” The History of the Troubles and Trials of Archbishop Laud;“the second part or volume of which was published after his death by his father, the Rev. Edmund Wharton, in 1700. This is one of the most useful collections of facts illustrative of the times in which Laud lived, that we are in possession of. He published also a new edition of Becatelli’s Life of Cardinal Pole, in Latin, with the confest between the ambassadors of England and France at the council of Constance. He published in 8vo,” Historia deEpiseopis & Decanis Londinensilxus, nee non de Episcopis & Decanis Assavensibus, a prima sedis utriusque fundatione ad annum MDXL.“Besides these works he left several pieces behind him, about which he had taken great pains: and two volumes of his” Sermons“have been printed in 8vo since his death. Among his Mss, are several English historians not yet published, which he had transcribed and collated with the originals, and prepared for the press; viz. 1.” Benedictus Abbas de Gestis Henrici secundi Regis Angliae, A. D. U70.“2.” Chronicon Nicolai Tribettt (vulgo de Trebeth) Dominicani, ab ann. 1136 ad ann, 1307.“3?” Chronicon Petri Ickham, Compilatio de Gestis Britonum & Anglorum.“4.” Stephani Birchington Monachi Cantuariensis Historia de regibus Angliae post conquestum.“5.” Liber nonus de miraculis Anglorum.“In some of these are contained vast collections out of the ancient and modem records relating to church affairs. Among his manuscripts was likewise” An Account of the Mss. in Lambeth Library“in which, besides giving a most exact catalogue of them, he had under every book transcribed all those treatises contained in them which were not yet published. Among the printed books, towards a new and more correct edition of which Wharton had considerably contributed, were the following: 1.” Historia Matt. Parkeri Archiepiscopi Cantuar. de antiquitate Britaonicae Ecclesiae,“&c. enlarged with notes, collections, and additions, partly made by Parker himself, and partly by others, and several by Wharton; together with the Life of the said Archbishop, as also that of St. Austin of Canterbury, written by George Acworth. 2.” Franciscus Godwinus de Praesulibus Angliae," with some notes. 3. Florentius Wigorniensis and Matthew of Westminster, both with many notes, corrections, and additions. He had likewise made notes on several of his own books already published by him; which it is probable were designed for additions to those books whenever they should receive a new impression. All these, which were purchased by archbishop Tenison, are now in the Lambeth Library.

He also, as just noticed, translated NowelPs Catechisms into Greek, the larger of which was printed in 1573, and dedicated to the lord treasurer, sir William Cecil, and the smaller in 1575, dedicated to Nowell. He also translated into Latin, bishop Jewel’s reply to Harding. These increased his reputation, extending it to Oxford, where he wa incorporated doctor of divinity. On the preferment of Dr. William Chaderton to the bishoprick of Chester, Dr. Whitaker succeeded him in 1579 in the office of regius professor at Cambridge. Although considered by many as rather too young for a place to which many of his seniors had pretensions, he proved, by his course of lectures, that he was deficient in none of the qualities of an able divine and accomplished professor. He soon displayed copious reading, sound judgment, and an eloquence and vigour which greatly increased the number as well as quality of his hearers. While in this office he remained the indefatigable student, making himself acquainted with the writings of the fathers, both Greek and Latin, and of the eminent divines and ecclesiastical historians. In his lectures, he began with various select parts of the New Testament, and then entered upon the controversies between the papists and protestants. The latter were matters of the first importance at that time, and Whitaker accordingly took an ample share in confirming the protestant establishment, and carried on a successful controversy with some of the champions of the Romish church, particularly Campian, Dury, Saunders, &c. Cardinal Bellarmine, though often foiled by his pen, honoured his picture with a place in his library; aud said, he was the most learned heretic he had ever read.

, bishop of Winchester, was the son of Robert White, of Farnham in Surrey, and was born there in 1511. He was educated at Winchester school, and thence removed to New college, Oxford, of which he became perpetual fellow in 1527. In 1534 he completed his degrees in arts, and being esteemed for his classical knowledge, was about that time appointed master of Winchester school. He was soon after made warden of Winchester college, and appears to have been principally instrumental in saving it, when the adjoining college of St. Elizabeth, the site of which he purchased, and so many others, were utterly destroyed. He was in 1551 promoted to the rectory of Cheyton in that neighbourhood; but in the preceding year, being suspected of corresponding with persons abroad, who opposed king Edward’s proceedings, he was examined by the council, and committed to the tower. After continuing some months in confinement, he pretended compliance with the reformed religion, and was set at liberty. Such is Strype’s account; but the historian of Winchester says that he lay in prison till the reign of queen Mary. However this may be, it is certain that on her accession, he was in such favour, as a zealous Roman Catholic, that she promoted him in 1554 to the bishopric of Lincoln. In the following year he was incorporated D. D. at Oxford, and in 1557 was translated to the see of Winchester, which, on account of his predilection for his native county, appears to have been the object of his wishes. This dignity, however, was granted him upon condition of his paying 1000l. yearly, out of the revenue of his see, to cardinal Pole, who complained that the temporalities of Canterbury (of which he was then archbishop) were so ruined by his predecessor, that he could not live in a manner suitable to his rank.

White, Robert, Cardinal. See Pullen.

Soon after this, as he was recovering from a severe fit of sickness, happened the remarkable visitation of his university by cardinal Pole, in order to discover and expel the heretics, or those inclined to the doctrines of the reformation. To avoid the storm, Whitgift thought of going Abroad, and joining the other English exiles; but Dr. Perne, master of his college, although at that time a professed papist, had such an esteem for him, that he undertook to screen him from the commissioners, and thus he was induced to remain; nor was he deceived in his confidence in Dr. Perne’s friendship, who being then vicechancellor, effectually protected him from all inquiry, not withstanding the very strict severity of the visitation. In 1560 Mr. Whitgift entered into holy orders, and preached his first sermon at St. Mary’s with great and general approbation. The same year he was appointed chaplain to Cox, bishop of Ely, who gave him the rectory of Teversham in Cambridgeshire. In 1563 he proceeded bachelor of divinity, and Matthew Button, then fellow of Trinity-college, being appointed regius professor of divinity, the same year Whitgift succeeded him as lady Margaret’s professor of divinity. The subject of his lectures was the book of Revelations and the whole Epistle to the Hebrews, which he expounded throughout. These lectures were prepared by him for the press; and sir George Paule intimates, that they were likely in his time to be published; but whatever was the reason, they have never appeared. Strype tells us, that he saw this manuscript of Dr. Whitgift' s own hand -writing, in the possession of Dr. William Payne, minister of Whitechapel London; and that after his death it was intended to be purchased by Dr. John More, lord bishop of Ely. This manuscript contained likewise his thesis, when he afterwards kept his act for doctor of divinity, on this subject, that “the Pope is Antichrist.”

