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

, another dramatic writer, of lesi fame and merit, was born in the Wilds of Kent, about 1553, according to the computation of Wood, who says, “he became a student in Magdalen-college in the beginning of 1569, aged sixteen or thereabouts, and was afterwards one of the demies or clerks of that house.” He took the degree of B.A.April 27, 1573, and of M. A. in 1575. On some disgust, he removed to Cambridge; and thence went to court, where he was taken notice of by queen Elizabeth, and hoped to have been preferred to the post of master of the revels, but after many years of anxious attendance, was disappointed, and was forced to write to the queen fot some little grant to support him in his old age. Of his two letters, or petitions, to her, many copies are preserved in manuscript. In what year he died is unknown; but Wood says, he was alive in 1597. His attachment to the dramatic Muses produced nine dramatic pieces, none of which, however, have preserved their reputation in our times. Even Phillips, in his “Theatrum,” calls them “old-fashioned tragedies and comedies.” Besides these, Lilly has been celebrated for his attempt, which was a very unhappy one, to reform and purify the English language. For this purpose he wrote a book entitled “Euphues,” which met with a degree of success very unusual, and certainly not less unmerited, being almost immediately and universally followed; at least, if we may give credit to the words of Mr. Blount, who published six of Lilly’s plays together, in one volume in twelves. In a preface to that book he says, “our nation are in his debt for a new English, which he taught them * Euphues and his England ' began first that language all our ladies were his scholars and that beauty at court, which could not parley Euphuisme, that is to say, who was unable to converse in that pure and reformed English, which he had formed his work to be the standard of, was as little regarded as she which now there speaks not French.”

According to Mr. Blount, Lilly was deserving of the highest encomiums. He styles him, in his title-page, “the only rare poet of that time, the witty, comical, facetiously quick and unparalleled John Lilly” and in his epistle dedicatory, says, “that hep sate at Apollo’s table that Apollo gave him a wreath of his own bayes without snatching, and the lyre he played on had no borrowed strings.” If, indeed, what has been said with regard to his reformation of the English language had been true, he certainly would have had a claim to the highest hor ours from his countrymen; but those eulogiums are far from well founded, since his injudicious attempts at improvement produced only the most ridiculous affectation. The style of his Euphues exhibits the absurdest excess of pedantry, to which nothing but the most deplorable bad taste could have given even a temporary approbation. Lilly was the author of a famous pamphlet against Martin Mar-prelate and his party, well known to collectors, entitled “Pap with a Hatchet, alias a fig for my godson, &c.” published about 1589, and attributed to Nashe, but was certainly Lilly’s. His prose work, or rather his two prose works intended to reform the English language, were entitled “Euphues and his England,” Lond. 1580, and “Euphues, the Anatomy of Wit,” 1581. Some differences of opinion as to the times of publishing these, may be found in our authorities.

, a famous English astrologer, was born at Diseworth in Leicestershire, in 1602, and was put to school at Ashby-de-la-Zouch, in the same county; but, his father not being in circumstances to give him a liberal education, as he intended at Cambridge, he was obliged to quit the school, after learning writing and arithmetic. Being then, as his biographers inform us, of a forward temper, and endued with shrewd wit, he resolved to push his fortune in London, where he arrived in 1620; and where his immediate necessities obliged him to article himself as a servant to a mantua-maker, in the parish of St. Clement Danes. In 1624, he was assistant to a tradesman in the Strand; who, not being able to write, employed him (among other domestic offices) as his book-keeper. He had not been above three years in this place, when, his master dying, he addressed and married his mistress, with a fortune of 1000l. In 1632, he turned his mind to astrology; and applied to one Evans, a worthless Welsh clergyman, who, after practising that craft many years in Leicestershire, had come to London, and, at this time, resided in Gunpowder-alley. Here Lilly became his pupil, and made such a quick progress, that he understood, in the cant of his brethren, how “to set a figure” perfectly in seven or eight weeks; and, continuing his application with the utmost assiduity, gave the public a specimen of his attainments and skill, by intimating that the king had chosen an unlucky horoscope for the coronation in Scotland, 1633.

In 1634, having procured a manuscript, with some alterations, of the “Ars Notoria” of Cornelius Agrippa, he became so infatuated by the doctrine of the magical circle, and the invocation of spirits, as not only to make use of a form of prayer prescribed there to the angel Salmonaeus, and to fancy himself a favourite of great power and interest with that uncreated phantom, but even to claim a knowledge of, and a familiar acquaintance with, the partieular guardian angels of England, by name Salmael and Malchidael. After this he treated the more common mystery of recovering stolen goods, &c. with great contempt, claiming a supernatural sight, and the gift of prophetical predictions, and seems to have known well how to profit by the credulity of the times. Such indeed was his fame, as to produce the following notable story. When one Ramsay, the king’s clock maker, being informed that there was a great treasure buried in the cloister of Westminster-abbey, obtained the dean’s (Dr. Williams, bishop of Lincoln), leave to search for it with the divining or Mosaical* rods, he applied to Lilly for his assistance. Lilly, with one Scot, who pretended to the use of the said rods, attended by Ramsay and above thirty persons more, went into the cloister by night, and, observing the rods to tumble over one another on the West side of the cloister, concluded the treasure lay hid under that spot; but, the ground being' dug to the depth of six feet, and nothing found but a coffin, which was not heavy enough for their purpose, they proceeded, without opening it, into the abbey. Here they were alarmed by a storm, which suddenly rose, and increased to such a height, that they were afraid the West end of the church would have been blown down upon them; the rods moved not at all; the candles and torches, all but one, were extinguished, or burned very dimly. Scot was amazed, looked pale, and knew not what to think or do; until Lilly gave directions to dismiss the chcinons, which when done, all was quiet again, and each man returned home. Lilly, however, took care not to expose his skill again in this manner, though he was cunning enough to ascribe the miscarriage, not to any defect in the art itself, but to the number of people who were present at the operation and derided it; shrewdly laying it down for a rule, that secrecy and intelligent operators, with a strong confidence and knowledge of what they are doing, are necessary requisites to succeed in this work.

In the mean time he buried his first wife, purchased a moiety of thirteen houses in the Strand, and married a second wife, who, joining to an extravagant temper a termagant spirit, which all his art could not lay, made him both poor and miserable. With this lady he was obliged to retire in 1637, to Hersham in Surrey, where he continued till Sept. 1641; and now seeing a prospect of advantage from the growing confusion of the times, and the prevalence of enthusiasm and credulity of all kinds, he returned to London. Here having purchased several curious books in his art, which were found in pulling down the house of another astrologer, he perused them with incessant diligence, and, in 1644, published his “Merlinus Anglicus Junior,” and several other astrological books. He had contracted an intimacy, the preceding year, with Bulstrode Whitelocke, esq. who was afterwards his friend and patron; and, in 1645, devoted himself entirely to the interests of the parliament, after the battle of Naseby, though he had before rather inclined to the king’s party. In 1647, upon the breaking out of the quarrel between the parliament and army, whose head quarters were at Windsor, he was sent for, together with Booker, another astrologer, by Fairfax, the general, who addressed him in these terms: “That God had blessed the army with many signal victories, and yet their work was not finished; that he hoped God would go along with them, until this work was done; that they sought not themselves, but the welfare and tranquillity of the good people, and the whole nation; and, for that end, were resolved to sacrifice both their own lives and fortunes; that he hoped the art, which they (Lilly and Booker) studied, was lawful and agreeable to God’s word; that he understood it not, but did not doubt they both feared God, and therefore had a good opinion of them.” To this speech Lilly returned the following answer: “My lord, I am glad to see you here at this time: certainly both the people of God, and all others of this nation, are very sensible of God’s mercy, love, and favour unto them, in directing fhe parliament to nominate and elect you general of their armies, a person so religious, so valiant. The several unexpected victories obtained under your excellency’s conduct will eternize the same unto all posterity. We are confident of God’s going along with you and your army, until the great work, for which he ordained you both, is fully perfected; which we hope will be the conquering and subversion of yours and the parliament’s enemies; and then a quiet settlement, and firm peace over all the nation, unto God’s glory, and full satisfaction of tender consciences. Sir, as for ourselves, we trust in God, and, as Christians, believe in him; we do not study any art, but what is lawful and consonant to the scriptures, fathers, and antiquity! which we humbly desire you to believe.” This audience, in November, seems to have been occasioned by a suspicion of his attachment to the royal party, of which he had afforded some ground, by receiving an application from the king, then in custody of the army at Hampton-court; for, in August preceding, when his majesty had framed thoughts of escaping from the soldiery, and hiding himself somewhere near the city, he sent, as Lilly tells us, Mrs. Whorwood, to know in what quarter of the nation he might be safely concealed, till he thought proper to discover himself. Lilly, having erected a figure, said, the king might be safely concealed in some part of Essex about twenty miles from London, where the lady happened to have a house fit for his majesty’s reception, and went away next morning to acquaint him with it. But the king was gone away in the night Westward, and surrendered himself at length to Hammond, in the Isle of Wight; and thus the project was rendered abortive. He was again applied to by the same lady, in 1648, for the same purpose, while the king was at Carisbrook- castle; whence having laid a design to escape by sawing the iron bars of his chamber-window, Mrs. Whorwood came to our author, and acquainted him with it. Lilly procured a proper saw, made by one Farmor, an ingenious locksmith, in Bow-lane, Cheapside, and furnished her with aquafortis besides; by which means his majesty had nearly succeeded, but his heart failing, he proceeded no farther. About September, the same lady came a third time to Lilly, on the same errand. The parliament-commissioners were now appointed to treat with his majesty; on which, our astrologer, after perusing his figure, told the lady the commissioners would be there such a day, appointed the day and hour when to receive them, and directed, as soon as the propositions were read, to sign them, and make haste with all speed to come up with the commissioners to London, the army being then far distant from London, and the city enraged stoutly against them. The king is said to have promised he would do so, but was diverted from it by lord Say.

All this while our astrologer continued true to his own interest, by serving that of the parliament party, from whom he received this year, 1648, fifty pounds in cash, and an order from the council of state for a pension of 100l. perann. which was granted to him for furnishing them with a perfect knowledge of the chief concernments of France. This he obtained by means of a secular priest, with whom he had been formerly acquainted, and who now was confessor to one of the French secretaries. Lilly received the pension two years, when he threw it up, with the employment, in disgust on some account or other. He read public lectures upon astrology, in 1648 and 1649, for the improvement of young students in that art and succeeded so well both as a practitioner and teacher, that we find him, in 1651 and 1652, laying out near 2000l. for lands and a house at Hersham. During the siege of Colchester, he and Booker were sent for thither, to encourage the soldiers, which they did by assuring them that the town would soon be taken, which proved true, and was perhaps not difficult to be foreseen. In 1650 he published that the parliament should not continue, but a new government arise, agreeably thereto; and in the almanack for 1653, he also asserted, that the parliament stood upon a ticklish foundation, and that the commonalty and soldiery would join together against them. On this he was called before the committee of plundered ministers; but, receiving notice before the arrival of the messenger, he applied to speaker Lenthal, always his friend, who pointed out the offensive passages, which he immediately altered; and attended the committee next morning with six copies printed, which six alone he acknowledged to be his. By this trick he escaped after having been only detained thirteen days in custody of the serjeant at arms. This year he was engaged in a dispute with Mr. Thomas Gataker, and, before the expiration of the year, he lost his second wife, to his great joy, and married a third in October following. In 1655 he was indicted at Hicks’s-hall, for giving judgment upon stolen goods, but acquitted: and, in 1659, he received, from the king of Sweden, a present of a gold chain and medal, worth above 50l. on account of his having mentioned that monarch with great respect in his almanacks of 1657 and 1658.

After the restoration, in 1660, being taken into custody, and examined by a committee of the House of Commons, touching the execution of Charles I, he declared, that Robert Spavin, then secretary to Cromwell, dining with him soon after the fact, assured him it was done by cornet Joyce. This year, he sued out his pardon under the broad-seal of England, and continued in London till 1665; when, on the appearance of the plague, he retired to his estate at Hersham. Here he applied himself to the study of physic, having, by means of his friend Elias Ashmole, procured from archbishop Sheldon a licence to practise it; and, from Oct. 1670, he exercised both the faculties of physic and astrology, till his death, which was occasioned by a paralytic stroke, in 1681, at Hersham. He was interred in the chancel of the church at Walton, and a black marble stone, with a Latin inscription, was placed over his grave soon after by Mr. Ashmole, at whose request also Dr. Smalridge, bishop of Bristol, then a scholar at Westminster-school, wrote a Latin and English elegy on his death, both which are annexed to the history of our author’s life and times, from which this memoir is extracted.

Lilly was author of many works. His “Observations on the Life and Death of Charles late King of England,” if we overlook the astrological nonsense, may be read with as much satisfaction as more celebrated histories, Lilly being not only very well informed, but strictly impartial. This work, with the Lives of Lilly and Ashmole, written by themselves, were published in one volume, 8vo, in 1774. His other works were principally as follow: 1. “Merlinus Anglicus Junior.” 2. “Supernatural Sight.” 3. “The white King’s Prophecy.” 4. “England’s prophetical Merlin;” all printed in 1644. 5. “The starry Messenger,” 1645. 6. “Collection of Prophecies,” 1646. 7. “A Comment on the white King’s Prophecy,” ib. 8. “The Nativities of archbishop Laud, and Thomas earl Strafford,” ib. 9. “Christian Astrology,” 1647; upon this piece he read his lectures in 1648, before- mentioned. 10. “The third Book of Nativities,” ib. 11.“The World’s Catastrophe,” ib. 12. “The Prophecies of Ambrose Merlin, with a Key,” ib. 13. “Trithemius, or the Government of the World by presiding Angels.” See Cornelius Agrippa’s book with the same title. These three last were printed together in one volume; the two first being translated into English by Elias Ashmole, esq. 14. “A Treatise of the three Suns seen in the Winter of 1647,” printed in 1648. 15. “Monarchy or no Monarchy,” 1651. 16. “Observations on the Life and Death of Charles, late King of England,” ib. and again in 1615, with the title of Mr. William Lilly’s “True History of King James and King Charles I.” &c. 17. “-Annus Tenebrosus or, the black Year.” This drew him into the dispute with Gataker, which our author carried on in his almanack in 16.54.

, an eminent English grammarian, was born at Odiham, in Hampshire, about 1468. After a good foundation of school-learning, he was sent to Magdalen -college, Oxford, and admitted a demy there at the age of eighteen. Having taken the degree of B. A. he quitted the university, and went, for religion’s sake, to Jerusalem, as Pits, and after him Wood, Tanner, and others have asserted; but Bale, from whom Pits copied, gives no such reason for Lily’s journey. It is indeed most probable, that he travelled eastward with an intention to acquire some knowledge of the Greek language, especially as he continued five years in the island of Rhodes with no other design. At Rhodes he found several learned men who had taken refuge there, under the protection of the knights, after the taking of Constantinople; and here he became acquainted with the domestic life and familiar conversation of the Greeks. He went thence to Rome; and improved himself farther in the Latin and Greek tongues under John Sulpitius and Pomponius Sabinus. On his arival in England, in 1509, he settled in London, and taught a private grammar-school, being the first teacher of Greek in the metropolis. In this he had so much success and reputation, that he was appointed first-master of St. Paul’s school. by the founder, Dr. Culet, in 1510. This laborious and useful employment he filled for the space of twelve years; and in that time educated a great many youths, some of whom proved the greatest men in the nation, as Thomas Lupset, sir Anthony Denny, sir William Paget, sir Edward North, John Leland, &c. He died of the plague at London in February 1523, aged 54, and was buried in the north yard of St. Paul’s. He is highly praised by Erasmus for his uncommon knowledge in the languages, and admirable skill in the instruction of youth. He was very intimate with sir Thomas More, to whose Latin translations of several Greek epigrams are prefixed some done by Lily, printed with this title, “Progymnasmata Thorns Mori & Gulielmi Lilii, Sodalium,” Basil, 1518, by Frobenius; and again in 1673, ibid. Lily, by his wife Agnes, had two sons; and a daughter, who was married to his usher John Rightwise, who succeeded his father-in-law in the mastership of St. Paul’s school, and died in 1532.