, famous for his embassies and his writings, was a Hollander, and born in 1598; but it is not certain at what place, though some have mentioned Amsterdam. He left his country very young, and went and settled in France, where he applied himself diligently to political studies, and sought to advance himself by political services. Having made himself known to the elector of Brandenburg, this prince appointed him his resident at the court of France, about 1626 and he preserved this post two- and-thirty years, that is, till 1658. Then he fell into disgrace with cardinal Mazarin, who never had much esteem for him, and particularly disliked his attachment to the house of Conde. The cardinal accused him of having sent secret intelligence to Holland and other places; and he was ordered to leave the court and the kingdom: but, before he set out, he was seized and sent to the Bastille. M. le Teilier wrote at the same time tp the elector of Brandenburg, to justify the action; which he did by assuring him that his minister was an intelligencer in the pay of several princes. The year after, however (1659), he was set at liberty, and escorted by a guard to Calais; whence he passed over to England, and thence to Holland. There De Witt, the pensionary, received him affectionately, and protected him powerfully: he had indeed been the victim of De Witt, with whom he had carried on a secret correspondence, which was discovered by intercepted letters. He reconciled himself afterwards to France, and heartily espoused its interests; whether out of spite to the prince of Orange, or from some other motive; and the count d'Estrades reposed the utmost confidence in him. JFor the present, the duke of Brunswic-Liwienburg made him his resident at the Hague; and he was appointed, besides this, secretary-interpreter of the States General for foreign dispatches.

, known in his own time, among scholars, by the name of Florentius Volusenus, was born at Elgin, in Scotland, about the beginning of the sixteenth century, and was educated in his native place, whence he removed for academical studies to the university of Aberdeen. On quitting coHege, he went to England, where his talents recommended him to the notice of cardinal Wols^y, who made him preceptor to his nephew, whom he afterwards accompanied to Paris for education, and remained with him till the death of Wolsey, which for a time; eclipsed his prospects. He was soon afterwards taken under the protection of the learned cardinal du Bellai, archbishop of Paris, but here again the disgrace at court of this second patron proved a severe disappointment. Wilson,' however, adhered to the cardinal, and would have accompanied him to Rome, but he fell sick at Avignon, and the cardinal being obliged to leave him, his finances were too much exhausted to allow any thoughts of his accomplishing the journey alone, and his patron’s change of fortune having probably put the offer of sufficient assistance out of his power, Mr. Wilson found himself compelled to abandon a project, in which both affection and curiosity had so warmly interested his heart.

At this time the cardinal Sadolet was in residence upon his bishopric of Carpentras. His name in the republic of letters was inferior to very few in the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries; nor was he less celebrated for his liberality towards learned men in circumstances of want and distress. Mr. Wilson, as soon as the re-establishment of his health permitted, took the resolution of paying him a visit. Although it was night at Mr. Wilson’s arrival, the courtesy of the cardinal, then engaged in study, gave him immediate access. He first learned from the stranger, that his visit was occasioned, partly by his desire of seeing a person not less illustrious by his learned writings than the eminence of his station, and partly by his wish to recommend himself, through the cardinal’s interest, to the employment of teaching the Greek and Latin languages to the youth of the city. Mr. Wilson’s eloquent command of the Latin tongue, and the proof which he soon gave of superior understanding and knowledge, inspired the car-? dinal with such prepossession in his favour, that he was unwilling to part with him, till he had learnt the particulars of the stranger’s country, his parentage, his education, and the different scenes of life through which he had passed. Greatly interested by the narrative, he rose early the next morning, and, demanding a conference with the magistrates, consulted them on Mr. Wilson’s proposition; but not wishing their decision to be solely the result of his recommendation, he invited them on a certain day to an entertainment, a kind of symposium at his palace; during which he contrived to engage Mr, Wilson in disputation with a learned physician on certain points of Natural Phi-. Josophjr. It does not appear, that his learning and accomplishments ever procured him any thing better from this period than his laborious though honourable employment of teaching the ancient languages at Carpentras. It was perhaps to reconcile himself to the mediocrity of his lot, that during his residence in that city he composed his excellent book “De Tranquillitate Aninii.” If he possessed that contentment and peace of mind which made the subject of these contemplations, the first blessing of life was his, and which wealth and station only have never bestowed on man.

About 1546, the tenth year of Mr. Wilson’s residence at Carpentras, after having taught the belles lettres with great reputation, and established the character of a very learned, ingenious, and worthy man, he felt a strong desire to revisit his native country. But the doctrines of the Reformation having now got some footing in Scotland, Mr. Wilson was aware of the difficulties which he should have to contend with on his return. He had therefore recourse to his friend and patron the cardinal Sadolet, at that time at Rome. He wrote to request his advice, in. what manner he should conduct himself betwixt religious parties in his own country. We find the answer in the sixteenth book of Sadolet’s Epistles, dated 1546, and the substance of ifc is to recommend an adherence to the religion of his forefathers. From a Romish cardinal no other could be expected. Wilson now determined upon his journey to Scotland, but falling sick at Vienne in Dauphiny, his progress was suddenly stopped. His disorder increased beyond the power of medical relief; and he expired on the banks ef the Rhone 1547.