Lily’s works are, 1. “Brevissima institutio, seu ratio grammatices cognoscendi,” Lond. 1513; reprinted often, and used at this day, and commonly called “Lily’s Grammar.” The English rudiments were written by Dr. Colet, and the preface to the first edition, by cardinal Wolsey. The English syntax was written by Lily; also the rules for the genders of nouns, beginning with Propria quse maribus; and those for the preter-perfect tenses and supines, beginning with “As, in prsesenti.” The Latin syntax was chiefly the work of Erasmus. See Ward’s preface to his edition of Lily’s grammar, 1732. 2. “In senigmatica Bossi Antibossicon primum, secundum, tertium, ad G. Hormannum,” Lond. 1521, 4to. 3. “Poemata varia,” printed with the former. 4. “Apologia ad R. Whyttingtonum.” 5. “Apologia ad Joan. Skeltonum,” in answer to some invectives of that poet. 6. “De laudibus Deipari Virginis.” 7. “Super Philippi archiducis appulsu.” 8. “De Caroli quinti Caesaris adventu panegyricum.” Some other pieces are attributed to him on doubtful authority.

Lily had two sons, George and Peter. George was born in London, and bred at Magdalen-college, in Oxford; but, leaving the university without a degree, went to Rome, where he was received into the patronage of cardinal Pole, and became eminent for several branches of learning. Upon his return, he was made canon of St. Paul’s, and afterwards prebendary of Canterbury. He published the first exact map of Britain, and died in 1559. He wrote “An^lorum Regum Chronices Epitome,” Venice, 1548, Francf. 1565, Basil, 1577. To which are added, “Lancastrian & Eboracensis [Famil.] de Regno Contentiones, & Regum Anglise genealogia” “Elogia Virorum illustrium, 1559,” 8vo; “Catalogus, sive Series Pontificum Romanorum;” besides the “Life of Bishop Fisher,” ms. in the library of the Royal Society. Peter, his second son, was a dignitary in the church, of Canterbury, and father of another Peter Lily, D. D, This other was some time fellow of Jesus-college in Cambridge afterwards a brother of the Savoy-hospital in the Strand, London prebendary of St. Paul’s; and archdeacon of Taunton. He died in 1614, leaving a widow, who published sooie of his sermons.

, a celebrated professor of divinity in Holland, of the Arminian persuasion, was of a good family, originally of Maestricht, and born at Amsterdam, June 19, 1633. He passed the first years of his life in his father’s house, going thence daily to school; and then, attending the public lectures, became the disciple of Gaspar Barlaeus in ethics, of Gerard John Vossius in history, and of Arnold Sanguerd in philosophy. This foundation being laid, he applied himself to divinity under Stephen Curcellseus, who succeeded Simon Episcopius in that chair, among the remonstrants. From Amsterdam he went to Utrecht, and frequented the lectures of Gilbert Voetius, and other divines of the reformed religion. In May 1654, he returned to Amsterdam, and made his first probationsermon there in Oct. following. He passed an examination in divinity in August 1655; and was admitted to preach publicly, as a probationer, which he did first at Haerlem. The same year he was invited to be stated minister of Alcmaer, but declined it, not thinking himself yet qualified for that important task. In 1657 he published a course of sermons in Dutch, by Episcopius, his greut uncle by the mother’s side, and the same year was invited to be minister of the remonstrants at Gouda, where there was a numerous congregation of that sect. He accepted this vocation, and exercised the ministerial function in that town till he was called to Amsterdam.

Having inherited the papers of Episcopius, he found Among them a great number of letters relating to the affairs of the remonstrants; and, communicating these to Hartsoeker, minister of the remonstrants at Rotterdam, they joined in disposing them into a proper order, and then published them under the title of “Epistolae praestantium et eruditorum Virorum, &c.” at Amsterdam, in 1660, 8vo. These being well received by the public, Limborch collected more letters, and published a second edition, corrected and enlarged, in 1684, fol. After which, the copy feomlng into another bookseller’s hands, a third edition came out, 1704, at Amsterdam, in folio, with an appendix, by Limborch, of twenty letters more; the whole containing a complete series of every thing which relates to the history of Arminianism, from the time of Arminius to the synod of Dort, ad afterwards. In 1661 our author published a little piece in Dutch, by way of dialogue upon the subject of toleration in religion. Curcellseus having printed, in 1650, the first volume of Episcopius’s works, which had beea communicated to hi<n by Francis Limborch, our author’s father, the second volume was procured by Philip the son in 1661; to which he added a preface in defence of Episcopius and the remonstrants. In 1667 he became minister at Amsterdam, where Pontanus, the professor of divinity, whose talent lay chiefly in preaching, appointed Limborch his deputy; first for a year, and then resigned the chair absolutely to him in 1668. From this time he turned all his studies that way, and acquired a great reputation, not only among those of his own party at home, but among foreigners too, to which his mild and modest temper contributed not a little. Soon after, he published, in Flemish, several sermons of Episcopius, which had never been printed before.

In 1660 he had married; and, his wife being dead, in 1674 he engaged in a second marriage, and had two children. The ensuing year he procured an edition of all the works of his master Curcellseus, several of which had never appeared before. But, as neither Episcopius nor Curcellseus had leisure to finish a complete system of the remonstrant theology, Limborch resolved to undertake the task, and to compose one which should be entirely complete; some disorders, however, and several avocations, hindered him from finishing it before 1684, and it did not come out till 1686. This was the first system of divinity, according to the doctrine of the remonstrants, that had appeared in print. The work was undertaken at their request, received with all eagerness by them, and passed through four editions*. The same year, 1686, he had a dispute, at first

Controversiarum in Fcederato Belgio de Dutch, under the title of the “ Comviva voce, and afterwards in writing, with Isaac Orobio, -a Jew of Seville in Spain, who had made his escape out of the inquisition, and retired to Amsterdam, where he practised physic with great reputation. This dispute produced a piece by our author, entitled” Collatio arnica de Veritate Religionis Christiana cum erudito Judaso.“” A friendly conference with a learned Jew concerning the Truth of the Christian Religion." In it he shewed, that a Jew can bring no argument of any force in favour of Judaism which may not be made to militate strongly in favour of Christianity. Orobio, however, contended that every man ought to continue in the religion, be what it would, which he professed, since it was easier to disprove the truth of another religion than it was to prove his own; and upon this principle he averred, that, if it had been his lot to be born of parents who worshiped the sun, he saw no reason why he should renounce their religion and embrace another. To this piece against Orobio, Limborch added a small tract against Uriel Acosta, a Portuguese deist, in which Limborch answers very solidly his arguments, to shew that there is no true religion besides the religion of nature. (See Acosta.) Shortly after, Limborch published a little piece of Episcopius, in Flemish, containing an account of a dispute between that remonstrant and one William Borne, a Romish priest, shewing, that the Roman church is not exempt from errors, and is not the sovereign judge of controversies. In 1692 the book of sentences passed in the inquisition at Thoulouse, in France, coming into the hands of a friend, and containing all the sentences passed in that court from 1307 to 1323, Limborch resolved to publish it, as it furnished him with an occasion of adding the history of that dreadful tribunal, drawn from the writings of the inquisitors themselves *. In 1693 our author had the care of a new edition, in one large folio volume, of the sermons of Episcopius, in Dutch; to

bats of Sion, by James Fruitier.“There the translator has prefixed a large inis a long extract of the” Theologia troduction concerning the rise and proChristiana,“by Le Clerc, in Bibl. gress of persecution, an4 the real and Univ. torn. II. p. 21, et seq. pretended causes of it. In this edition, * The title i,” Historia Inquisi- Mr. Chandler had the assistance of tionis, cui subjungitur Liber Senten- some papers of our author communitiarum Inqumtiouis Tholosanas ab An- cated to him by Anthony Colling, esq. no 1307 ad 13-23, Araste!. 1692," fol. and the corrections and additions of It was translated into English by Mr. Francis Limborch, a relation of our Sam. Chandler, and printed at Lon- author. See Chandler’s preface, don, 1731, in vols. 4to; to which which he. added, not only a preface, but also a very long history of the life of Episcopius, in the same language, this has been since translated into Latin, and printed in 8vo at Amsterdam, 1701. (See Episcopius.)

In 1694 a young gentlewoman at Amsterdam, of twenty-­two years of age, took a fancy to learn Hebrew of a Jew; and was by frequent conversations with her tutor, induced to quit the Christian religion for Judaism. As soon as her mother understood this, she employed several divines, but in vain; because they undertook to prove Christianity from the Old Testament, omitting the authority of the New; to which she, returning the common answers she had learned from the Jews, received no reply that gave her satisfaction. While the young lady was in the midst of this perplexity, Dr. Veen, a physician, happened to be sent for to the house; and, hearing her mother speak, with great concern, of the doubts which disturbed her daughter, he mentioned Limborch’s dispute with Orobio. She immediately applied to Limborch, in hopes that he would be able to remove her scruples, and bring her back to the Christian religion. Limborch accordingly used the same train of argument which he had pursued with Orobio, and quickly recovered her to her former faith. In 1698 he was accused of a calumny, in a book concerning the Xo'yog in St. John’s gospel, by Vander Waeyen, professor of divinity at Franecker, because he had said, that Francis Burman, a divine and professor at Leyden, had, in his “Theologia Christiana,” merely transcribed Spinoza without any judgment. Limborch, producing passages from both, endeavoured to prove that he had said nothing which was not strictly true; but when this was printed at Amsterdam in 1699, the two Burmans, one professor of history and eloquence at Utrecht, and the other minister at Amsterdam, published a book in viiulication of their father’s memory, entitled “Burmannorum Pietas,” “The Piety of the Burmans;” to which Limborch made no reply. la 1700 he published, in Dutch, at Amsterdam, a book of piety, containing instructions for dying persons, or means of preparing for death; with a discourse upon the death of John Owens, minister of the remonstrants at Gouda. At the same time he began a -commentary upon the Acts of the Apostles, and upon the Epistles to th.e Romans and Hebrews, which was published in 1711.

Having pursued the strictest temperance through life, he preserved the vigour of his mind, and health of his body, to a considerable age, but in the autumn of 1711 he was seized with the St. Anthony’s fire which, growing more violent in the winter, carried him oft, April So, 1713. His funeral oration was spoken by John Le Clerc, who gives him the following character: “Mr, Limborch had many friends among the learned, both at home and abroad, especially in England, where he was much esteemed, particularly by archbishop Tillotson, to whom his history of the inquisition was dedicated, and Mr. Locke. With Mr, Locke he first became acquainted in Holland, and after-> wards held a correspondence by letters, in which, among other things, he has explained the nature of human liberty, a subject not exactly understood by Mr. Locke. He was of an open sincere carriage, which was so well tempered with humanity and discretion as to give no offence. In his instructions, when professor, he observed the greatest perspicuity and the justest order, to which his memory, which retained whatever he had written, almost to a word, contributed very much; and, though a long course of teaching had given him an authority with those about him, and his advanced age had added a reverence to him, yet he was never displeased with others for differing from him, but would both censure, and be censured, without chagrin. Though he never proposed the understanding of languages as the end of his studies, yet he had made large advances in them, and read over many of the ancient and modern writers, and would have excelled in this part of literature, if he bad not preferred that which was more important. He bad all the qualifications suitable to the character of a divine. Above all things, he had a love for truth, and pursued the search of it, by reading the Scriptures with the best commentators. As a preacher, his sermons were methodical and solid, rather than eloquent. If he had applied himself to the mathematics he would undoubtedly have excelled therein; but he had no particular fondness for that study, though he was an absolute master of arithmetic. He was so perfectly acquainted with the history of his own country, especially for 150 years, that he even retained the most minute circumstance?, and the very time of each transaction; so that scarce any one could deceive him in that particular. In his manner he was grave withput pride or sullenness, affable without affectation, pleasant and facetious, upon occasion, without sinking into a vulgar lowness, or degenerating into malice or ill-nature. By these qualifications he was agreeable to all who conversed with him; and his behaviour towards his neighbours was such, that all who knew him, or had any dealings with him, ever commended it.”

, one of the most eminent physicians and scholars of his age, descended from the Linacres of Li nacre-hall in the parish of Chesterfield, Derbyshire, was born at Canterbury about 1460. Having completed his school-education, under William de Sellingj a very eminent master, in his native city, he entered at Oxford, and was chosen fellow of All Souls’ college in 1484. Being desirous of farther advancement in learning, he accompanied De Selling into Italy, whither the latter was sent on an embassy to the court of Rome by Henry VII. De Selling left him at Bologna, with strong recommendations to Politian, one of the most elegant Latinists in Europe; and removing thence to Florence, Linacre acquired the favour of that munificent patron of literature, Lorenzo de Medicis, who granted him the privilege of attending the same preceptors with his own sons; an opportunity, by which he knew how to profit; and under Demetrius Chalcondylas, who had fled from Constantinople when it was taken by the Turks, he acquired a perfect knowledge of the Greek language. He then went to Rome, and studied medicine and natural philosophy under Hermolaus Barbaras. He applied particularly to the works of Aristotle and Galen, and is said to have been the first Englishman who made himself master of those writers by perusing them in the original Greek. He also translated and published several of Galen’s tracts into most elegant Latin, and along with Grocyn and William Latimer, undertook a translation of Aristotle, which, however, they left imperfect. On his return to England, he was incorporated M. D. at Oxford, which degree he had taken at Padua, gave temporary lectures on physic, and taught the Greek language in that university. His reputation soon became so high, that king Henry VII. called him to court, and entrusted him with the care both of the health and education of his son, prince Arthur. He is said also to have instructed princess Catherine in the Italian language. He was made successively physician to the kings Henry VII., Henry VIII., and Edward VI., and to the princess Mary.

In the reign of Henry VIII. indeed, he appears to have Stood above all rivalship at the head of his profession; and he evinced his attachment to its interests, as well as to the public good, by various acts; but especially by founding two lectures on physic in the university of Oxford, and one in that of Cambridge. That at Oxford was left to Merton college, and the Cambridge lecture was given to St. John’s, at which college it is said by Wood and Knight that Linacre studied for some time. The endowment of both is the manor of Tracys, or Tracies, in Kent; but although he bequeathed these at his death in 1524, and the lectures were actually read even in his life-time, they were not established until December 1549, by Tunstall, bishop of Durham. Linacre also may be reputed the founder of the royal college of physicians in London. Regretting that there was no proper check upon illiterate monks and empirics, licences being easily obtained by improper persons, when the bishops were authorised to examine and license practitioners in an art of which they could not be competent judges, Linacre obtained letters patent in 1518 from Henry VIII. constituting a corporate body of regularly bred physicians in London, in whom was vested the sole right of examining and admitting persons to practise within the city, and seven miles round it; and also of licensing practitioners throughout the whole kingdom, except such as were graduates of Oxford or Cambridge, who by virtue of their degrees were independent of the college, except within London and its precincts. The college had likewise authority given to it to examine prescriptions and drugs in apothecaries’ shops. Linacre was the first president of the new college, and continued in the office during the remaining seven years of his life; and, at his death, he bequeathed to the college his house in Knight-rider-street, in which its meetings were held.

After receiving all these honours, as attestations and reyards of superior merit in his profession, he resolved to change it for that of divinity. To this study he applied himself in the latter part of his life; and, entering into the priesthood, obtained the rectory of Mersham, October 1509; but, resigning it within a month, he was installed into the prebend of Eaton in the church of Wells, and afterwards, in 1518, into another of York; he was alsa precentor in the latter church, but resigned it in half a year. He had other preferments in the church, some of which he received from archbishop Warham, as he gratefully acknowledges in a letter to that prelate. Dr. Knight informs us, that he was a prebendary of St. Stepiien’s, Westminster; and bishop Tanner writes, that he was also rector of Wigan, in Lancashire. He died of the stone, in great pain and torment, Oct. 20, 1524, and was buried in St. Paul’s cathedral; where a handsome monument was afterwards erected to his memory by his admirer and successor in fame, Dr. Caius.

In his literary character, Linacre stands eminently distinguished; as he was one of the first, in conjunction with Colet, Lily, Grocyn, and Latimer, who revived, or rather introduced, classical learning in this island. Translations from the Greek authors into Latin were the chief occupations of the literati of those times; and Linacre, as we have already observed, conferred a benefit on his profession, by translating several of the most valuable pieces of Galen. These were the treatises, “De Sanitate tuenda,” in six books, which was printed at Cambridge in 1517, and dedicated to king Henry VIII.; “De Morbis curandis,” in fourteen books, printed at Paris in 1526; three books “De Temperamentis,” and one “De inaequali Temperie,” first printed at Cambridge in 1521, and inscribed to pope Leo X. A* copy of this on vellum, which Linacre presented to Henry VIII. is now in the Bodleian. There is another edition, without date or printer’s name. “De naturalibus Facaltatibus,” three books, together with one book “De Pulsuum Usu,” without date, but they were reprinted by Colinaeus in 1528, as well as his posthumous translation of the four books “De Morborum Symptomatibus.” In these versions Linacre exhibited a Latin style so pure and elegant, as ranked him among the finest writers of his age. In the polish of his style he was rather fastidious, and his friend Erasmus describes him as “Vir non exacti tantum, sed severi judicii;” and Huet, in his learned treatise “De claris Interpretatoribus,” gives him the pra?se of extraordinary elegance and chasteness of style, but intimates that he occasionally sacrifices fidelity to these qualities.

It was, indeed, on his reputation as a philologist, that he seems chiefly to have valued himself. His first essay was a translation of “Proclus on the Sphere,” dedicated to his pupil, prince Arthur; and he also wrote a smal book of the rudiments of the Latin grammar, in English, for the use of the princess Mary, which was afterwards translated into Latin by the celebrated Buchanan. But the work which appears to have engaged a very large portion of his time, and was universally acknowledged to be a work of the most profound erudition, was a larger grammatical treatise, entitled “De emendata structura Latini Sermonis, libri sex.” This work, which was not printed till after his death, in December 1524, when it appeared with a recommendatory letter from the learned Melancthon, was received with much applause by men of erudition, and passed through several editions. The original is very scarce; but from the translation of it, by Buchanan, it appears to be little more than the present accidence taught in schools, and still retaining the title of “Rudiments, &c.” His friend Erasmus, indeed, in his “Moriae Encomium,” bestowed some good-natured raillery upon the author, for having tortured himself for twenty years by the subtleties of grammar, and, after forsaking other more important objects, thought himself happy in living long enough to establish certain rules for distinguishing the eight parts of speech.

In his professional character, Linacre acquired universal reputation, among his countrymen and contemporaries, for skill and practical ability, as well as for his learning; and he was equally the subject of applause and estimation es an upright and humane physician, a steady and affectionate friend, and a munificent patron of letters. It were sufficient of itself to justify this eulogium, to mention that he was the intimate friend of Erasmus. That great and worthy roan frequently takes occasion to express his affection and esteem for his character and abilities; and writing to an acquaintance, when seized with an illness at Paris, he pathetically laments his absence from Linacre, from whose skill and kindness he might receive equal relief.

, a learned divine, of St. MaryVhall at Oxford, officiated for many years as minister of the nonjuring society in Trinity-chapel, Aldersgate-street, and is said to have been, their last minister. He was also for some time a corrector of the press to Mr. Bowyer the printer. He finished a long and useful life, June 21, 1768, at the age of eighty-two; and was buried in Islington church-yard. Mr. Lindsay published “The Short History of the Regal Succession,” &c. with “Remarks on Whiston’s Scripture Politics,” &c. 1720, 8vo which occurs in the Bodleian Catalogue. His valuable translation of Mason’s “Vindication of the Church of England,” 1726, (reprinted in 1728,) has a large and elaborate preface, containing “a full and particular Series of the Succession of our Bishops, through the several Reigns since the Reformation,” &c. He dates the second edition from “Islington, 13 Dec. 1727.” In 1747, he published, in the same size, “Two Sermons preached at Court in 1620, by Francis Mason;” which he recommends, “as well for their own intrinsic value, as to make up a complete Collection of that learned Author’s Works.” He had a nephew, who died curate of Waltham abbey, Sept. 17, 1779.

, an ancient Scotch poet, descended from a noble family, was born in 1490, at Garmylton in Hadingtonshire, and received his early education probably at the neighbouring school of Coupar. In 1505 he was sent to the university of St. Andrew’s, which he is supposed to have left in 1509. He then entered into the service of the court, where, in 1512, he was an attendant, or page of honour to James V. then an infant. In this situation he continued until 1524, when, by the intrigues of the queen mother, the young king was deprived of his servants, Bellenden, Lindsay, and others, for whom he seems always to have entertained a just regard, and whom he dismissed with a pension, the payment of which his majesty was studious to enforce, while his means were few, and his power was little. From 1524 to 1528, Lindsay was a witness of the confusions and oppressions arising from the domination of the Douglasses over both the prince and his people. From that thraldom the king, at the age of sixteen, made his escape, by his own address and vigour, in July of 1528, after every other exertion had failed. Lindsay had now liberty and spirits to support him in the cultivation of his muse, and about the end of the year just mentioned, produced his “Dreme.” In the following year he presented his “Complaynt” to the king, and in 1530 he was inaugurated lion king of arms, and incidentally became a knight. In December of this year he published his satire on the clergy, called “The Complaynt of the Papingo.”

Sir David was soon employed in discharging the proper functions of lion herald. In April 1531, he was sent with Campbel and Panter, to Antwerp, to renew the ancient treaty of commerce with the Netherlands, and they were so well received by the emperor Charles V. as to insure the success of their mission. Lindsay returned to Scotland in the latter end of 1531, and not long after married. This marriage does not appear to have been either fruitful or happy. Sir David left no issue, and he every where speaks with a sort of Turkish contempt of women. He was now occupied upon a poem, which displays much of that sentiment, a drama of a very singular kind, which he called, what he intended it to be, “A Satyre of the three Estatis.” Some of his biographers have affected to consider him as the first dramatist of his country. But moralities existed in Scotland before he was born; and were very common in his time. In 1536, probably, he produced his “Answer to the King’s Flyting,” and his ' Complaynt of Basche," which shew the gloominess of his temperament.

In the mean time he was sent as lion king, with sir John Campbel of Laudon, in 1535, to the emperor, to demand in marriage one of the princesses of his house. The king, however, not being satisfied with the portraits of the princesses presented to him, or perhaps, as Mr. Chalmers thinks, being attracted by a more useful connection with France, sent Lindsay, in 1536, to that country to demand in marriage a daughter of the house of Vendome; but the king himself, arriving the year following, made choice of Magdalene of France, who died in about two months after her marriage; and this lamentable event occasioned Lindsay’s next poem, the “Deploratioun of the Deith of quene Magdalene.” The king, however, married again in 1538, and Lindsay’s talents were called forth in the rejoicings and ceremonies consequent to that event, and afterwards on the birth of a prince. During the remainder of the reign of James V. he appears to have retained his majesty’s favour, and to have been frequently employed in his character of herald; but few of these incidents seem of sufficient importance to be detached from his biographer’s narrative. During the regency, he appears to have espoused the cause of the reformers, and after the assassination of cardinal Beaton, wrote his “Tragedie of the late Cardinal,” to strengthen the prejudices of the public against that ecclesiastic.

In 1548 he was sent, as lion herald, to Christian, king of Denmark, to solicit ships, for protecting the Scottish coasts against the English, and to negociate a free trade, particularly in grain: the latter purpose only was accomplished, but at Copenhagen, Lindsay had an opportunity of becoming acquainted with the literati of Denmark. He at length returned to his usual occupations, and was probably no more employed in such distant embassies. About this time he published the most pleasing of all his poems, “The Historic and Testament of Squire Meldrum.” In 1553 he finished his last and greatest work, “The Monarchic.” When he died, seems a matter of great uncertainty. His latest and best-informed biographer is inclined to place his death in or about 1557; but others say that he lived till 1567. It is rather singular that a man of so much celebrity, a great public officer, one of the reformers, or who at least contributed to the reformation, and the most popular poet of his time, should have died in such obscurity, without even a tradition as to when or where he was buried. Little of his personal character can now be known, but what is to be gleaned from his writings. Hfc entered with great zeal into the religious disputes of his time, but is supposed to lean rather to the Lutheran than Calvinistic principles of reformation; his satires, however, were powerfully assisting in exposing the vices of the clergy, and produced a lasting etiect on the minds of the people. We shall not enter very minutely into his character as a poet. In his works, says Mr. Ellis, we do not often find either the splendid diction of Dunbar, or the prolific imagination of Gawin Douglas. Perhaps, indeed, the “Dream” is his only composition which can be cited as uniformly poetical; but his various learning, his good sense, his perfect knowledge of courts, and of the world, the facility of his versification, and above all, his peculiar talent of adapting himself to readers of all denominations, will continue to secure to him a considerable share of that popularity, for which he was originally indebted to the opinions he professed, no less than to his poetical merit. The most ample information respecting Lindsay, his personal history, and works, may be found in the very accurate edition of the latter published in 1806, by George Chalmers, esq. in 3 vols. 8vo. It has been justly remarked that if the learned editor had executed no more than the glossary prefixed to this edition, he would have been amply entitled to the gratitude both of English and Scotch scholars. A more elaborate, learned, and satisfactory production of the kind has certainly not appeared since that of Ruddiman.

, a Socinian writer, was born at Middlewich, in Cheshire, June 20th, 1723, old style. His father, Mr. Robert Lindsey, was an opulent proprietor of the salt-works in that neighbourhood; his mother’s name was Spencer, a younger branch of the Spencer family, in the county of Buckingham. Theophilus was the second of three children, and so named after his godfather, Theophilus earl of Huntingdon. He received the rudiments of grammar-learning at Middlewich, and from his early attachment to books, and the habitual seriousness of his mind, he was intended by his mother for the church. He lost some time by a change of schools, until he was put under the care of Mr. Barnard of the free-school of Leeds, under whom he made a rapid progress in classical learning. At the age of eighteen he was admitted of St. John’s college, Cambridge, where, by exemplary diligence and moral conduct, he obtained the entire approbation of his tutors. As soon as he had finished his studies at college, taken his first degree, and had been admitted to deacon’s orders, he was nominated by sir George Wheler to a chapel in Spital-square London. Soon after this, he was, by the recommendation of the earl of Huntingdon, appointed domestic chaplain to Algernon duke of Somerset. The duke, from a great regard for his merit, determined to procure him a high rank in the church, but an early death deprived Mr. Lindsey of his illustrious patron. In 1754, be accompanied the present duke of Northumberland to the continent, and on his return he supplied, for some time, the temporary vacancy of a good living in the north of England, called Kirkby-Wisk: here he became acquainted with Mr. archdeacon Blackburne, and in 1760 married his daughter-in-law. From Kirkby Mr. Lindsey went to Piddletown, in Dorsetshire, having been presented to the living of that place by the earl of Huntingdon: this, through the interest of the same patron, he exchanged, in 1764, for the vicarage of Catterick, in Yorkshire. Here he resided nearly ten years, an exemplary pattern of a primitive and conscientous pastor, highly respected and beloved by the people committed to his charge. Besides his various and important duties as a parish clergyman, Mr. Lindsey was ever alive, and heartily active, in every cause in which a deviation from the formularies and obligations of the church was considered as necessary. With this view, in 1771 he zealously co-operated with Mr. archdeacon Blackburne, Dr. John Jebb, Mr. Wyvil, and others, in endeavouring to obtain relief in matters of subscription to the thirty-nine articles. Mr. Lindsey had, probably, for some years, entertained doubts with respect to the doctrine of the Trinity, and other leading topics of the established faith; and these pressed so heavy upon him that he could no longer endure to remain in a church, partaking of its emoluments, which he could not deserve, and preaching its doctrines, which he could not believe. He therefore, in November 1773, wrote to the prelate of his diocese, informing him of his iateiuion to quit the church, and signifying, that in a few days he should transmit to him his deed of resignation. The bishop endeavoured to persuade him to remain at his post, but he had made up his mind that duty required the sacrifice, and he was resolved to bear the consequences. When the act was done, he said he felt himself delivered from a load which had long lain heavy upon him, and at times nearly overwhelmed him. Previously to his quitting Catterick, Mr. Lindsey delivered a farewell address to his parishioners, in which he stated his motives for quitting them in a simple and very affecting manner, pointing out the reasons why he could no longer conduct, nor join in their worship, without the guilt of continual insincerity before God, and endangering the loss of his favour for ever. He left Catterick about the middle of December, and after visiting some friends in different parts of the country, he arrived in London in January 1774, where he met with friends, who zealously patronized the idea which he entertained of opening a place of worship, devoted entirely to unitarian principles. A large room was at first fitted up for the purpose in Essex-street in the Strand, which was opened April 17, 1774. The service of the place was conducted according to the plan of a liturgy which had been altered from that used in the established church by the celebrated Dr. Samuel Clarke, whose conscience was not quite so delicate as that of Mr. Lindsey. Mr. Lindsey published the sermon which he preached on the opening of his chapel, to which was added an account of the liturgy made use of. About the same time he published his “Apology,” of which several editions were called for in the course of a few years. This was followed by a still larger volume, entitled “A Sequel to the Apology,” which was intended as a reply to his various opponents, and likewise to vindicate and establish the leading doctrines which he professed, and on account of which he had given up his preferment in the church. This work was published in 1776; and in 1778 he was enabled, by the assistance of his friends, to build the chapel of Essex-street, and to purchase the ground on which it stands. Till the summer of 1793, Mr. Lindsey, with the aid of his friend the Rev. Dr. Disney, conducted the services of the place, upon strict unitarian principles, to a numerous congregation. He then resigned the whole into the hands of his coadjutor, notwithstanding the, earnest wishes of his hearers that he should still continue a part of the services, Though he had quitted the duties of the pulpit, he continued to labour in the cause, by his publications, till he had attained his 80th, year. In 1802, he published his last work, entitled “Conversations on the Divine Government, shewing that every thing is from God, and for good to all.” The professed object of this piece is to vindicate the Creator from those gloomy notions which are too often attached to his providence, and to shew that the government of the world is the wisest that could have been adopted, and that afflictions and apparent evils are permitted for the general good. From this principle Mr. Lindsey derived consolation through life, and upon it he acted in every difficult and trying scene. On his death-bed he spoke of his sufferings with perfect patience and meekness, and when reminded, by a friend, that he doubtless was enabled to bear them with so much fortitude in the recollection of his favourite maxim, that “Whatever is, is right; w “No,” said he with an animation that lighted up his countenance, “Whatever is, is best.” This was the last sentence which he was able distinctly to articulate: he died Novembers, 1808. Besides the works already referred to, he published two dissertations: 1. On the preface to St. John’s Gospel; 2. On praying to Christ:” An Historical View of the State of the Unitarian Doctrine and Worship from the Reformation to our own Times;“and several other pieces. Among controversial writers Mr. Lindsey takes a place as his” Vindiciae Priestleianae,“and his” Examination of Mr. Robinson’s Plea for the Divinity of Christ," will shew. Two volumes of his Sermons have been published since his death.