, an eminent antiquary, was born at Stendall, in the old Marche of Brandenbourg, in the beginning of 1718. He was the son of a shoemaker, but although to all appearance destined by his birth to superintend a little school in an obscure town in Germany, he raised himself to the office of president of antiquities in the Vatican. After having been seven years professor in the college of Seehausen near Salswedel, he went into Saxony,where he resided seven years more, and was Jibrarian to count Bonau at Nothenitz. The count was author of an “History of the Empire,” and died 1762. His fine library, valued in 1749 at 15,000 English crowns, has been since added to the public library of Dresden. Mr. Winkelman, in 1748, made a most methodical and informing catalogue of it, in 4 vols. When he left this place in 1754, he went to Dresden, where he formed an acquaintance with the ablest artists, and particularly with M. Oeser, an excellent painter, and one of the best draughtsmen of the age. In that year he abjured Lutheranism, and embraced the Roman cathylic religion. In Sept. 1755, he set out for Italy, and arrived at Rome in December following. His principal object was to see the Vatican library, and to examine the ruins of Herculaneum. While engaged, as he tells us, in teaching some dirty boys their Abc, he aspired to a knowledge of the beautiful, and silently meditated on the comparisons of Homer’s Greek with the Latin literature, and a critical acquaintance with the respective languages, which were more familiar to him than they had ever been to any former lover of antiquity, both by his application in studying them, and his public lectures as professor of them. His extensive reading was improved in the noble and large library which he afterwards superintended. The solitude and the beauty of the spot where he lived, and the Platonic reveries which he indulged, all served to prepare the mind for the enthusiasm winch he felt at the sight of the master-pieces of art. His first steps in this career bespoke a man of genius; but what a concurrence of^circumstances were necessary to develope his talents! The magnificent gallery of paintings and the cabinet of antiquities at Dresden, the conversation of artists and amateurs, his journey to Rome, his residence there, the friendship of Mengs the painter, his residence in the palace and villa of cardinal Albani, his place of writer in the Vatican, and that of president *of antiquities, were so many advantages and helps to procure him materials, and to facilitate to him the use of them for the execution of the design which he had solely in view. Abso,­lute master of his time, he lived in a state of perfect independence, which is the true source of genius, contenting himself with a frugal and regular life, and knowing no other passions than those which tended to inflame his ardent pursuit. An active ambition urged him on, though he affected to conceal it by a stoical indifference. A lively imagination, joined to an excellent memory, enabled him to derive great advantages from his study of the works of the ancients, and a steady indefatigable zeal led him naturally to new discoveries. He kindled iii Rome the torch of sound study of the works of the ancients. His intimate acquaintance with them enabled him to throw greater certainty upon his explanations, and even upon his conjectures, and to overthrow many arbitrary principles and ancient prejudices. His greatest merit is, to have pointed out the true source of the study of antiquity, which is the knowledge of art, to which no writer had before attended. Mr. Winkelman carried with him into Italy a sense of beauty and art, which led him instantly to admire the master-pieces of the Vatican, and with which he began to study them. He soon increased his knowledge, and it was not till after he had thus purified his taste, and entertained conceptions of ideal beauty, which transported him to inspiration, and led him into the greatest secrets of art, that he began to think of the explanation of other monuments, in which his great learning could not fail to distinguish him. At the same time another immortal scholar treated the science of antiquity in the same manner on this side the Alps. Count Caylus had a profound and extensive knowledge of the arts, was master of the mechanical part, and drew and engraved in a capital style. Winkelman was upt endowed with these advantages, but in point of classical erudition surpassed the count; and while the latter employed himself in excellent explications of little objects, the former had continually before him at Rome the greatest monuments of ancient art. This erudition enabled him to fill ap his principal plan of writing the “History of Art.” In 1756 he planned his “Restoration of Ancient Statues,” and a larger work on the “Taste of the Greek Artists;” $od designed an account of the galleries of Rome and Italy, beginning with a volunqe on the Belvedere statues, in the manner of Richardson, who, he says, only ran over Rome. In. the preface he intended to mention the fate of these statues at the sacking of Rome in 1527, when the soldiers made a fire in Raphael’s lodge, which spoiled many things. He also intended a history of the corruption of taste in art, the restoration of statues, and an illustration of the obscure points of mythology. All these different essays led him to his “History of Art,” and his “Monumenti Inediti.” It must, however, be confessed, that the first of these works has not all the clearness and precision that might be expected in its general plan, and division of its parts and objects; but it has enlarged and extended the ideas both of antiquaries ancj collectors. The description of the gems and sulphurs of the Stosch cabinet contributed not a little to extend Mr. Winkelman’s knowledge. Few persons have had opportunities of contemplating such vast collections. The engravings of Lippet and count Caylus are all that many can arrive at. Mr. Winkelman’s “Monumenti Inediti,” of which he had begun the third vol. 1767, seem to have secured him the esteem of antiquaries. He there explained a number of monuments, and particularly bas reliefs till then accounted inexplicable, with a parade of learning more in compliance with the Italian fashion than was necessary. Had he lived, we should have had a work long wished for, a complete collection of the bas reliefs discovered from the time of Bartoli to the present, the greater part of which are in the possession of cardinal Albani. But however we may regret his tragical end, the intenseness of his application, and the eagerness of his pursuit after ancient monuments, had at last so bewildered tym, in conjectures, that, from a commentator on the works of the ancients, he became a kind of seer or prophet. yis warm imagination outran his judgment. As he proceeded in his knowledge of the characters of art in monunients, he exhausted iiis fund of observations drawn from the ancients, and particularly from the Greeks. He cited early editions, which are frequently not divided into chapters; and he was entirely unacquainted with the publications in the rest of Europe on the arts and antiquity. Hence his “History of Art” is full of anachronisms.

In one of his letters, dated 1754, he gives an account of his change of religion, which too plainly appears to have been guided by motives of interest, in order to make his way to Rome, and gain a better livelihood. At Dresden he published, 1755, “Reflections on the Imitation of the Works of the Greeks,” 4to, translated into French the same year, and republished 1756, 4to. At Rome he made an acquaintance with Mengs, first painter to the king of Poland, afterwards, in 1761, appointed first painter to the house of Spain, with an appointment of 80,000 crowns, a house, and a coach; and he soon got access to the library of cardinal Passionei, who is represented as a most catholic and respectable character, who only wanted ambition to be pope. His catalogue was making by an Italian, and the work was intended for Winkelman. Giacomelli, canon of St. Peter, &c. had published two tragedies of Æschylus and Sophocles, with an Italian translation and notes, and was about a new edition of “Chrysostom de Sacerdotio;” and Winkelman had joined with him in an edition of an unprinted Greek oration of Libanius, from two Mss. in the Vatican and Barberini libraries. In 1757 he laments the calamities of his native country, Saxony, which was then involved in the war between the emperor and the king of Prussia. In 1758 he meditated a journey over the kingdom of Naples, which he says could only be done on foot, and in the habit of a pilgrim, on account of the many difficulties and dangers, and the total want of horses and carriages from Viterbo to Pisciota, the ancient Velia. Jn 1768 we find him in raptured with the idea of a voyage to Sicily, where he wished to make drawings of the many beautiful earthen vases collected by the Benedictines at Catana. At the end of the first volume of his letters, 1781, were first published his remarks on the ancient architecture of the temple of Girgenti. He was going to Naples, with 100 crowns, part of a pension from the king of Poland, for his travelling charges, and thence to Florence, at the invitation of baron Sto&ch. Cardinal Archinto, secretary of state, employed him to take care of his library. His “Remarks on Ancient Architecture' 7 were ready for a second edition. He was preparing a work in Italian, to clear up some obscure points in mythology and antiquities, with above fifty plates; another in Latin, explanatory of the Greek medals that are least known; and he intended to send to be printed in England” An Essay on the Style of Sculpture before Phidias.“A work in 4to appeared at Zurich, addressed to Mr. Wrnkelman, by Mr. Mengs, but without his name, x entitled,” Thoughts on Beauty and Taste in Painting,“and was published by J. C. Fuesli. When Cardinal Albam succeeded to the place of librarian of the Vatican, he endeavoured to get a place for the Hebrew language for Winkelman, who refused a canonry because be would not take the tonsure. The elector of Saxony gave him, 1761, unsolicited, the place of counsellor Richter, the direction of the royal cabinet of medals, and antiquities at Dresden. Upon the death of the abbe Venuti, 1762, he was appointed president of the antiquities of the apostolic chamber, with power over all discoveries and exportations of antiquities and pictures. This is a post of honour, with an income of 160 scudi per annum. He had a prospect of the place of president of antiquities in the Vatican, going to be created at 16 scudi per month, and was named corresponding member of the academy of inscriptions. He had thoughts of publishing an” Essay on the Depravation of Taste in the Arts and Sciences.“The king of Prussia offered him by Col. Quintus Icilius the place of librarian and director of his cabinet of medals and antiquities, void by the death of M. Gautier de la Croze, with a handsome appointment. He made no scruple of accepting the offer; but, when it came to the pope’s ears, he added an appointment out of his own purse, and kept him at Rome. In April 1768 he left Rome to go with M. Cavaceppi over Germany and Switzerland. When he came to Vienna he was so pleased with the reception he met with that he made a longer stay there than he had intended. But, being suddenly seized with a secret uneasiness, and extraordinary desire to return to Rome, he set out for Italy, putting off his visits to his friends in Germany to a future opportunity. It was the will of Providence, however, that this opportunity should never come, he being assassinated in June of that year, by one Arcangeli, of whom, and of his crime, the following narrative was published: ” Francis Arcangeli was born of mean parents, near the city of Pistoia, and bred a cook, in which capacity he served in a respectable family at Vienna, where, having been guilty of a considerable robbery, he was condemned to work in fetters for four years, and then to be banished from all the Austrian dominions, after being sworn never to return. When three years of his slavery were expired, he found friends to intercede in his favour, and he was released from serving the fourth, but strictly enjoined to observe the order of banishment; in consequence of which he left Vienna, and retired to Venice with his pretended wife, Eva Rachel. In August 1767, notwithstanding his oath, he came to Trieste with a view to settle; but afterwards changed his mind, and returned to Venice, where, being disappointed of the encouragement he probably expected, he came again to Trieste in May 1768. Being almost destitute of money, and but shabbily dressed, he took up his lodging at a noted inn (probably with a view of robbing some traveller). In a few days the abbe Winkelman arrived at the same inn in his way from Vienna to Home, and was lodged in the next apartment to that of Arcangeli. This circumstance, and their dining together at the ordinary, first brought them acquainted. The abbe expressed a desire of prosecuting his journey with all possible expedition, and Arcangeli was seemingly very assiduous in procuring him a passage, which the abbé took very kindly, and very liberally rewarded him for his services. His departure, however, being delayed by the master of the vessel which was to carry turn, Arcangeli was more than ordinarily diligent in improving every opportunity of making himself acceptable to the abbe, and their frequent walks, long and fainiliar conversations, and the excessive civility and attention of Arcangeli upon all occasions that offered, so improved the regard which the abbe had begun to conceive for him, that he not only acquainted him in the general run of their discourse with the motives and the event of his journey to Vienna, the graces he had there received, and the offers of that ministry; but informed him also of the letters of credit he had with him, the medals of gold and silver which he had received from their imperial majesties, and, in short, with all the things of value of which he was possessed.

, one of the first martyrs for the protestant religion in Scotland, and a person of great distinction in the ecclesiastical history of that country, was born in the beginning of the sixteenth century, and appears to have very early felt the consequences of imbibing the spirit of the reformers. He was descended of the house of Pitarrow in the Mearns, an illustrious family in Scotland, and is said to have travelled into Germany, where he became acquainted with the opinions of Luther. Other accounts mention x his having been banished from his own country by the bishop of Brechin, for teaching the Greek 7‘estament in the town of Montrose, and that after this he resided for some years in the university of Cambridge. Of this latter circumstance there is no reason to doubt, for besides an account of him while there by one of his pupils, printed by Fox, the historian of Bene’t or Corpus Christ! college has inserted a short account of him, as one of the members of that house. In 1544, he returned to his native country, in the company of the commissioners who had been sent to negociate a treaty with Henry VIII. of England. At this time he was allowed to excel all his countrymen in learning, and to be a man of the most persuasive eloquence, irreproachable in life, courteous and affable in manners. His fervent piety, zeal, and courage, in the cause of truth, were tempered with uncommon meekness, modesty, patience, prudence, and charity. With these qualifications he began to preach in a very bold manner, against the corruptions of the Romish church, and the vices of the clergy. He met with a most favourable reception wherever he appeared, and was much followed and eagerly listened to, which so excited the indignation of cardinal Beaton, and the popish clergy in general, that a resolution was formed to take away his life by some means or other.

Two attempts were made to cut him off by assassination; but he defeated the first by his courage, and the second by his caution. On the first of these attempts he behaved with great generosity. A friar named Weighton, who had undertaken to kill him when he was in Dundee (where he principally preached), knowing that it was his custom to remain in the pulpit after sermon, till the church was empty, skulked at the bottom of the stairs with a dagger in his right hand under his gown. Wishart (who was remarkably quick-sighted), as he came down from the pulpit, observing the friar’s countenance, and his hand with something in it under his gown, suspected his design, sprung forward, seized his hand, and wrenched the dagger from him. At the noise which this scuffle occasioned, a crowd of people rushed into the church, and would have torn the friar in pieces; but Mr. Wishart clasped him in his arms, and declared that none should touch him but through his body. “He hath done me no hurt” said he, “my friends; he hath done me much good; he hath taught me what I have to fear, and put me upon my guard.” And it appeared that he defeated the second attempt on his life by the suspicion which the first had inspired. When he was at Montrose, a messenger came to him with a letter from a country gentleman, acquainting him that he had been suddenly taken ill, and earnestly intreating him to come to him without delay. He immediately set out, accompanied by two or three friends, but when they were about half a mile from the town, he stoppled, saying, “I suspect there is treason in this matter. Go you (said he to one of his friends) up yonder, and tell me what you observe.” He came back and told him, that he had seen a company of spearmen lying in ambush near the road. They then returned to the town, and on the way he said to his friends; “I know I shall one day fall by the hands of that blood-thirsty man (meaning cardinal Beaton), but I trust it shall not be in this manner.”

These two plots having miscarried, and Wishart still continuing to preach with his usual boldness and success, the cardinal summoned a synod of the clergy to meet Jan. 11, 1546, in the Blackfriars church, Edinburgh, and to consider of means for putting a stop to the progress of heresy, and while thus employed, he heard that Wishart was in the house of Ormiston, only about eight miles from Edinburgh, where he was seized by treachery, and conducted to the castle of Edinburgh, and soon after to the castle of St. An-r drew’s. Here, being completely in the hands of the cardinal, he was put upon his trial March 1, before a convocation of the prelates and clergy assembled for that purpose in the cathedral, and treated with the utmost barbarity, every form of law, justice, or decency, being dispensed with. He endeavoured to answer the accusations brought against him, and to shew the conformity between the doctrines he had preached and the word of God; but this was denied him, and he was condemned to be burnt as an obstinate heretic, which sentence was executed next day on the castle green. The cardinal seems to have been sensible that the minds of men would be much agitated by the fate of this amiable sufferer, and even to have apprehended that some attempt might be made to rescue him from the flames. He commanded all the artillery of the castle to be pointed towards the scene of execution; and, either to watch the ebullitions qf popular indignation/to display his Contempt of the reformers, or to satiate himself by contemplating the destruction of a man, in whose grave he hoped that their principles would be buried, he openly, with the prelates who accompanied him, witnessed the melancholy spectacle. In many accounts which we have of Wishart’s death, it is mentioned that, looking towards the cardinal, he predicted, “that he who, frooi yonder place (pointing to the tower where he sat), beholdeth us with such pride, shall, within a few days, lie in the same as ignominiously as now he is seen proudly to rest.” In our account of Beaton we have noticed the evidence for this fact, and the opinion of historians upon it, to which may now be added the opinions of some able writers (noticed in our references) who have appeared since that article was drawn up. Concerning Wishart, we may conclude, with Dr. Henry, that his death was a loss to his persecutors as well as to his friends. If he had lived a few years longer, the reformation, it is probable, would have been carried on with more regularity and less devastation. He had acquired an astonishing power over the minds of the people; and he always employed it in restraining them from acts of violence, inspiring them with lave to one another, and with gentleness and humanity to their enemies.