Mr. Lindsey was a man of mild and amiable manners, and very highly respected by every person who knew him. As a writer on the side of unitarianism, it cannot be said that he brought many accessions of new matter and argument, but his honourable conduct in the resignation of his preferment rendered him peculiarly an ornament to the sect he joined, and the loss of such a man might be justly regretted by the church he left.

, a Dutch painter, or at least one who painted much in the Dutch manner, was born at Frankfort on the Maine, in 1625, and learned his art in Holland, but afterwards went to Koine, where he studiously observed every thing that was curious in art or nature, and continued at Rome till he was twenty-five years of age. His usual subjects are fairs, mountebanks, seaprospects, naval engagements, and landscapes. His landscapes are enriched with antiquities, ruins, animals, and elegant figures; his sea-fights are full of expression, exciting pity and terror; and all his objects are well-designed. His skies are generally light, and thinly clouded, and his management of the aerial perspective is extremely judicious; his keeping is usually good; his distances of a clear bluish tint; and the whole together is masterly, producing an agreeable effect. In painting figures or animals, he had uncommon readiness, and on that account he was employed by several eminent artists to adorn their landscapes with those objects; and whatever he inserted in the works of other masters, was always well adapted to the scene and the subject. His pencil is free, his touch clean and light, and his compositions are in general esteem. It may be observed, that he was particularly fond of introducing into most of his compositions, pieces of architecture, the remains of elegant buildings, or the gates of the sea-port towns of Italy; embellished with statues, placed sometimes on the pediments and cornices, and sometimes in niches. He also excelled in representing Italian fairs and markets, inserting in those subjects abundance of figures, well grouped and designed, in attitudes suitable to their different characters and occupations; and although )ie often repeated the same subjects, yet the liveliness of liis imagination, and the readiness of his invention, always enabled him to give them a remarkable variety. He died in 1687.

, a French advocate and political writer, was born at Rheims, July 14, 1736. His father was one of the professors of the college of Beauvais, at Paris, and had his son educated under him, v who made such proficiency in his studies as to gain the three chief prizes of the college in 1751. This early celebrity was noticed by the duke de Deux-Pont, then at Paris, who took him with him to the country; but Linguet soon left this nobleman for the service of the prince de Beavau, who employed him as his aide-de-camp in the war in Portugal, on account of his skill in mathematics. During his residence in that country, Linguet learned the language so far as to be able to translate some Portuguese dramas into French. Returning to France in 1762, he was admitted to the bar, where his character was very various; but amongst the reports both of enemies and friends, it appears that of an hundred and thirty causes, he lost only nine, and was allowed to shine both in oiatory and compo*­sidon. He had the art, however, of making enemies by the occasional liberties he took with characters; and at one time twenty-four of his brethren at the bar, whether from jealousy or a better reason, determined that they would take no brief in any cause in which he was concerned, and the parliament of Paris approved this so far as to interdict him from pleading. We are not sufficiently acquainted with the circumstances of the case to be able to form an opinion on the justice of this harsh measure. It appears, however, to have thrown Linguet out of his profession, and he then began to employ his pen on his numerous political writings but these, while they added to his reputation as a lively writer, added likewise to the number of his enemies. The most pointed satire levelled at him was the “Theory of Paradox,” generally attributed to the abbe Morellet, who collected all the absurd paradoxes to be found in Linguet’s productions, which it must be allowed are sufficiently numerous, and deserve the castigation he received. Linguet endeavoured to reply, but the laugh was against him, and all the wits of Paris enjoyed his mortification. His “Journal,” likewise, in which most of his effusions appeared, was suppressed by the minister of state, Maurepas; and Linguet, thinking his personal liberty was now in danger, came to London; but the English not receiving him as he expected, he went to Brussels, and in consequence of an application to the count de Vergeunes, was allowed to return to France. He had not been here long, before, fresh complaints having been made of his conduct, he was, Sept. 27, 1780, sent to the Bastille, where he remained twenty months. Of his imprisonment and the causes he published a very interesting account, which was translated into English, and printed here in 1783. He was, after being released, exiled to Rethel, but in a short time returned to England. He had been exiled on two other occasions, once to Chartres, and the other to Nogent-le-Kotrou. At this last place, he seduced a madame But, the wife of a manufacturer, who accompanied him to England. From England he went again to Brussels, and resumed his journal, or “Annales politiques,” in which he endeavoured to pay his court to the emperor Joseph, who was so much pleased with a paper he had written on his favourite project of opening the Scheldt, that he invited him to Vienna, and made him a present of 1000 ducats. Linguet, however, soon forfeited the emperor’s favour, by taking part with Varider Noot and the other insurgents of Brabant. Obliged, therefore, to quit the Netherlands, he came to Paris in 1791, and appeared at the bar of the constituent assembly as advocate for the colonial assembly of St. Domingo and the cause of the blacks. In February 1792, he appeared in the legislative assembly to denounce Bertrand de Moleville, the minister of the marine; but his manner was so absurd, that notwithstanding the unpopularity of that statesman, the assembly treated it with contempt, and Linguet indignantly tore in pieces his memorial, which he had been desired to leave on the table. During the reign of terror, he withdrew into the country, but was discovered and brought before the revolutionary tribunal, and condemned to death June 27, 1794, for having in his works paid court to the despots of Vienna and London. At the age of fifty-seven he went with serenity and courage to meet his fate. It is not very easy to form an opinion of Linguet’s real character. His being interrupted in his profession seems to have thrown him upon the public, whose prejudices he alternately opposed and flattered. His works abound in contradictions, but upon the whole it may be inferred that he was a lover of liberty, and no inconsiderable promoter of those opinions which precipitated the revolution. That he was not one of the ferocious sect, appears from his escape, and his death. His works are very numerous. The principal are, 1. “Voyage au labyrinthe du jardin du roi,” Hague, (Paris,) 1755, 12mo. 2. “Histoire du siecle d'Alexandre,” Paris, 1762, 12mo. 3. “Projet d‘un canal et d’un pont sur les cotes de Picardie,” 1764, 8vo. 4. “Le Fanatisme de Philosophes,” 1764, 8vo. 5. “Necessit6 d‘une reforme dans l’administration de la justice et des lois civiles de France,” Amst. 1764, 8vo. 6. “La Dime royale,” 1764, reprinted in 1787. 7. “Histoire des Revolutions de l'empire Remain,” 1766, 2 vols. 12mo. This is one of his paradoxical works, in which tyranny and slavery are represented in the most favourable light. 8. “Theorie des Lois,” 1767, 2 vols. 8vo, reprinted in 1774. 9. “Histoire impartiale des Jesuites,” 1768, 8vo. 10. “Hardion’s Universal History,” vols. 19th and 20th. 11. “Theatre Espagnole,” 1770, 4 vols. 12mo. 12. “Theorie du Libelle,” Amst. (Paris), 1775, 12mo, an a,nswer to the abbe Morellet. 13. “Du plusheureux gouvernment,” &c. 1774, 2 vols. 12mo. 14. “Essai philosophique sur le Monachisme,” 1777, 8vo. Besides these he wrote several pieces on the revolution in Brabant, and a collection of law cases.

, an eminent mnsic professor and organist, long resident at Bath, where he had served an apprenticeship under Chilcot, the organist of that city, was a studious man, equally versed in the theory and practice of his art. Having a large family of children, in whom he found the seeds of genius had been planted by nature, and the gift of voice, in order to cultivate this, he pointed his studies to singing, and became the best singing-master of his time, if we may judge by the specimens of “his success in his own family. He was not only a masterly player on the organ and harpsichord, but a good composer, as his elegies and several compositions for Drury-lane theatre evinced. His son Thomas, who was placed under Nardini at Florence, the celebrated disciple of Tartini, was a fine performer on the violin, with a talent for composition, which, if he had lived to develope, would have given longevity to his fame. Being at Grimsthorpe, in Lincolnshire, at the seat of the duke of Ancaster, where he often amused himself in rowing, fishing, and sailing in a boat on a piece of water, in a squall of wind, or by some accident, the boat was overset, and this amiable and promising youth was drowned at an early age, to the great affliction of his family and friends, particularly his matchless sister, Mrs. Sheridan, whom this calamity rendered miserable for a long time; during which, her affection and grief appeared in verses of the most sweet and affecting kind on the sorrowful event. The beauty, talents, and mental endowments of this” Sancta Caecilia rediviva," will be remembered to the last hour of all who heard, or even saw and conversed with her. The tone of her voice and expressive manner of singing were as enchanting as her countenance and conversation. In her singing, with a mellifluous-toned voice, a perfect shake and intonation, she was possessed of the double power of delighting an audience equally in pathetic strains and songs of brilliant execution, which is allowed to very tew singers. When she had heard the Agujari and the Danzi, afterwards madame le Brun, she astonished all hearers by performing their bravura airs, extending the natural compass of her voice a fourth above the highest note of the harpsichord, before additional keys were in fashion. Mrs. Sheridan died at Bristol in 1792.

Mrs. Tickel, her sister, was but little inferior to her in beauty and talents; and Mr. Linley’s other daughters continued to excite the admiration of all who knew them, in a manner worthy of the family from which they sprang.

, afterwards Von Linne', the most eminent of modern naturalists, was born at Rashult, in the province of Smaland, in Sweden, May 13th, 1707. His father, Nicholas Linnæus, was assistant minister of the parish of Stenbrohult, to which the hamlet of Rashult belongs, and became in process of time its pastor or rector; having married Christina Broderson, the daughter of his predecessor. The subject of our memoir was their first-born child. The family of Linnæus had been peasants, but some of them, early in the seventeenth century, had followed literary pursuits. In the beginning of that century regular and hereditary surnames were first adopted in Sweden, on which occasion literary men often chose one of Latin or Greek derivation and structure, retaining the termination proper to the learned languages. A remarkable Lindentree, Tilia Europæa, growing near the place of their residence, is reported to have given origin to the names of Lindelius and Tiliander, in some branches of this family but the above-mentioned Nicholas, is said to have first taken that of Linnæus, by which his son became so exlen--“sively known. Of the taste which laid the foundation of his happiness, as well as his celebrity, this worthy father was the primary cause. Residing in a delightful spot, on the banks of a fine lake, surrounded by hills and valleys, woods and cultivated ground, his garden and his fields yielded him both amusement and profit, and his infant son imbibed, under his auspices, that pure and ardent love of nature for its own sake, with that habitual exercise of the mind in observation and activity, which ever after marked his character, and which were enhanced by a rectitude of principle, an elevation of devotional taste, a warmth of feeling, and an amiableness of manners, rarely united in those who so transcendantly excel in any branch of philosophy or science, because the cultivation of the heart does by no means so constantly as it ought keep pace with that of the understanding. The maternal uncle of Nicholas Linnæus, Sueno Tiliander, who had educated him with his own children, was also fond of plants and of gardening, so that these tastes were in some measure hereditary. From his tutor he learned to avoid the error of the desultory speculators of nature; and his memory, like his powers of perception, was naturally good, and his sight was always remarkably acute. He does not appear, however, to have been very happy under this tutor, and at seven years of age grammar had but an unequal contest with botany, in the mind of the young student. Nor was he much more fortunate when removed, in 1717, to the grammar-school of Wexio, the master of which, as his disgusted pupil relates,” preferred stripes and punishments to admonitions and encouragements.“In 1722 he was admitted to a higher form in the school, and his drier studies were now allowed to be intermixed and sweetened with the recreations of botany. In 1724, being seventeen years of age, he was removed to the superior seminary or Gymnasium, and his destination was fixed for the church; but, having no taste for Greek or Hebrew, ethics, metaphysics, or theology, he devoted himself with success to mathematics, natural philosophy,and a scientific pursuit of his darling botany. The” Chloris Gothica“of Bromelius, and” Hortus Upsaliensis" of Rudbeck, which made a part of his little library, were calculated rather to fire than to satisfy his curiosity; while his Palmberg and Tillands might make him sensible how much still remained to be done. His own copies of these books, used with the utmost care and neatness, are now in sir James Smith’s library. Linnæus’ s literary reputation, therefore, made so little progress, that his tutors havino pronounced him a dunce, he would probably have been put to some handicraft trade, had not Dr. Hothmann, the lecturer on natural philosophy, taken him into his own house, with a view to the studv of physic, and given him a private course of instruction in physiology. He first suggested to Linnæus the true principles upon which botany ought to be studied, founded on the parts of fructification, and put the system of Tournefort into his hands, in the knowledge of which he made a rapid progress.

In 1727 Linnæus was matriculated at the university of Lund, and devoted himself to the study of medicine. He lodged at the house of a physician, Dr. Stobaeus, and haying accesfs to a library and museum of natural history, was indefatigable in his application, and Stobaeus being infirm in health and spirits, Linnæus was allowed occasionally to relieve him from the labours of his profession, and soon bocame a great favourite. In the ensuing summer he passed the vacation under his paternal roof, and meeting there with his former patron Rothmann, by his advice he quitted Lund for Upsal, as a superior school of medicine and botany. But in this situation, owing to his father’s poverty, he was reduced to great necessity, and although he came well recommended, could only obtain a royal scholarship, which was so insufficient for his maintenance, that he often wanted the necessaries of life. He nevertheless studied with great perseverance, and at last, in 1729, obtained a liberal patron in Dr. Olaus Celsius, professor of divinity, who met him by chance in that academic garden, the fame of which he was destined to immortalize. Dr. Celsius discovering his merit, took him under his protection, and soon recommended him to pupils, by which measure his finances were improved.