, a celebrated cardinal and statesman, but to be remembered with more respect as a benefactor to learning, was so obscure in his origin that scarcely any historian mentions the names of his father and mother. Their names, however, are preserved by Rymer (Feed. vol. XIV. p. 355), in the pope’s bull of favours to those who came to Cardinal college in Oxford, and prayed for the safety of the said cardinal, and after his decease for the souls of him, his father Robert, and his mother Joan. This partly confirms the discovery of his zealous biographer, Dr. Fiddes, that he was the son of one Robert Wolsey, a butcher of Ipswich, where he was born in March 1471. Fiddes says that this Robert had a son whose early history corresponds with that of the cardinal, and that he was a man of considerable landed property. We may from other evidence conclude that his parents were either not poor, or not friendless, since they were able to give him the best education his native, town afforded, and afterwards to send him to Magdalen college. But in whatever way he was introduced here, it is certain that his progress in academical studies was so rapid that he was admitted to the degree of bachelor of arts at the age of fifteen, and from this extraordinary instance of precocity, was usually named the boy bachelor.

In the mean time, there was no intermission in his preferments. His influence was courted by the pope, who had made him a cardinal, and, in 1516, his legate in England, with powers not inferior to his own; and by the king of Spain, who granted him a pension of three thousand livres, while the duchy of Milan bestowed on him a yearly grant often thousand ducats. On the resignation of archbishop Warham, he was appointed lord high chancellor. “If this new accumulation of dignity,” says Hume, “increased his enemies, it also served to exalt his personal character and prove the extent of his capacity. A strict administration of justice took place during his enjoyment of this high office; and no chancellor ever discovered greater impartiality in his decisions, deeper penetration of judgment, or more enlarged knowledge of law or equity.”

In the same year the pope granted him the administration of the bishopric of Bath and Wells, and the king bestowed on him its temporalities. This see, with those of Worcester and Hereford, which the cardinal likewise farmed, were filled by foreigners who were allowed nonresidence, and compounded for this indulgence by yielding a share of the revenues. The cardinal’s aid, about this time, in establishing the College of Physicians of London, is to be recorded among the many instances of the very liberal views he entertained of every improvement connected with literature. In 1521, he evinced his zeal against the reformation' which Luther had begun, by procuring his doctrines to be condemned in an assembly of divines held at his own house, published pope Leo’s bull against him, and endeavoured to suppress his writings in this kingdom; but there is no favourable part of his character so fully established as his moderation towards the English Lutherans, for one article of his impeachment was his being remiss in punishing heretics, and showing a disposition rather to screen them.

Of the immense riches which he derived from his various preferments, some were no doubt spent in luxuries which left only a sorrowful remembrance, but the greater part was employed in" those magnificent edifices which have immortalized his genius and spirit. In 1514 he began to build the palace at Hampton Court, and having finished it, with all its sumptuous furniture, in 1528, he presented it to the king, who in return gave him the palace of Richmond for a residence. In this last mentioned year, he acceded to the bishopric of Winchester by the death of Fox, and resigned that of Durham. To Winchester, however, he never went. That reverse of fortune which has exhibited him as an example of terror to the ambitious, was now approaching, and was accelerated by events, the consequences of which he foresaw, without the power of averting them. Henry was now agitated by a passion not to be controuled by the whispers of friendship, or the counsels of statesmen, and when the cardinal, whom he had appointed to forward his divorce from queen Catherine and his marriage with Anne Boleyn, appeared tardily to adhere to forms, or scrupulously to interpose advice, he determined to make him feel the weight of his resentment. It happened unfortunately for the cardinal that both the queen and her rival were his enemies, the queen from a suspicion that she never had a cordial friend in him, and Anne from a knowledge that he had secretly endeavoured to prevent her match with the king. But a minute detail of these transactions and intrigues belongs to history, in which they occupy a large space. It may suffice here to notice that the cardinal’s ruin, when once determined, was effected in the most sudden and rigorous manner, and probably without his previous knowledge of the violent measures that were to be taken.

On the first day of term, Oct. 9, 1529, while he was opening the Court of Chancery at Westminster, the attorney-general indicted him in the Court of King’s Bench, on the statute of provisors, 16 Richard II. for procuring a bull from Rome appointing him legate, contrary to the statute, by which he had incurred a prtemunire^ and forfeited all his goods to the king, and might be imprisoned. Before he could give in any reply to this indictment, the king sent to demand the great seal from him, which was given to sir Thomas More. He was then ordered to leave York-place, a palace which had for some centuries been the residence of the archbishops of York, and which he had adorned with furniture of great value and magnificence: it now became a royal residence under the name of Whitehall. Before leaving this place to go to Esher, near Hampton Court, a seat belonging to the bishopric of Winchester, he made an inventory of the furniture, plate, &c. of York-place, which is said to have amounted to the incredible sum of five hundred thousand crowns, or pounds of our money. He then went to Putney by water, and set out on the rest of his journey on his mule, but he had not gone far before he was met by a messenger from the king, with a gracious message, assuring him that he stood as high as ever in the royal favour, and this accompanied by a ring, which the king had been accustomed to send, as a token to give credit to the bearer. Wolsey received these testimonials with the humblest expression of gratitude, but proceeded on his way to Esher, which he found quite unfurnished. The king’s design by this solemn mockery is not easily conjectured. It is most probable that it was a trick to inspire the cardinal with hopes of being restored to favour, and consequently to prevent his defending himself in the prosecution upon the statute of provisors, which Henry knew he could do by producing his letters patent authorising him to accept the pope’s bulls. And this certainly was the consequence, for the Cardinal merely instructed his attorney to protest in his name that he was quite ignorant of the above statute; but that he acknowledged other particulars with which he was charged to be true, and submitted himself to the king’s mercy. The sentence of the court was, that “he was out of the protection, and his lands, goods, and chattels forfeit, and his person might be seized.”

The next step to complete his ruin was taken by the duke of Norfolk and the privy counsellors, who drew up articles against him, and presented them to the king; but he still affecting to take no personal concern in the matter, remained silent. Yet these probably formed the basis of the forty-four articles presented December 1, to the House of Lords, as by some asserted, or, according to other accounts, by the lords of the council to the House of Commons. Many of them are evidently frivolous or false, and others, although true, were not within the jurisdiction of the House. The cardinal had, in fact, already suffered, as his goods had been seized by the king; he was now in a prtemunire, and the House could not go much farther than to recommend what had already taken place. The cardinal, however, found one friend amidst all his distresses, who was not to be alarmed either at the terrors of the court or of the people. This was Thomas Cromwell, formerly Wolsey’s steward (afterwards earl of Essex), who now refuted the articles with so much spirit, eloquence, and argument, that although a very opposite effect might have been expected, his speech is supposed to have laid the foundation of that favour which the king afterwards extended to him, but which, at no very distant period, proved as fatal to him as it had been to his master. His eloquence had a yet more powerful effect, for the address founded on these articles was rejected by the Commons, and the Lords could not proceed farther without their concurrence.