While under the roof of Dr. Celsius, he met with a review of Vaillant’s treatise on the sexes of plants, which first led him to consider the importance and various formation of the stamens and pistils, and thence to form a new scheme of arrangement founded on those essential organs. He drew up an essay in opposition to the librarian of the university, who had published a work “De nuptiis planturum i” and this performance being approved both by Celsius and Rudbeck, led the way to his being appointed in 1730 to lecture in the botanic garden, as an assistant to Rudbeck. He was also taken into Rudbeck’s house as tutor to his younger children, and ms leisure time was employed on some of those botanical works which he afterwards published in Holland during his stay there.

The frequent conversations of Rudbeck, concerning the natural history of Lapland, and the curiosities he had seen there, excited an irresistible desire in Linnæus to visit the same country. To this he was perhaps the more immediately prompted by some little circumstances which made his residence at Upsal uncomfortable. These were, the jealousy of Dr. Rosen, who was ambitious of succeeding Rudbeck whenever his professorships should become vacant, and who by his success as the only practising physician at Upsal, was likely to prove a formidable rival as well as some domestic chagrin, which he thus relates “The faithless wife of the librarian Norrelius lived at this time in Rudbeck’s bouse, and by her Linnæus was made so odious to his patroness, that he could no longer stay there.” In the end of 1731, he retired to his native place, and soon received, from the academy of sciences at Upsal, an appointment to travel through Lapland, under the royal authority, and at the expence of the academy. He accordingly set out from Upsal, May 12th, on this expedition; and after visiting the Lapland Alps on foot, and descending to the coast of Norway, of which he has given a most picturesque and striking description, returned by Tornea, and the east side of the Bothnian gulph, to Abo, and so to Upsal, which he reached on the 10th of October, having performed a journey of near 4000 English miles. The particulars of his interesting expedition have lately been given to the public, in an English translation of the original journey written on the spot, illustrated with wooden cuts from his own sketches, making two octavo volumes.

Having learned the art of assaying metals during ten days’ residence at the mines of Biorknas, near Calix, in the course of his tour, he next year gave a private course of lectures on that subject, which had never been taught at Upsal before. The jealousy of Rosen, however, still pursued him; and this rival descended so low as to procure, partly by intreaties, partly by threats, the loan of his manuscript lectures on botany, which Linnæus detected him in surreptitiously copying. Rosen had taken by the hand a young man named Wallerius, who afterwards became a distinguished mineralogist, and for whom he now procured, in opposition to Linnæus, the new place of adjunct, or assistant, in the medical faculty at Lund. But the basest action of Rosen, and which proved envy to be the sole source of his conduct, was, he obtained, through the archbishop’s means, an order from the chancellor to prevent all private medical lectures in the university. Linnæus, deprived of his only means of subsistence, is said to have been so exasperated as to have drawn his sword upon Rosen, an affront with which the latter chose to put up and Linnæus, after having for some time indulged feelings of passionate resentment, entirely subdued these; and Rosen, towards the close of his life, was glad of the medical aid of the man he had in vain endeavoured to crush.

Disappointed in his views of medical advancement, Linnaeus turned his thoughts more immediately to the subject of mineralogy. In the end of 1733, he had visited some of the principal mines of Sweden, and had been introduced to baron Reuterholm, governor of the province of Dalarne, or Dalecarlia, resident at Fahlun, at whose persuasion and expence he travelled through the pastern part of Dalecarlia, accompanied by seven of his ablest pupils, a journal of which tour exists in his library. At Fahlun he gave a course of lectures on the art of assaying, which was numerously attended; and here he first became acquainted with Browallius, then chaplain to the governor, afterwards bishop of Abo, who advised him to take his doctor’s degree, in order to pursue the practice of physic, and further recommended him to aim at some advantageous matrimonial connection. In pursuit of the first part of this advice, Linnaeus, having scraped together about 15l. sterling, now entered on his travels, with a view of obtaining his degree at the cheapest university he could find, and of seeing as much of the learned world as his chances and means might enable him to do. In the beginning of 1735 he set out, and after a short stay at Hamburgh and Amsterdam, he proceeded to Harderwyck, where, having offered himself *s a candidate, and undergone the requisite examinations, ce obtained his degree June 23. On this occasion he published and defended a thesis, entitled “Hypothesis nova de Febriuin Intermittentium Causâ,” in the dedication of which, to his “Mæceuates et Patrnes,” it is remarkable that, among the names of Rudbeck, Rothmann, StobacusV Moraius, &c. we find that of Rosen. The hypothesis here advanced, most correctly so denominated, is truly Boerhaavian. Intermitting fevers are supposed to be owing to fine particles of clay, taken in with the food, and lodged in the terminations of the arterial system, where they cause the symptoms of the disorder in question.

In Holland Linnæus became acquainted with Dr. John Frederick Gronovius, who assisted him in publishing the first edition of the celebrated “Systema Naturie,” consisting of eight large sheets, in the form of tables; which edition is now a great bibliothecal curiosity. He also procured access to the illustrious Boerhaave, who encouraged him to remain in Holland; but this advice could scarcely have been followed, had he not met with a patron in Burmann, of Amsterdam, who was then preparing his “Thesaurus Zeylanicus,” and who received Linnæus into his house as his guest for some months, during which period he printed his “Fundamenta Botanica,” a small 8vo, which contains the very essence of botany, and has never been superseded or refuted. After he had been a few months under Burmann’s roof, he was introduced by Boerhaave toi Mr. George Clifford, an opulent banker, who had a capital garden at Hartecamp, and invited Linnæus to superintend it. This situation, which he accepted, appears to have been in all respects agreeable and profitable to his studies, and here he wrote and printed his “Flora Lapponica.” In 1736, after having written his “Musa Cliffortiana,” Linnaeus was sent by Mr. Clifford to England, and was introduced to the lovers and teachers of natural science at Oxford and London, Shaw, Martyn, Miller, and Collinson, &c. They admired his genius, and valued his friendship, and supplied him with books and plants, both for his own herbarium, and the garden of his patron at Hartecamp.

On his return to Holland, he continued the impression of his “Genera Plantarum,” which appeared in 1737. In Oct. 1736, he was made a member of the imperial academy Nature Curiosorum, by the title, according to the cdslom of that body, of “Dioscorides Secundus.” He printed also in 1737, the “Viridarium Cliffortianum,” an 8 vd catalogue of his friend’s garden, disposed according to his own sexual system, of which he published, later in the same year, at Leyden, an exemplitication under the title of “JYkthodus SexuaUs,” in which all' the known genera of plants are so arranged by name only. This year also he produced his magnificent “Hortus Cliffortianus,” folio. This splendid volume, which was printed by Mr. Clifford only for private distribution, was begun and finished in nine months. In the same year Linnæus wrote and published his “Critica Botanica,” a sequel to part of the “Fundamenta” but these labours, and perhaps the air of Holland not agreeing with his health, he left the hospitable roof of Mr. Clifford, and for a while assisted professor Adrian Van Royen at Ley den in the garden there, and about the same time printed the “Classes Plantarum,” a view of all the botanical systems ever known. Here also be published his friend Artedi’s “Ichthyologia.” (See Artedi).

Linnæus remained at Leyden till the spring of 1738, when he had an interesting interview with the great Boerhaave, then on his death-bed. Linnæus’s departure, however, from Leyden, was prevented by a very formidable intermittent fever. The skill of Van Swieten, and the renewed attentions of the amiable Clifford, who received him again under his roof with the most liberal and indulgent kindness, after some weeks restored him so far, that he was able, though still weak, to set out on his journey, carrying with him an introductory letter from Van Royen to Anthony de Jussieu, the physician, who made him acquainted with his brother, the famous Bernard de Jussieu. He inspected the botanic garden, the herbariums of Tournefort, Vaillant, the Jussieus, &c. visited the neighbourhood of Fontainbleau, formed an acquaintance with Reaumur and other distinguished naturalists, and was admitted a corresponding member of the academy of sciences.

How he conversed with Reaumur and others, who knew no language but their own, and how he contracted so close a friendship with Mr. Collinson at London, it is not easy to conceive. He confesses a peculiar inaptitude, and certainly a blatneable indifference, for the learning of languages, declaring in his diary that in all his travels he learnt “neither English, French, German, Laplandish, nor even Dutch, though he stayed in Holland three whole years. Nevertheless, he found his way every where, well and happily.” By the journal of his Lapland tour, and other manuscripts, it appears that Latin was sufficiently familiar to him; and as some fastidious critics have censured the style of the “Amojniuues Academicae,” it is fair to remark that the essays which compose those volumes are chiefly written by the pupils whose inaugural dissertations they were, and are therefore improperly quoted as the works of our author.

After leaving Paris, Linnæus took his passage at Rouen for Sweden, and landed at Helsingborg, from whence be proceeded to Fahlun, visiting his father for a few days in his way. His reception from the lady of his choice, the daughter of Dr. Moraeus, a physician of the place, was favourable, and they were formally betrothed to each other, but it was necessary that some prospect of an advantageous establishment should be discovered. The scientific merits of Lmnseus were not overlooked, as he was unanimously chosen a member of the Upsal academy, the only one then in Sweden; yet the homage he had so lately received abroad, seems to have made him a little unreasonable on this head, and he declares that he would certainly have quitted his native country, “had he not been in love.” To this all-powerful deity, therefore, and not to his merits, or to the wisdom of his countrymen in discerning them, was Sweden, in the first instance, indebted for the possession of her Linnæus. After passing the winter of 1738 in Stockholm, he began to make his way in medical practice, so that by the following March he had considerable employment. At this time a plan was formed for establishing a literary society at Stockholm, which afterwards rose to great eminence. Triewald, Hopken, and Alstroem (whose family was ennobled by the name of Alstroemer), were, with Linnæus, the first members and the infant society, being incorporated by royal authority, was augmented with all the most learned men of the country.

A most flattering mark of public approbation was, soon after, conferred on Linnæus, without any solicitation. Count Tessin, marshal of the Diet, which was then sitting, gave him an annual pension of 200 ducats from the board of mines, on condition of his giving public lectures on botany and mineralogy at Stockholm. The same nobleman also obtained for him the appointment of physician to the navy, and received him into his house. His practice novr increased greatly among the nobility, and he found himself in so prosperous a condition that he would no longer delay his marriage, which took place at Fahlun, June 26, 1739. After a month he returned to Stockholm. He was, by?lot, the first president of the new academy; and as that office was to be but of three months’ duration, after the Frenaji plan, he resigned it in September, and on that occasion delivered an oration in Swedish, on the wonderful economy of insects, which was printed in the Transactions; and a Latin version of it may be found in the “Amoenitates Acadeniicae,” v. 2. His example was followed by all the succeeding presidents.

In 1741 Linnæus received an order to travel through Æland, Gothland, &c. for the purpose of investigating the natural history and produce of those countries. On this Jhe spent four months, accompanied by six of his pupils, and published an account of it at Stockholm in 1745. Before he began his lectures at Upsal, to which place he removed in the autumn, he delivered a Latin oration “On the benefit of travelling in one’s own country,” which is translated by Mr. Stillingfleet in his miscellaneous tracts. In 1742 he undertook the reform of the Upsal garden, which in the following year was put in a state to receive those many exotics which his extensive foreign correspondence procured. In 1745 he published his “Flora Suecica, and in 1746 his” Fauna Suecica;“the second editions of which valuable works were enriched with many additions. His reputation was now followed by corresponding honours. He was chosen a member of the academy at Montpellier, and secretary to the Upsal academy; a medal of him was struck in 1746, and soon after he received the rank and title of Archiater from the king, and was the only Swede chosen into the new-modelled academy of Berlin. He also acquired about this time, what be perhaps valued as highly as these honours, the herbarium made by Hermann in Ceylon, now in the possession of sir Joseph Banks. From this originated Linnæus’s” Flora Zeylanica,“Stockholm, 1747. In 174U appeared his” Materia Medica,“Written in. the same systematic and didactic style as-tlle? rest of his works. Of this numerous editions have heeti published on the continent, but none with any additions or corrections from the author himself, though he left ber hind him copious manuscript notes on the subject. In the same year he had a violent attack of the gout, which en-> dangered his life; and such was his anxiety to promote science, that he dictated from his bed-side, the manuscript of his” Philosophia Botanica," which afterwards received his own corrections, and was published in 1751.

About this period the queen of Sweden, Louisa Ulrica, having a taste for natural history, which her- royal consort, king Adolphus Frederick, also patronized, shewed much favour to Linnæus. He was employed in arranging her collection of insects and shells, in the country palace of Drotningholm, or Ulricksdahl, and was frequently honoured with the company and conversation of their majesties, during his attendance there. The queen interested herself in the education of his son, and promised to send him to travel through Europe at her own expence. She also listened very graciously to any recommendation or petition, of Linnæus, in the service of science. Linnæus devoted some of his leisure time in winter, to the arragement of his friend count Tessin’s collection of fossils, at Stockholm, of which an account in Latin and Swedish, making a small folio, with plates, came out in 1753. The result of his labours at Drotningholm was not given to the public [until] 1764, when his “Museum Reginse” appeared, in 8Vo, be-, ing a sort of Prodromus of an intended more splendid work, that was never executed. His most magnificent publication appeared in 1754, being a large folio, entitled “Museum Regis Adolphi Frederici,” comprehending descripr: tions of the rarer quadrupeds, birds, serpents, fishes, &c. of the king’s museum, in Latin and Swedish, with plates, and an excellent preface, which was translated by Dr. (now; sir James) Smith, and first printed in 1786; appearing, again, in a volume of “Tracts relating to Natural History,” in 1798. In the mean time, Linnæus was preparing a lasting monument of his own talents and application, the “Species Plantarum,” of which the first editiqn was primed in 1753, the second in 1762, each in two volumes S.vo. The work is too well known to need any description, and must ever be memorable for the adaptation of specific,­<5>ras they were at first called, trivial, names. This coa-, trivance, which Linnæus first used in his “Pan Sueciciw,” a dissertation printed in 1749, extended to minerals in his “Museum Tessinianum,” and subsequently to all the departments of zoology, has perhaps rendered his works more popular than any one of their merits besides. His specific differences were intended to be used as names; but their unavoidable length rendering this impracticable, and the application of numeral figures to each species, in Haller’s manner, being still more burthensome to the memory, all natural science would have been ruined for want of a common language, were it not for this simple and happy invention. By this means we speak of every natural production in two words, its generic and its specific name. No ambiguous comparisons or references are wanted, no presupposition of any thing already known. The philosophical tribe of naturalists, for so they are called by themselves and their admirers, do not therefore depreciate Linnæus, when they call him a nomenclator. Whatever may have been thought of the Linnæun trivial names at their first appearance, they are now in universal use, and their principle has been, with the greatest advantage, extended to chemistry, of which the celebrated Bergman, the friend of Linnæus, originally set the example.

These Herculean literary labours, combined with the practice of physic, were more than the bodily constitution of Linnæus could support. He was attacked with the stone, and had also, from time-to time, returns of gout, but he considered the wood strawberry as a specific for both disorders, and they never greatly interfered with his comfort or his duties. On the 27th of April, 1753, he received, from the hand of his sovereign, the order of the Polar Star, an honour which had never before been conferred for literary merit. A still more remarkable compliment was paid him not long after by the king of Spain, who invited him to settle at Madrid, with the offer of nobility, the free exercise of his religion, and a splendid botanical appointment. This proposal, however, he declined, from an attachment to his own country, and in November 1756, he was raised to the rank of Swedish nobility, and took the name of Von Linné".

The “Systema Naturæ” had already gone through nine editions in different countries. Its author had, for several years, a more ample edition of the animal department in contemplation, on the plan of his “Species Plantarum,” and this constituted the first volume of the tenth edition, published in 1758. The second volume, which came out the following year, was an epitome of the vegetable kingdom. This same work appeared still more enlarged, in a twelfth edition, in 1766: to this the mineral kingdom was added in a third volume on the same plan with the first. We can readily pardon the self-complacency of its author, when, in his diary written for the use of his friend Menander, he calls the “Systema Naturæ” “a work to which natural history never had a fellow.” We may venture to predict, says his learned biographer, that as this was the first performance of the kind, it will certainly be the last; the science of natural history is now become so vast, that no man can ever take the lead again as an universal naturalist.

The emoluments of Linnæus by his various publications were not great, as he is reported to have sold the copyright of most of them for a ducat (about nine and sixpence) a printed sheet. His different appointments, however, for he soon laid aside the general practice of physic, had raised him to a considerable degree of opulence. In 1758 he purchased the estates of Hammarley and Sofja, for above 2330l. sterling, and having chosen the former for his country residence, he received the visits of distinguished foreigners, and admitted his favourite pupils, to several of whom he gave private courses of lectures, and completely laid aside the state of the nobleman and professor while he discoursed with them on his favourite topics. In 1760 he wrote a prize dissertation on the “sexes of plants,” which was published in English in 1786 by Dr. (now sir James) Smith, the possessor of his library. Linnaeus’s patent of nobility did not receive his majesty’s sign manual till 1761, though it was antedated 1757. It was confirmed by the Diet in 1762, and he then took a coat of arms expressive of the sciences which he cultivated. He became also about the same time one of the eight foreign members of the French academy of sciences, an honour never before conferred on a Swede.

In 1763, he was permitted to avail himself of the assistance of his son, now twenty-one years of age, in the botanical professorship, and the young man was thus trained up for his future successor. In 1764, the sixth edition, by far the most complete, of the “Genera Plantarum,” was published, and he never prepared another. It was intended as a companion to the “Species Plantarum,” but wai greatly superseded by the more concise and commodious short characters of genera, given in the vegetable part of the “Systema Naturae,” published with the title of “Systema Vegetabilium,” edition 13th, in 1774, and reprinted with additions in 1784.

Although, as a physician, Linnæus appears to advantage in his “Clavis Medicinae” and his “Genera Morborum,” his abilities are more striking in his classification of natural objects. He excelled in a happy perception of such technical characters as brought together things most naturally allied. His lectures on the natural order of plants were published long after his death in 1792, at Hamburgh, and evince his deep consideration of a subject then in the infancy of cultivation. In the zoological department, his classification of birds and insects is the most original as well as the best of the whole. The arrangement of fishes was an original idea of Linnæus; and in the arrangement of shells, he has succeeded at least as well as any of his fellow-labourers: though we are, says his biographer, by no means inclined to justify some of his terms, which are borrowed from an anatomical analogy, not only false in itself, but totally exceptionable. This leads us to consider a charge, often brought against this great man, of pruriency of phraseology in many parts of his works. The most attentive contemplation of his writings has satisfied us that in such instances he meant purely to be anatomical and physiological; and if his fondness for philosophical analogies sometimes led him astray, it was not in pursuit of any thing to contaminate his own mind, much less that of others. That the mind of Linnæus was simple and chaste, as his morals were confessedly pure, is evinced by his Lapland Tour, written only for his own use, but which is now, as we have already mentioned, before the public. This is such a picture of his heart as will ever render any justification of his moral character, and any elaborate display of his religious principles or feelings, alike superfluous. His apparent vanity, as displayed in his diary,published in Dr. Maton’s valuable edition of Dr. Pulteney’s “View of his Writings,” is perhaps far less justifiable. All we can say for him is, that this paper was drawn up for the use of his intimate friend Menander, as materials from which his life was to be written. If it be unbecoming, and indeed highly ridiculous in many instances, for a man to speak as he does of himself, the justice and accuracy of his assertions, had they come from any other person, could in no case be disputed.

As the habits of Linnæus were temperate and regular, he retained his health and vigour in tolerable perfection, notwithstanding the immense labours of his mind, till beyond his sixtieth year, when his memory began in some degree to fail him. In 1774, at the age of sixty-seven, an attack of apoplexy greatly impaired his constitution. Two years afterwards a second attack rendered him paralytic on the right side, and materially affected his faculties. The immediate cause of his death, which happened January 10th, 1778, in the seventy-first year of his age, was an ukeration of the bladder. His remains were deposited in a vault near the west end of the cathedral of Upsal, where a monument of Swedish porphyry was erected by his pupils. His obsequies were performed, in the most respectful manner, by the whole university, the pall being supported by sixteen doctors of physic, all of whom had been his pupils. A general mourning took place on the occasion at Upsal. His sovereign, Gustavus III. commanded a medal to be struck, expressive of the public loss, and honoured the academy of sciences at Stockholm with his presence, when the eulogy of this celebrated man was pronounced there by his intimate friend Back. A still higher compliment was paid to his memory by the king in a speech from the throne, wherein his majesty publicly celebrated the talents of his deceased subject, and lamented the loss which his country had so recently sustained. Various testimonies of respect were given to the merits of Linnæus in the different parts of Europe, even where rival systems or interests had heretofore triumphed at his expence. The celebrated Condorcet delivered an oration in his praise to the Parisian academy of sciences, which is printed in its memoirs. We cannot wonder that his memory was cherished in England, where he had long had numerous correspondents, and where two of his most distinguished pupils, Solander and Dryander, have, in their own talents and character, conferred singular honour upon their preceptor. Ten years after his decease a new society of naturalists, distinguished by his name, was founded in London, and has since been incorporated by royal charter, whose publications, in ten quarto volumes of Transactions, sufficiently evince that its members are not idle venerators of the name they bear. This name, in imitation of them, has been adopted by several similar institutions in other parts of the world.

The appellation of Limuean Society was, with the more propriety, chosen by this British institution, on account of the museum of Linnæus having fallen into the hands of sir James Smith, its original projector, and hitherto only president. This treasure, comprehending the library, herbarium, insects, shells, and all other natural curiosities, with all the manuscripts and whole correspondence of the illustrious Swede, were obtained by private purchase from his widow, after the death of his son in 1783. The authority which such an acquisition gave to the labours of the infant society, as well as to all botanical and zoological publications, the authors of which have ever been allowed freely to consult it, will readily be perceived. Nothing perhaps could have more contributed to raise up, or to improve, a taste for natural science, in any country.

, or Von Linne' (Charles), the oldest, and only surviving son of the preceding, was born January 20, 1741, at the House of his maternal grandfather, at Fahlun. His father was anxiously desirous of his excelling in natural history, more particularly botany; and committed him, when about the age of nine or ten, t the more particular care of some of his own most favourite pupils. By them he was taught the names of the plants in the Upsal garden, and such of the principles of natural science as were suited to his period of life, as well as to converse habitually in Latin. He appears to have given satisfaction to his father, who procured for him, at the age of eighteen, the appointment of Demonstrator in the botanic garden, an office then first contrived on purpose for him. Having learned to draw from nature, he became an author at the age of twenty-one, publishing in 1762 his first “Decas Plantarum Rariorum Horti Upsaliensis,” the plates of which, in outline only, were drawn by his own hand, and are sufficiently faithful and useful, if not ornamental, while the descriptions are full and scientific. In 1763 another “Decas,” or collection of ten species, came out on the same plan, but, for whatever reason, he printed no more numbers under this title. In 1767, however, he published at Leipsic ten more plates and descriptions, like the above, entitled “Plantarum Rariorum Horti Upsaliensis Fasciculus Primus,” but no second fasciculus appeared. In 1763 he was nominated adjunct professor of botany, with a promise, hitherto unexampled, that after his father’s death he should succeed to all his academical functions. In 1765 he took his degree of doctor of physic, and began to give lectures.

His progress would probably have been happy, if not brilliant, but for the conduct of his unnatural mother, who, not content with dishonouring her husband’s bed, and making his home as uncomfortable as she could, by the meanest parsimony and disgusting petty tyranny, conceived a hatred for her only son, which she displayed by every affront and persecution that her situation gave her the means of inflicting on his susceptible and naturally amiable mind. According to Fabricius, she forced her husband, who by such a concession surely partook largely of her guilt and meanness, to procure the nomination of his pupil Solander to be his future successor, in preference to his own son; and it was a part of her plan that he should marry her eldest daughter. Solander, however, disdained both the usurpation and the bait, refusing to leave England; and the misguided father recovered his senses and authority, causing his son, as we have said above, to receive this truly honourable distinction. The mind and spirit of the young man nevertheless still drooped; and even when he had attained his thirtieth year, he would gladly have escaped from his miseries and his hopes together. The authority of the king was obliged to be exerted, at his father’s solicitation, to prevent his going into the army. This measure of the parent was happily followed up by kindness and encouragement in his botanical pursuits, to which treatment the son was ever sensible, and he revived from his despondency before his father’s death, which happened when he was thirty-seven years of age. Though obliged by his mother to purchase, at her own price, the library, manuscripts, herbarium, &c. which he ought by every title to have inherited, he rose above every impediment, and betook himself to the useful application of the means now in his hands, for his own reputation and advancement. His father had already prepared great part of a third botanical appendix, or “Mantissa;” from the communications of Mutis, Kcenig, Sparmann, Forster, Pallas, and others. Hence originated the “Supplementum Plantarum,” printed at Brunswick, under the care of Ehrhart in 1781. The ingenious editor inserted his own new characters of some genera of mosses; which Hedwig has since confirmed, except that some of the names have been justly rejected. This sheet was, in an evil hour, suppressed by the mandate of Linnæus from London, where, at that period, the subject of generic characters of mosses was neither studied nor understood, whatever superior knowledge was displayed concerning their species. The plants of the “Supplementum” are admitted into the fourteenth edition of the “Systema Vegetabilium” by Murray, and figures of some of the most curious have been published by sir J. Smith, in his “Plantarum Icones ex Herbario Linnæano.” Three botanical dissertations also appeared under the presidency of the younger Linnæus, on grasses, on lavandula, and the celebrated Methodus muscorum, which last was the work, and the inaugural thesis, of the present professor Swartz of Stockholm. These form a sequel to the 186 similar essays, which most of them compose the seven volumes of the Amcenitates Academicae, the rest being published by Schreber in three additional ones.

The subject of our memoir had always felt a strong desire to visit the chief countries of learned and civilized Europe. For this purpose he was obliged to pawn his juvenile herbarium, made from the Upsal garden, to his friend Alstroemer, for the loan of about fifty or sixty pounds. He arrived at London in May 1781, and was received with enthusiasm by the surviving friends and correspondents of his father, and was in a manner domesticated under the roof of sir Joseph Banks, whose friendship, kindness, and liberality could not be exceeded; neither could they have been by any one more gratefully received. Here the ardent Swedish visitor had every assistance for the preparation of several works on which he was intent, as a system of the mammalia, a botanical treatise on the lily and and palm tribes, ard new editions of several of his father’s standard books. None of these, however, have yet been printed. An attack of thfe jaundice rendered half his stay in England uncomfortable as well as useless to him. He proceeded to Paris in the latter end of August 1781, accompanied by the amiable and celebrated Broussonet, with whom he became acquainted at London. His reception in France was not less flattering than what he had experienced in England. The next place in which he made any stay was Hamburgh, where several of his own friends were already settled; and from hence he returned by Copenhagen and Stockholm, visiting his friend Fabricius at Kiel, and his patron baron Alstroemer at Gottenburgh, finally arriving at Upsalin Feb. 1783. But his career was cut short by a bilious fever, followed by apoplexy, Nov. 1, 1783, in the forty-second year of his age. He died very much respected and lamented. His museum and library reverted to his mother and sisters, as he had never been married, and were purchased by sir James Smith.

, a painter, called from his dress “the Turk,” was born at Geneva, in 1702. He went to Paris to study in 1725, and thence accompanied the marquis de Puisieux to Rome, where the earls of Sandwich and Besborough engaged him to accompany them to Constantinople. There he became acquainted with sir Everard Fawkener, our ambassador, who persuaded him to come to England, where he remained two years. He painted admirably in miniature, and in enamel, though he seldom practised the last, but he is best known by his crayons. The earls of Harrington and Besborough have some of his most capital works. His portraits, however, were so exact as to displease those who sat to him, for he never could conceive the absence of any imperfection or mark in the face that presented itself. Such a man could not be long a favourite, and therefore, according to lord Orford, although he had great business the first year, he had very little the second, and went abroad. It is said that he owed much of his encouragement to his making himself conspicuous by adopting the manners and habits of the Levant He came to England again in 1772, and brought a collection of pictures of different masters, which he sold by auction; and some pieces of glass painted by himself with surprizing effect of light and shade, but more curious than useful, as it was necessary to darken the room before they could be seen to advantage. He staid two years likewise on this visit. He went to the continent afterwards, but we find no account of his death. He carried his love of truth with him on all occasions; and we are told that at Venice and Milan, and probably elsewhere, all but firstrate beauties were afraid to sit to him, and he would have starved if he had not so often found customers who were of opinion that they belonged to that class.

, a learned German divine, was born Nov. 11, 1630, at Goritz in Brandenburgh, and studied at the schools of Brandenburgh and Ruppin, whence he went to Stetin, and made great progress in his studies under Micrelius and other eminent professors of that college. In 1651 he studied philosophy and divinity at Wittemberg, and after two years residence was admitted to the degree of master of arts. He had now some advantageous offers of settlement in other places, but he could not bring himself to quit an university where he was so likely to add to his stores of knowledge. At length, however, in 1659, he accepted the office of corrector at Halle, which he retained until 1672, when he was appointed rector and professor in the Caroline college at Stetin. This he quitted in 1676, and accepted the office of corrector at Lubeck, where he died, Nov. 6, 1692, worn out, as Niceron informs us, by labour, chagrin, and disease. His works are very numerous, consisting of disputations, 'eloges, and other academical productions; but he is now principally known by his “Bibliotheca realis Theologica,” Francfort, 1685, 2 vols. “Biblioth. Juridica,” ib. 1679; “BibK Philosophica,” ibid. 1682; and “Biblioth. Medica,” ibid. 1679, making in all six folio volumes, containing an account of works published in each of these departments. The “Bibl. Juridica” was reprinted at Leipsic in 1757, 2 vols. and corrections and a supplement were published by Aug. Fr. Scott, in 1775; another supplement was published by Senkenberg in 1789, making in all four volumes folio. Morhoff speaks favourably of the original work, and the “Bibl. Juridica” is doubtless greatly improved.