During the cardinal’s residence at Esher the king sent several messages to him, “some good and some bad,” says Cavendish, “but more ill than good,” until this tantalizing correspondence, operating on a mind of strong passions, brought on, about the end of the year, a sickness which was represented to the king as being apparently fatal. The king ordered his physician, Dr. Butts, to visit him, who confirmed what had been reported of the dangerous state of his health, but intimated that as his disease affected his mind rather than his body, a kind word from his majesty might prove more effectual -than the best skill of the faculty. On this the king sent him a ring, with a gracious message that he was not offended with him in his heart; and Anne Boleyn sent him a tablet of gold that usually hung at her side, with many kind expressions. The cardinal received these testimonies of returning favour with joy and gratitude, and in a few days was pronounced ut of danger.

Nor can we blame Wolsey for his credulity, since Henry, although he had stripped the cardinal of all his property, and the income arising from all his preferments, actually granted him, Feb. 12, 1530, a free pardon for all crimes and misdemeanors, and a few days after restored to him the revenues, &c. of the archbishopric of York, except York place, before-mentioned, and one thousand marks yearly from the bishopric of Winchester. He also sent him a present of 3000l. in money, and a quantity of plate and furniture exceeding that sum, and allowed him to remove from Esher to Richmond, where he resided for some time in the lodge in the old park, and afterwards in the priory. His enemies at court, however, who appear to have influenced the king beyond his usual arbitrary disposition, dreaded Wolsey’s being so near his majesty, and prevailed on him to order him to reside in his archbishopric. In obedience to this mandate, which was softened by another gracious message from Henry, he first went to the archbishop’s seat at Southwell, and about the end of September fixed his residence at Cawood castle, which he began to repair, and was acquiring popularity by his hospitable manners and bounty, when his capricious master was persuaded to arrest him for high treason, and order him to be conducted to London. Accordingly, on the first of November he set out, but on the road he was seized with a disorder of the dysenteric kind, brought on by fatigue and anxiety, which put a period to his life at Leicester abbey on the 28th of that mouth, in the fifty-ninth year of his age . Some of his last words implied the awful and just reflection, that if he had served his God as diligently as he had served his king, he would not have given him over to his enemies. Two days after he was interred in the abbey church of Leicester, but the spot is not now known. As to the report of his having poisoned himself, founded on an expression in the printed work of Cavendish, it has been amply refuted by a late eminent antiquary, who examined the whole of the evidence with much acuteness. Modern historians have formed a more favourable estimate of Wolsey’s character than their predecessors, yet it had that mixture of good and evil which admits of great variety of opinion, and gives to ingenious party-colouring all the appearance of truth. Perhaps Shakspeare, borrowing from Holinshed and Hall, has drawn a more just and comprehensive sketch of his perfections and failings than is to be found in any other writer.

———“This cardinal,

The cardinal’s biographers, in treating of the founda.­tion of his college, begin with a very laboured defence of his seizing the property and revenues of many priories and nunneries, which were to serve as a fund for building and endowment; and the zeal they display on this subject, if it cannot now enforce conviction, at least proves the historical fact that the rights of property even at that time were not to be violated with impunity, and that the cardinal’s conduct was highly unpopular. At first it was objected to even by the king himself, although he soon afterwards converted it into a precedent for a more general dissolution of religious houses. Wolsey, however; ought not to be deprived of such defence as has been set up. It has been urged, that h.e procured bulls from the pope empowering him to seize on these priories; and that the pope, according to the notions then entertained of his supremacy, could grant a power by which religious houses might be converted into societies for secular priests, and for the advancement of learning. It has been also pleaded, that the cardinal did not alienate the revenues from religious service, but only made a change in the application of them; that the appropriation of the alien priories by Chichele and Waynriete was in some respects a precedentj and that the suppression of the Templers in the fourteenth century, might also be quoted. Bishop Tanner likewise, in one of his letters to Dr. Charlett, quotes as precedents., bishops Fisher, Alcock, and Beckington. But perhaps the best excuse is that hinted by lord Cherbury, namely, that Wolsey persuaded the king to abolish unnecessary monasteries that necessary colleges might be erected, and the progress of the reformation impeded by the learning of the clergy and scholars educated in them. Tbe same writer suggests, that as Wolsey pleaded for the dissolution of only the small and superfluous houses, the king might not dislike this as a fair experiment how far the project of a general dissolution would be relished. On the other hand, by two letters still extant, written by the king, it appears that he was fully aware of the unpopularity of the measure, although we cannot infer from them that he had any remedy to prescribe.

By two bulls, the one dated 1524, the other 1525, Wolsoy obtained of pope Clement VII. leave to enrich his college by suppressing twenty-two priories and nunneries, the revenues of which were estimated at nearly 2000l.; but on his disgrace some of these were given by the king for other purposes. The king’s patent, after a preface paying high compliments to the cardinal’s administration, enables him to build his college principally on the site of the priory of St. Frideswide and the name, originally intended to be “The College of Secular Priests,” was now changed to Cardinal College. The secular clergy in it were to be denominated the “dean and canons secular of the cardinal of York,” and to be incorporated into one body, and subsist by perpetual succession. He was also authorised to settle upon it 2000l. a year clear revenue. By other patents and grants to the dean and canons, various church livings were bestowed upon them, and the college was to be dedicated to the praise, glory, and honour of the Holy Trinity, the Virgin Mary, St. Frideswide, and All Saints.

Of these Wolsey himself named the dean and eighteen of the canons. The dean was Dr. John Hygden, president of Magdalen college, and the canons first nominated were all taken from the other colleges in Oxford, and were men of acknowledged reputation in their day. He afterwards added others, deliberately, and according as he was able to supply the vacancies by men of talents, whom he determined to seek wherever they could be found. Among his lattfic appointments frcrr Cambridge, we find the names of Tyndal and Frith, the translators of the Bible, and who had certainly discovered some symptoms of heresy before this time. Cranmer and Parker, afterwards the first and second protestant archbishops of Canterbury, were also invited, bat declined; and the cardinal went on to complete his number, reserving all nominations to himself during his life, but intending to bequeath that power to the dean and canons at his death. In this, however, he was as much disappointed as in his hopes to embody a force of learned men sufficient to cope with Luther and the foreign reformers, whose advantage in argument he conceived to proceed from the ignorance which prevailed among the monastic clergy.

An impartial life of cardinal Wolsey is perhaps still a desideratum in English biography. Cavendish is minute and interesting in what he relates of the cardinal’s domestic history, but defective in dates and arrangement, and not altogether free from partiality; which, however, in one so near to the cardinal, may perhaps be pardoned. Fiddes is elaborate, argumentative, and upon the whole useful, as arc extensive collector of facts and authorities; but he wrote for a special purpose, and has attempted, what no man can effect, a portrait of his hero free from those vices and failings of which it is impossible to acquit him. Grove, with all the aid of Cavendish, Fiddes, and even Shakspeare, whose drama he regularly presses into the service, is a heavy and injudicious compiler, although he gives so much of the cardinal’s contemporaries, that his volumes may be consulted with advantage as a series of general annals of the time. But Cavendish, on whom all who have written on the actions of Wolsey, especially our modern historians, have relied, has been the innocent cause of some of their principal errors. Cavendish’s work remained in manuscript, of which several copies are still extant, until the civil wars, when it was first printed under the title of “The Negociations of Thomas Wolsey, &c.” 1641, 4to, and the chief object of the publication was a parallel between the cardinal and archbishop Laud, in order to reconcile the public to the murder of that prelate. That this object might be the better accomplished, the manuscript was mutilated and interpolated without shame or scruple, and no pains having been taken to compare the printed edition with the original, the former passed for genuine above a century, nor until very lately has the work been presented to the public as the author left it, in Dr. Wordsworth’s "Ecclesiastical Biography.