, an eminent historical painter, was born at Florence, probably about the beginning of the fifteenth century, as he was a scholar of, and of course nearly contemporary with, Massaccio. At the age of sixteen, being entered a noviciate in the convent of Carmelites at Florence, he had there an opportunity of seeing that extraordinary artist at work upon the astonishing frescoes with which he adorned the chapel of Brancacci, in the church there; and being eager to embrace the art, such was his success, that after the death of his master, it was said by common consent, that the soul of Massaccio still abode with Fra. Filippo. He now forsook the habit of his convent, and devoted himself entirely to painting; but his studies were for a time disturbed by his being unfortunately taken, while out on a party of pleasure, by some Moors, and carried prisoner to Barbary; where he remained in slavery eighteen months. But having drawn, with a piece of charcoal, the portrait of his master upon a wall, the latter was so affected by the novelty of the performance, and its exact resemblance, that, after exacting a few more specimens of his art, he generously restored him to his liberty. On his return home he painted some works for Alphonso, king of Calabria. He employed himself also in Padua; but it was in his native city of Florence that his principal works were performed. He was employed by the grand duke Cosmo di Medici, who presented his pictures to his friends; and one to pope Eugenius IV. He was also employed to adorn the palaces of the republic, the churches, and many of the houses of the principal citizens; among whom his talents were held in high estimation. He was the first of the Florentine painters who attempted to design figures as large as life, and the first who remarkably diversified the draperies, and who gave his figures the air of antiques. It is to be lamented that such a man should at last perish by the consequences of a guilty amour he indulged in at Spoleto; where he was employed at the cathedral to paint the chapel of the blessed virgin. This is differently told by different writers, some saying that he seduced a nun who sat to him for a model of the virgin, and others that the object of his passion was a married woman. In either case, it is certain that he was poisoned by the relations of the lady whose favours he was supposed to enjoy. Lorenzo di Medici erected a marble tomb in the cathedral to his memory, which Politian adorned with a Latin epitaph. His son Lippi Filippo, was renowned for excellent imitations of architectural ornaments. He died in 1505, at the age of forty-five. There was also a Florentine painter, Lorenzo Lippi, born in 1606, and likewise a great musician and a poet. In the latter character he published “II Malmantile racquistato,” which is considered as a classical work in the Tuscan language. He died in 1664.

, a Venetian, distinguished himself much at the council of Trent, where he strongly opposed the plurality of benefices, and was one of the three presidents of that council under pope Julius III. Paul IV. sent him into Poland as nuncio in 1556, and afterwards appointed him his secretary. The sanctity of Lippomani’s life gained him no less esteem than his doctrine; he was bishop of Mondonedo, then of Verona, and afterwards of Bergamo, and acquitted himself honourably in various nunciatures, but was justly accused of great cruelties towards the Jews and protestants when in Poland. He died in 1559. His works are, a compilation of “Lives of the Saints,” in 8 vols. but little valued and “Catena in Genesim, in Exoiiuni, etin aliquot Psalmos,” 3 vols. fol. &c.

, a very learned critic, was born at Isch, a country-seat of his father, between Brussels and Louvain, Oct. 18, 1547. He was descended from ancestors who had been ranked among the principal inhabitants of Brussels. At six years of age he was sent to the public school at Brussels, and soon gave proofs of uncommon parts. He tells as himself in one of his letters, that he acquired the French language, without the assistance of a master, so perfectly as to be able to write it before he was eight years old. From Brussels he was sent, at ten years old, to Aeth; and, two years after, to Cologne, where at the Jesuits’ college he prosecuted his literary and philosophical studies. Among the ancients, he learned the precepts of morality from Epictetus and Seneca, and the maxims of civil prudence from Tacitus. At sixteen, he was sent to the university of Louvain; and having now acquired a knowledge of the learned languages, applied himself to the civil law; but his principal delight was in belles lettres and ancient literature; and, therefore, losing his parents, and becoming his own master before he was eighteen, he projected a journey to Italy, for the sake of cultivating them. Before, however, he set out, he published three books of various readings, “Variarum Lectionum Libri tres,” which laid the foundation of his literary fame; and his dedication of them to cardinal Perenettus, a great patron of learned men, served to introduce him to the cardinal, on his arrival in 1567, at Rome, where he lived two years with him, was nominated his secretary, and treated with the utmost kindness and generosity. His time he used to employ in the Vatican, the Farnesian, the Sfortian, and other principal libraries, which were open to him, and where he carefully collated the manuscripts of ancient authors, of Seneca, Tacitus, Plautus, Propertius, &c. His leisure hours he spent in inspecting the most remarkable antiquities, or in cultivating the acquaintance of the literati then residing at Rome, Antonius Muretus, Paulus Manutius, Fulvius Ursinus, Hieronymus Mercurialis, Carolus Sigonius, Petrus Victorius, and others, from whose conversation he could not fail to reap advantage and encouragement in his studies.

In 1569 he returned to Louvain, and spent one year in habits of dissipation, very unsuitable to his character, and defensible only as he says by pleading the heat of youth. Sensible of his folly, he resolved upon a journey to Vienna; but stopping at Dole, an university in the Franche Comt6, he relapsed into an excess which produced a fit of illness. On his recovery he pursued his journey to Vienna, and there fell into the acquaintance of Busbequius, and other learned men, who used many arguments to induce him to settle there; but the love of his own native soil prevailed, and he directed his course through Bohemia, Misnia, and Thuringia, in order to arrive at it. But being informed of the dangerous state of the Low Countries from the war, and that his own patrimony was laid waste by soldiers, he stopped at the university of Jena, where he was invested with the professorship of eloquence, and became a disciple of Luther. This latter circumstance obliging him to leave Jena, he arrived at Cologne, where he married a widow in 1574, by whom he had no children. During his stay at Cologne, he wrote his “Antiquae Lectiones,” which chiefly consist of emendations of Plautus; he also began there hf notes upon Cornelius Tacitus, which were afterwards souniversally applauded by the learned.

He then retired to his own native seat at Isch, intending to devote himself entirely to letters; but the war, which was still raging, disturbed his plans, and he was obliged to go to Louvain, where he resumed the study of the civil law, though with no intent to practise. At Louvain he published his “Epistolicae Quaestiones,*' and some other things; but, being again obliged to quit his residence, went to Holland, and spent thirteen years at Leyden, during which time he composed and published, what he calls, his best works. These are,” Electorum Libri duo;“” Satyra Menippaea;“” SaturnalSum Libri duo;“” Commentarii pleni in Cornelium Taciturn;“” De Constanti& Libri duo;“” De Amphitheatre Libri duo;“”Ad Valerium Maximum Notae“” Epistolarum Centuriae duae“” Epistolica Institutio“” De recta Pronunciatione Linguae Latinas“” Animadversiones in Senecos Tragoedias“” Animadversiones in Velleium Paterculum“”Politicorum Libri sex“” De una Religione Liber.“These he call his best works, because they were written, he says, in the very vigour of his age, and when he was quite at leisure;” in flore aevi, & ingenii in alto otio;“and he adds too, that his health continued good till the latter part of his life;” nee valetudo, nisi sub extremos annos, titubavit.“The intolerant principles, however, which he divulged here, raised so much indignation against him that he was obliged to retire suddenly and privately from Leyden, in 1590; and, after some stay at Spa, went and settled at Louvain, where he taught polite literature, as he had done at Leyden, with the greatest credit and reputation. He spent the remainder of his life at Louvain, though he had received powerful solicitations, and the offers of vast advantages, if he would have removed elsewhere. Pope Clement V11I. Henry IV. of France, and Philip IL of Spain, applied to him by advantageous proposals. Several cardinals would gladly have taken him under their protection and patronage; and all the learned in foreign countries honoured him in the highest degree. The very learned Spaniard, Arias Montanus, who, at the command of Philip II. superintended the reprinting the Complutensian edition of the Bible at Plantin’s press. had such a regard for him, that he treated him as a son rather than a friend, and not only admitted him into all his concerns, but even offered to leave him all he had. Lipsius, nevertheless, continued at Louvain, and, among others, wrote the following works” De Cruce Libri tres;“”De Militia Romana Libri quinque“” Poliorceticon Libri quinque“” De Magnitudine llomana Libri quatuor“” Dissertatiuncula & Commentarius in Plinii Panegyricum;“” Manuductio ad Stoicam Philosophiam," &c. All his works have been collected and printed together, in folio, more than once. The best edition is that of Vesel, 1675, 4 vols. fol. usually bound in eight. His critical notes upon ancient authors are to be found in the best editions of each respective author; and several of his other pieces have, for their peculiar utility, been reprinted separately.

Lipsius died at Louvain, March 23, 1606, in his 59th year, and left, says Joseph Scaliger, the learned world and his friends to lament the loss of him. Lipsius is said to have been so mean in his countenance, his dress, and his conversation, that those who had accustomed themselves to judge of great men by their outward appearance, asked, after having seen Lipsius, whether that was really he. But the greatest blot in his character was his inconstancy with regard to religion. He was educated a Roman Catholic, but professed the Lutheran religion while he was professor at Jena. Afterwards returning to Brabant, he appeared again a Roman Catholic; but when he accepted a professor’s chair in the university of Leyden, he published what was called Calvinism. At last, he removed from Leyden, and went again into the Low Countries, where he adopted the extreme bigotry of the Roman communion. This is obvious from his credulous and absurd accounts of the holy virgins, in his “Diva Virgo H aliensis,” &c. and “Diva Schemiensis,” &c. in both which he admits the most trifling stories, and the most uncertain traditions. Some of his friends endeavoured to represent how greatly all this would diminish the reputation he had acquired; but he was deaf to their expostulations. He even went so far as to dedicate a silver pen to the Holy Virgin of Hall; and on this occasion wrote some verses which are very remarkable, both on account of the elogies he bestows on himself, and of the extravagant worship he pays to the Virgin. By his last will, he left his gown, lined with fur, to the image of the same lady. With these superstitions he joined an inconsistency of a more serious nature; for when, as we have already noticed, he lived at Leyden in an outward profession of the reformed religion, he gave his public approbation of the persecuting principles which were exerted, throughout all Europe, against the professors of it, maintaining that no state ought to suffer a plurality of religions, nor shew any mercy towards those who disturbed the established worship, but pursue them with fire and sword, it being better that one member should perish rather than the whole body “dementias non hie locus ure, seca, ut membrorum potius aliquod quam totum corpus corrumpatur.” When attacked for these principles and expressions, he endeavoured to explain them in a very evasive manner, pretending that the words ure and seca were only terms borrowed from chirurgery, not literally, to signify fire and sword, but only some effectual remedy. All these evasions are to be met with in his treatise * f De una Religione," the worst of his writings. His works in general turn upon subjects of antiquity and criticism. In his early pieces he imitated, with tolerable success, the style of Cicero; but afterwards chose rather to adopt the concise and pointed manner of Seneca and Tacitus. For this corruption of taste he was severely censured by Scioppius and Henry Stephens; but his example was followed by several contemporary writers. On this innovation Huet justly remarks, that although the abrupt and antithetical style may obtain the applauses of unskilful youth, or an illiterate multude, it cannot be pleasing to ears which have been long inured to genuine Ciceronian eloquence.

Captivated, says Brucker, with the appearance of superior wisdom and virtue which he observed in the ancient school of Zeno, Lipsius sought for consolation from the precepts of the Stoic philosophy, and attempted to reconcile its doctrines with those of Christianity. But he was imposed upon by the vaunting language of this school concerning fate and providence; and explains its tenets in a manner which cannot be reconciled with the history and general system of Stoicism. In order to revive an attention to the doctrines of this ancient sect, he wrote two treatises, “Manuductio ad Philosophiam Stoicam,” An Introduction to the Stoic Philosophy; and “Dissertationes de Physiologia Stoica,” Dissertations on Stoic Physiology; to which he intended to have added a treatise on the moral doctrine of the stoics, but was prevented by death. His edition of Seneca is enriched with many valuable notes, but he was too much biassed by his partiality for stoicism to perceive the feeble and unsound parts of the system, and gave too easy credit to the arrogant claims of this school, to be a judicious and useful interpreter of its doctrine.

, historiographer and censor royal, and the first of a family of men of considerable eminence in France, was born Nov. 5, 1644, at Vaucouleurs. He gave private lectures on history and geography at Paris, and had not only the principal lords of the court among his pupils, but the duke of Orleans, afterwards regent of France, who always retained a particular value for him, and gave him frequent proofs of his esteem. He died at Paris, May 2, 1720, aged 76, leaving twelve children, of whom three sons will form the subject of the ensuing articles. His works are, “Relation historique du Roiaume de Siam,” 1684, 12mo; “An Abridgement of the Universal History,” 1731, 7 vols. 12mo-, and a Genealogical and Historical Atlas, on engraved plates.

, son to the preceding, and a very learned French geographer, was born at Paris Feb. 2$, 1675. His father being much occupied in the same way, young Lisle began at nine years of age to draw maps, and soon made a great progress in this art. In 1699 he first distinguished himself by executing a map of the world, and other pieces, which procured him a place in the academy of sciences, 1702. He was afterwards appointed geographer to the king, with a pension, and had the honour of instructing the king himself in geography, for whose particular use he drew up several works. De Lisle’s reputation was so great, that scarcely any history or travels came out without the embellishment of his maps. Nor was his name less celebrated abroad than in his own country. Many sovereigns in vain attempted to draw him out of France. The Czar Peter, when at Paris on his travels, paid him a visit, to communicate to him some remarks upon Muscovy; but especially, says Fontenelle, to learn from him, better than he could anywhere else, the extent Niceron, vol. XXIV. Bibl. Belg. Blount’s Censura. Brueker. Bufiart’s Academie des Sciences, vol. II. Saxii Onomast. and situation of his own dominions. De Lisle died of an apoplexy Jan. 25, 1726, at 51 years of age. Besides the excellent maps he published, he wrote many pieces in the Memoirs of the Academy of Sciences.

, brother of the preceding, and an astronomer, promoted the interests of science, by some very hazardous journeys and voyages. In 1726 he went to Russia with his brother Joseph, who had been appointed astronomer to the academy of sciences at Petersburg. Lewis, at this time, made excursions beyond the utmost boundaries of the immense Russian empire. He took several journeys to the coasts of the Icy sea, to Lapland, and the government of Archangel, to determine the situation of the principal places by astronomical observations. He afterwards traversed a great part of Siberia, with M. Muller and M. Gmelin, professors of the academy at Petersburg. In 1741 he proceeded alone to Kamtschatka, and thence to Cape Beering, to examine the unknown northern coasts of America, and the seas between them and the Atlantic continent. He died in the same year. On account of his great merit he obtained a seat in the academy of sciences, and was the author of some papers in the “Memoirs” of that learned body, and of the academy of sciences at Petersburg.