The honours of educating sir Thomas has been claimed for both universities; by Carter for St. John’s college, Cambridge, and by Anthony Wood for Oxford, because he resided for sometime on the establishment of cardinal Wolsey’s new college, now Christ-church. He then set out on his travels according to the custom of that age, and returned after some years, a gentleman of high accomplishments and elegant manners, and of such conversation talents both as to sense and wit as to have attracted the admiration of all ranks, and particularly of his sovereign, who bestowed on him the order of knighthood, and employed him in various embassies. Mr. Warton appears offended with Wood for saying that “the king was in a high manner delighted with his witty jests,” while he allows that Henry was probably as much pleased with his repartees as his politics. Lloyd, whom Mr. Gray and lord Orford have adopted as an authority, reports enough of his wit, to convince us that he might delight a monarch of Henry’s fickleness and passionate temper. Persons of this character are often more easily directed or diverted by a striking expression, than by a train of argument.

Amidst this prosperous career, he had the misfortune, like most of the eminent characters of this reign, to fall under the severe displeasure of the king, and was twice imprisoned, but for what offences his biographers are not agreed. Fuller says he had heard that he fell into disfavour about the business of queen Anne Bullen. Lloyd insinuates the same, and some have gone so far as to accuse him of a criminal connection with her, but all this is in part erroneous. From the oration which he delivered on his second trial, and which lord Orford has printed in his “Miscellaneous Antiquities,” he expressly imputes his first imprisonment to Charles Brandon, duke of Suffolk. “His first misfortune flowed from a court-cabal; the second from the villainy, jealousy, and false accusation of that wretch Bonner, bishop of London, whose clownish manners, lewd behaviour, want of religion, and malicious perversion of truth, sir Thomas paints with equal humour and asperity.” Bonner accused him of a treasonable correspondence with cardinal Pole, and this, with some treasonable expresssions concerning the king, formed the principal charges against him, which he repelled with great spirit, ease, and candour. The words which he was accused of having uttered were, "that the king should be cast out of. a cart’s a e;-and that by God’s blood, if he were

, an eminent statesman and patron of literature, was born in 1437, at Torrelaguna, in Old Castille, and was the son of Alphonso de Cimeros de Ximenes, procurator of that city. He was educated for the church, at Alcala and Salamanca, and then went to Rome, but having been robbed on his journey home, brought nothing back with him, except a bull for the first prebend which should be vacant. This the archbishop of Toledo refused to grant, and confined him in the tower of Uceda, where it is said a priest, who had long been prisoner there, foretold to him that he should, one day, be archbishop of Toledo. Having recovered his liberty, he obtained a benefice in the diocese of Siguenza, and cardinal Gonsalez de Mendoza, who was bishop there, made him his grand vicar. Ximenes entered soon after among the Franciscans of Toledo, and took the vows; but finding himself embarrassed by visits, he retired to a solitude called Castauel, where he studied the Oriental languages and divinity. On his return to Toledo, queen Isabella of Castille appointed him her confessor, and nominated him to the archbishopric of Toledo, 14.95, without his knowledge. When Ximenes received the bulls from the hand of this princess, he only kissed them, returned them to her, unopened, saying, “Madam, these letters are not addressed to me,” and went immediately back to his convent at Castanel, being determined not to accept the archbishopric. The queen was much pleased with this refusal; but when Ximenes still persisted in his refusal, an express command from the pope became necessary to overcome his resolution. Nor would he even then yield but upon the following conditions: “That he should never quit his church of Toledo; that no pension should be charged on his archbishopric (one of the richest in the world); and that no infringement of the privileges and immunities of his church should ever be attempted.” He took possession of it in 1498, being received with unusual magnificence at Toledo. This prelate’s first care was to provide for the poor, visit the churches and hospitals, and clear his diocese from usurers and licentious houses. Those judges who neglected their duty, he degraded, supplying their places with persons whose probity and disinterestedness were known to him. He held a synod afterwards at Alcala, and another at Talavera, where he made very prudent regulations for the clergy of his diocese, and laboured at the same time to reform the Franciscans throughout Castille and Arragon, in which he happily succeeded, notwithstanding the obstacles he had to encounter. Ximenes established a celebrated university at Alcala, and founded there in 1499, the famous college of St. Ildephonsus, built by Peter Gumiel, one of the best architects of that time. Three years after he undertook the great plan of a Polyglot Bible, for the execution of which he invited many learned men from Alcala to Toledo, who were skilled in Latin, Greek, Hebrew, Arabic, and other languages necessary for the perfect understanding the holy scriptures. This Bible, though began in 1502, was not printed till 1517, 6 vols. folio, at Alcala. It contains the Hebrew text of the Bible, the version of the LXX. with a literal translation, that of St. Jerome, and the Chaldee paraphrases of Onkelos on the Pentateuch only. In the original preface, addressed to pope Leo X. the learned archbishop says, “It is doing great service to the church to publish the scriptures in their original language, both because no translation cati give a perfect idea of the original, and because, according to the opinion of the holy fathers, we should refer to the Hebrew text for the Old Testament, and to the Greek for the New Testament.” The work was above fifteen years in finishing. Ximenes himself assisted in it with great assiduity, and paid the whole expence, which amounted to an immense sum. He purchased seven Hebrew copies, that cost four thousand crowns, and gave vast prices for ancient Mss. To the above-mentioned Bible, which is called the Polyglot of Ximenes, he added a dictionary of the Hebrew and Chaldee words in the Bible. In 1507 pope Julius II. gave him a cardinal’s hat; and Ferdinand the catholic entrusted him with the administration of state affairs, from which moment cardinal Ximenes became the soul of all that was done in Spain. He began his ministry by delivering the people from an oppressive tax, which had been continued on account of the war of Grenada; and he laboured so zealously and successfully in the conversion of the Mahometans, that he made near three thousand proselytes, among whom was the prince of the blood royal of Grenada. This great multitude he baptized in a spacious square, awd ordering all the copies of the Koran to be brought thither, set them on fire; which memorable day was afterwarda kept as a festival in Spain. Cardinal Ximenes extended Ferdinand’s dominion over the Moors, 1509, by the conquest of Oran, a city in the kingdom of Algiers. He undertook this conquest at his own expence, and marched himself at the head of the Spanish army in his pontifical habit, accompanied by a great number of ecclesiastics and monks, and at his return was met within four leagues of Seville by Ferdinand, who alighted to embrace him. Foreseeing afterwards an uncommon dearth, he ordered public granaries to be built at Toledo, Alcala, and Torrelaguna, and stored them with corn at his own cost; which made him so generally beloved, that his eulogy was engraved in the senate-house at Toledo, and in the public square, to perpetuate the memory of this noble action. King Ferdinand dying in 1516, appointed him regent of his dominions, and the archduke Charles (afterwards the emperor Charles V.) confirmed this appointment. No sooner was cardinal Ximenes established in the regency, than he became intent on exerting his authority. He introduced a reformation among the officers of the supreme council, and those of the court, ordered the judges to repress all extortions of the rich and of the nobility, and dismissed prince Ferdinand’s two favourites. These changes excited murmurs among the grandees, and some officer’s asked the cardinal, by what authority he thus acted? Ximenes immediately showed them the soldiers who composed his common guard, and replied, that his power consisted in their strength; then shaking his cord of St. Francis, said, “This suffices me to quell my rebellious subjects.” At the same time he ordered the cannon, which he kept behind his palace, to be fired, and concluded with these words: “Haec est ratio ultima regis;” i. e. This is the decisive argument of kings. He opposed the reformation of the inquisition; devoted himself, with indefatigable ardour, to the affairs of the church and state; and omitted nothing that he thought could contribute to the glory of religion, and the advantage of his sovereigns. At length, after having governed Spain twenty -two years, in the reigns of Ferdinand, Isabella, Jane, Philip, and Charles of Austria, he died November 8, 1517, as some think, by poison, in the eighty-first year of his age. His remains were interred in the college of Ildephonsus, at Alcala, where his tomb may be seen. This cardinal had settled several excellent foundations; among others, two magnificent female convents; one for the religious education of a great many young ladies of high rank, but destitute of fortune the other to be an asylum; for such poor maidens as should be found to have a real call to the monastic life. He also founded a chapel in his cathedral for the performance of divine service according to the Mozarabic rites. If we add the fountain of springwater, which he conveyed to the town of Torrelaguna, for public use, to the other sums he expended there, it will appear that he laid out nearly a million in that one place.

Many anecdotes are related of the peculiar temper and virtues of this celebrated cardinal, by his, biographers M. FJechier and M. Marsollier, each of whom published a life of him in 2 vols. 12mo, and there is a third by Gomez in folio. His family is generally represented to have been in a low situation; yet he is said, in the midst of his greatness, to have gone one summer to the village where he was born, to have visited his kindred, and to have treated them with all the marks of kindness and affection. His humility upon this head was very unaffected, and appeared sometimes very unexpectedly. He was present once when doctor Nicolas de Pax was explaining the philosophy of Raymund Lully; and, in speaking to the question, whether that famous man had the philosopher’s stone or not, he took notice of a passage in the Psalms which has been thought to look that way: “he raiseth up the poor out of the dust, and lifteth the needy out of the dunghill, that he may set him with the princes, even with the princes of his people.” That portion of scripture, said the cardinal, may be much more naturally interpreted, for instance, in my own case; and then ran out in a long detail of his own meanness, and the wonderful manner in which he had been exalted.

, an eminent cardinal, was born in 1339, at Padua. He taught common law in his native place and at Florence, where he acquired so much esteem, that when the archbishopric became vacant, he was chosen to fill it, but the pope had anticipated the election by giving it to another. Zabarella was afterwards invited to Rome by Boniface IX. and by John XXIII, who made him archbishop of Florence, and created him cardinal in 1411, from which time he had the title of the cardinal of Florence. The pope sent him on an embassy to the emperor Sigisrnund, who demanded a council, both on account of the Bohemian heresies, and the schism between the various candidates for the popedom; and the city of Constance having been fixed upon for this general council, Zabarella very much distinguished himself in its debates. He advised the deposition of John XXIII. and there is every reason to believe he would have been elected pope, had he not died, September 26, 1417, aged seventy-eight, six weeks before the election of Martin V. The emperor and the whole council attended his obsequies, and Poggio spoke his funeral oration, exerting the full powers of his eloquence and learning. Zabarella' s works are, “Commentaries on the Decretals and the Clementines,” 6 vols. folio. “Councils,” 1 vol. “Speeches and Letters,” 1 vol. A treatise “De Horis Canonicis” “De Felicitate, libri tres” “Varise Legum repethiones;” “Opuscula de Artibus liberalibus et de natura rerun* diversarum” * c Commentarii in naturalem et moralem Philosophiam“” Historia sui temporis“” Acta in Conciliis Pisano et Constanttensi“lastly,” Notes“on the Old and New Testament, and a treatise” On Schism,“Basil, 1565, folio, in which he ascribes all the misfortunes of the church, during his time, to the cessation of councils. This treatise” On Schism" has been frequently reprinted by the protestants, because Zabarella speaks very freely in it of the popes and the court of Rome; and for the same reason the book has been put into the index. Cardinal Zabarella had a nephew, Bartholomew Zabarella, who gave lectures in canon law at Padua, with reputation, and was afterwards archbishop of Florence, and referendary of the church under pope Eugenius IV. He died August 12, 1442, aged forty-six.

In 1752, he was recommended by the celebrated cardinal. Quirini as a director of the public library of Brescia, a re-< commendation which, however, had no effect. But two years after, his name being already known to the reigning duke of Modena, under whose auspices he had undertaken and continued his literary history of Italy, he was appointed director of the Ducal library, a place formerly held by Muratori, and on his death tendered to the learned father Corsini, of the university of Pisa, who had declined it, from his invincible attachment to his native place. He associated to himself, in the direction of the Ducal library, those two excellent friends and brothers, who were also co-operators in the compilation of the Literary History, father Dominic Troilo of Macerata, and father Joachim Gabardi of Carpi; who afterwards retained the same place under the celebrated father Granelli, and his successor, the illustrious Tiraboschi. Without any interruption to his higher literary pursuits, the improvements which he made in this situation are recorded highly to the honour of Zaccaria:. he enlarged the apartment devoted to the library; introduced a better classification of books, enriched it with new articles, and compiled a catalogue raisonne" of every branch, which, to the regret of many intelligent persons, was never published.

, an eminent painter, and brother of the preceding, was born in 1543, and carried to the Jubilee at Rome in 1550; when he was placed under his brother Taddeo, then in high reputation. He afterwards set up for a master -painter* and finished many of his brother’s pieces. Pope Gregory XIII. employed him; when Zncchero, having a difference with some of his officers, drew a picture of Slander, afterwards engraved by Corneliu^ Cort, in which he represented those who had offended him with ass’s ears. He exposed it publicly over the door of St. Luke’s chnrch; but was obliged to leave Rome, in order to avoid the Pope’s indignation. He worked in France for the cardinal of Lorrain, and in the Escurial for Philip II. without giving content to either the one or the other. He was more fortunate in England, where he drew the picture of queen Elizabeth, and of some other great personages, which gave great satisfaction. At last, returning to Italy, and having worked some time in Venice, Pope Gregory recalled and pardoned him. Soon after, he set up the academy of painting, by virtue of a brief obtained from this pope; of which being chosen the first president himself, he built a noble apartment for their 4 meeting. Hewent afterwards to Venice, to print some books he had written on painting thence passed on to Savoy and, in a journey to Loretto, died at Ancona in 1616. He differed but little from his brother in his style and manner of painting; though in sculpture and architecture he was far more excellent.