, younger brother of the preceding, was born at Paris April 4, 1688, and at first educated under his paternal roof. He then pursued his studies at the Mazarine-college, where the eclipse of the sun in 1706 seems to have directed his attention to astronomy, for which he soon displayed so much genius, as to be admitted into the academy of sciences, to the memoirs of which he contributed many valuable papers. In 1715 he calculated the tables of the moon according to the theory of sir Isaac Newton. He also, in the course of his pursuits, made many observations on the spots of the sun, and from them formed a theory to determine the sun’s rotation on his axis. In 1720 he delivered a proposal to the academy for ascertaining in France the figure of the earth, and some years afterwards this was carried into execution. In 1724 he paid a visit to England, where he became acquainted with Newton and Halley, who shewed him every mark of respect, and Halley in particular highly gratified him by a present of a copy of his astronomical tables of the sun, moon, and planets, which he had printed in 1719, but which were not published for many years after. In. 1726 he was appointed astronomer royal in the imperial academy of sciences at Petersburg, where for twenty- one years he resided in the observatory-house built by Peter the Great, incessantly occupied in the improvement of astronomy and geography. During this period he published “Memoirs illustrative of the History of Astronomy,” 2 vols. 4to; and an atlas of Russia, first published in the Russian language, and afterwards in Latin. He constructed also a thermometer, differently graduated from those in use, the degrees beginning at the heat of boiling water, and thence increasing to 150, which was the freezing point. In 1747, after much ill-treatment on the part of the Russian government, he obtained his dismission, and arrived in Paris in September of the same year. He was then appointed professor of the mathematics at the college royal, in which situation he lived to render the greatest service to the interests of science, by training up some learned pupils, among whom was the celebrated M. de la Lande. In 1743, his pupil, M. Monnier, took a voyage to Scotland to observe an annular eclipse of the sun, and on this subject De Lisle published a large advertisement, which was reckoned a complete treatise on annular eclipses. He afterwards entered more fully on the consideration of the theory of eclipses, and he communicated a part of his researches on the subject to the academy in 1749. He was so expert in calculations, that he made many founded on the observations of Greenwich, Berlin, Scotland, and Sweden. In 1750 and 1753 he published “New charts of the Discoveries of admiral de Fonte, or Fuente, made in 1640, and those of other navigators, Spanish, Portuguese, English, Dutch, French, and Russian, in the Northern seas, with, explications.” In 1753 appeared his map of the world, in which he represented the effect of the parallaxes of Mercury in different countries, in order to point out the proper places for making such observations on the then expected transit, as should furnish a method of determining the distance of the sun, in a manner similar to that applied by Halley to the transit of Venus. Another work of his, published in the Transactions of the Academy, was on the comet of 1758, which was visible several months; but he was principally attentive to the one predicted by Di% Halley, forty years before, which was first seen in January 1759, He gave an account of his observations on that comet irr the first volume of the “Mercure,” for July of that year. He was afterwards assiduously engaged on the transit of Venus, expected in 1761, in order to correct the error of Halley, and thus prevent persons from undertaking long voyages unnecessarily for the sake of observing it. He had, some years previously to this, been appointed astronomical geographer to the marine, and his business was to collect and arrange the plans and journals of naval captains, and to extract from them whatever might be found beneficial to the king’s service in this department. His majesty now purchased, with a pension- for life, all M. de Lisle’s rich astronomical and geographical collections, which were added to the Mss. in the depot. In 1758, JDeginning to decline, he withdrew as much as he could from public life, leaving the care of his observations to M. Messier, while M. de la Lamle was appointed his coadjutor at the college royal. He went to reside at the abbey of St. Genevieve, where he spent his time partly in devotional exercises, and partly in study, devoting the greatest part of his income to- acts of benevolence and charity. He died on the 11th of July 1768, in the eighty-first year of his age. As a man of science his merits are very great, and in private life he was distinguished by unaffected piety, pure morals, undeviating integrity, and most amiable manners.

, an English antiquary, was educated at Eton school, and admitted to King’s -college, Cambridge, in 1584, where he took his degree of M. A. and became fellow, but quitted his fellowship on succeeding to an estate at Wilbraham, in Cambridgeshire. He was afterwards appointed one of the esquires extraordinary of the king’s body, and died in 1637. No farther particulars of his life are upon record. He published “A Saxon treatise concerning the Old and New Testament; written about the time of king Edgar, (700 years ago) by >Elfricus Abbas, thought to be the same that was afterwards archbishop of Canterbury,” 1623, 4to. (See jELFRic). This was published by Mr. Lisle from a ms. in sir Robert Cotton’s library. The copy before us has only this “Treatise,” but the volume is incomplete without “A Testimony of Antiquity, shewing the ancient faith in the church of England, touching the sacrament of the body and blood of our Lord” the “Words of CEilfric abbot of St. Alban’s, &c. taken out of his epistles written to Wulfsine, bishop of Scyrburne;” and “The Lord’s prayer, the creed, and ten commandments, in the Saxon and English tongue.” The work is dedicated to prince Charles, afterwards Charles I. in a long copy of verses, “by way of eclogue, imitating the fourth of Virgile.” To this is added a still longer preface, or address to the reader, containing some curious remarks on a variety of topics relating to Saxon literature, the Bible, the English language, &c. Mr. Lisle also published Du Bartas’s “Ark, Babylon, Colonies, and Columns,” in French and English, 1637, 4to and “The Fair Æthiopian,” 1631, 4to, a long poem of very indifferent merit. His reputation was founded on his skill in the Saxon tongue.

, an English physician and natural philosopher, was born at Radcliffe, in Buckinghamshire, about 1638, and educated under his great uncle sir Martin Lister, knt. physician in ordinary to Charles I. and president of the college of physicians, one of a Yorkshire family which produced a considerable number of medical practitioners of reputation. Our author was sent to St. John’s college, in Cambridge, where he took his first degree in arts in 1653; and was made fellow of his college by a mandate from Charles II. after his restoration in 1660. He proceeded M. A. in 1662; and, applying himself closely to physic, travelled into France in 1668, for further improvement. Returning home, he settled in 1670 at York, where he followed his profession many years with good repute, and took every opportunity which his business would permit, of prosecuting researches into the natural history and antiquities of the country; with which view he travelled into several parts of England, especially in the North.

As this study introduced him to the acquaintance of Mr. Lloyd, keeper of the Ashmolean museum at Oxford, he enriched that collection with several altars, coins, and other antiquities, together with a great number of valuable natural curiosities. He also sent several observations and experiments, in various branches of natural philosophy, to the same friend; who communicating some of them to the royal society, our author was recommended, and elected a fellow. In 1684, resolving by the advice of his friends to remove to London, he was created doctor of physic, by diploma, at Oxford; the chancellor himself recommending him as a person of exemplary loyalty, of high esteem among the most eminent of his profession, of singular merit to that university in particular, by having enriched their museum and library with presents of valuable books, both printed and manuscript, and of general merit to the literary world by several learned books which he published. Soon after this, he was elected fellow of the college of physicians.

In 1685 he published his “Historia sive Synopsis Conchyliorum,” 2 vols. fol. containing very accurate figures of all the shells known in his time, amounting to upwards of a thousand; and what renders the book a singular curiosity is, that they were all drawn by his two daughters, Susanna and Anne. The copper-plates of this work becoming the property of the university of Oxford, a new edition was published there in 1770, under the care of Huddesford, keeper of the Ashmolean museum. This edition wants two or three of the plates belonging to the original; but to make up for this deficiency, two or three new plates have been added, and notwithstanding the progress which the study has since made, the work still retains its value, and is indispensable to the student of^conchology.

In 1698, he attended the earl of Portland in his embassy from king William to the court of France; and having the pleasure to see his “Synopsis Conchyliorum” in the king’s library, he presented that monarch with a second edition of the treatise, much improved, in 1699, not long after his return from Paris. Of this journey he published an account, with observations on the state and curiosities of that metropolis; which, containing some things of a trifling nature, was pleasantly ridiculed by Dr. Wm. King, in another, entitled “A Journey to London.” In 1709, upon the indisposition of Dr. Hannes, he was made second physician in ordinary to queen Anne; in which post he continued to his death, Feb. 2, 1711-12. He was buried in Claphamchurch, near the body of his wife Hannah, who died in 1695, leaving six children. One of his daughters, who died in 1758, was the wife of the rev. Owen Evans, of St. Martin’s, Canterbury. Besides the books already mentioned, he published, 1. “Historiae Animalium Angliae tres Tractatus,” &c. 1678. 2. “John Goedertius of Insects,” &c. 1682, 4to. 3. The same book in Latin. 4. “De Fontibus medicalibus AnglitE,” Ebor. 1682. There is an account of most of these in Phil. Trans. Nos. 139, 143, 144, and 166. 5. “Exercitatio anatomica, in qua de Cochleis agitur,” &c. 1694, 8vo. 6. “Cochlearum & Limacum Exercitatio anatomica; accedit de Variolis Exercitatio,” 1695, 2 vols. 8vo. 7. “Conchy liorum Bivalvium utriusque Aquae Exercitatio anatom. tertia,” &c. 1696, 4to. 8. “Exercitationes medicinales,” &c. 1697, 8vo. In his medical writings he is rather too much attached to hypotheses, and preserves too great a reverence for ancient and now untenable doctrines; but his reputation is well founded on his researches in natural history and comparative anatomy.

, a Scotchman, born the latter end of the fifteenth century, whose sufferings by imprisonment and torture at Malaga, and whose travels on foot over Europe, Asia, and Africa, seem to raise him almost to the rank of a martyr and a hero, published a well-known account of his peregrinations and adventures. The first edition of this was printed in 1614, 4to, and reprinted in the next reign, with additions, and a dedication to Charles J. Though the author deals much in the marvellous, the accounts of the strange cruelties, of whioh he tells us he was the subject, have, however, an air of truth. Soon after his arrival in England from Malaga, he was carried to Theobalds on a feather-bed, that king James might be an eye-witness of his martyred anatomy, by which he means his wretched body, mangled and reduced to a skeleton. The whole court crowded to see him; and his majesty ordered him to be taken care of; and he was twice sent to Bath at his expence. By the king’s command, he applied to Gondamor, the Spanish ambassador, for the recovery of money and other things of value which the governor of Malaga had taken from him, and for a thousand pounds for his support; but, although promised a full reparation for the damages he had sustained, that minister never performed his promise. When he was upon the point of leaving England, Lithgow upbraided him with the breach of his word, in the presence-chamber, before several gentlemen of the court. This occasioned their fighting upon the spot; and the ambassador, as the traveller oddly expressed it, “had his fistula contrabanded with his fist;” but the unfortunate Lithgow, although generally commended for his spirited behaviour, was sent to the Marshalsea, where he continued a prisoner nine months. At the conclusion of the 8vo edition of his travels, he informs us, that “in his three voyages his painful feet have traced over, besides passages of seas and rivers, thirty-six thousand and odd miles, which draweth near to twice the circumference of the whole earth.” Here the marvellous seems to rise to the incredible; and to set him in point of veracity below Coryat, whom it is nevertheless certain that he far outwalked. His description of Ireland is whimsical and curious. This, together with the narrative of his sufferings, is reprinted in Morgan’s “Phcenix Britannicus.” He published also an account of the siege of Breda, 1637, of which the reader will find a notice in the “Restituta.”

, a learned scholar, was descended from the Westcot family of Mounslow, in Worcestershire, and born Nov. 8, 1627, at Hales-Owen, in Shropshire, of which place his father, Thomas, was vicar. He was educated under Dr. Busby, at Westminster-school, and in 1644 was chosen student of Christ-church, Oxford, but was ejected by the parliament visitors in Nov. 1648. This ejection, however, does not seem to have extended so far as in other cases, for we find that, soon after, he became usher of Westminster-school; and in 1658 was made second master, having for some time in the interim taught school in other places. In July 1670, being then chaplain in ordinary to the king, he accumulated his degrees in divinity, which were conferred upon him without taking any in arts, as a mark of respect due to his extraordinary merit. This indeed had been amply attested to the university by letters from Henchman, bishop of London, recommending him as a man eminently learned, of singular humanity and sweetness of manners, blameless and religious life, and of genius and ready faculty in preaching. In Sept. 1674, he was inducted into the rectory of Chelsea, was made a prebendary of Westminster, and afterwards sub -dean. In 1685 he was licensed to the church of St. Botolph Aldersgate, which he held about four years, and then resigned it, possibly on account of some decay in his constitution.

He died June 30, 1694, aged sixty-seven years, and was buried on the north side of the chancel of Chelsea church, where there is a handsome monument, with an epitaph to his memory. He was an excellent philologist and grammarian, particularly in the Latin, as appears from his Dictionary of that language; he appears also to have studied the Greek with equal minuteness, a Lexicon of which he had long been compiling, and left unfinished at his death. He was also well skilled in the Oriental languages and in rabbinical learning; in prosecution of which he exhausted great part of his fortune in purchasing ' books and manuscripts from all parts of Europe, Asia, and Africa. The consequence of this improvidence, we are sorry, however, to add, was his dying insolvent, and leaving his widow in very distressed circumstances. Some time before his death, he made a small essay towards facilitating the knowledge of the Hebrew, Chaldee, and Arabic tongues, which he intended to have brought into a narrower compass. He was versed also in the abstruse parts of the mathematics, and wrote a great many pieces concerning mystical numeration, which came into the hands of his brother-in-law Dr. Hockin. In private life he was extremely charitable, easy of access, communicative, affable, facetious in conversation, free from passion, of a strong constitution, and a venerable countenance. Besides his “Latin Dictionary,” which appeared first in 1678, 4to, and was often reprinted, but is now superseded by Ainsworth’s, he published, 1. “Tragicomcedia Oxoniensis,” a Latin poem on the Parliament-Visitors,“1648, a single sheet, 4to, which, however, was afterwards attributed to a Mr. John Carrick, a student of Christ-churdi. 2.” Pasor metricus, sive voces omnes Nov. Test, primogenias hexametris versibus compreherusae,“1658, 4to, Greek and Latin. 3.” Diatriba in octo Tractatus distributa,“&c. printed with the former. 4.” Elementa Religionis, sive quatuor Capita catechetica totidem Linguis descripta, in usum Scholarum,“1658, 8vo, to which h added, 5.” Complicatio Radicum in primaeva Hebrseorurh Lingua.“6.” Solomon’s Gate, or an entrance into the Church,“&c. 1662, 8vo. Perhaps this title was taken from the north gate of Westminster-abbey, so called 7.” Sixty-one Sermons,“1680, fol. 8.” A Sermon at a solemn meeting of the natives of the city and county of Worcester, in Bow-church, London, 24th of June, 1680,“4to. 9.” Preface to Cicero’s Works,“Lond. 1681, 2 vols.'fol. 10.” A Translation of ‘ Selden’s Jani Anglorum Facies Altera,’ with Notes,“which for some unkuown reason he published under the name of Redman Westcote, 1683, fol. With this were printed three other tracts of Selden, viz. his” Treatise of the Judicature of Parliaments,“&c.” Of the original of Ecclesiastical Jurisdiction of Testaments.“”Of the Disposition of Intestates Goods.“11.” The Life of Themistocles,“from the Greek, in the first vol. of Plutarch’s Lives, by several hands, 1687, 8vo. He also published” Dissertatio epistolaris de Juramento Medicorum qui Ορκοσ Ἱπποκρατουσ dicitur," &c. also A Latin Inscription, in prose and verse, intended for the monument of the fire of London, in Sept. 1666. This is printed at the end of his Dictionary; with an elegant epistle to Dr. Baldwin Hamey, M. D.

, LL. D. an English divine and poet, was educated upon the royal foundation at Etonschool, where, under the care of that learned and excellent master. Dr. Snape, his school-exercises were much admired, and when his turn came, he was elected to King’s college, Cambridge, in 1716, with equal applause. Here he took his degrees of A. B. 1720, A.M. 1724, and LL.D. 1728. Having some talent for poetry, he had not been long at the university, before he diverted a school-fellow, whom he had left at Eton, with a humourous poem on the subject of his various studies, and the progress he had made in academical learning, which was followed by his more celebrated one “on a spider.” Dr. Morell, the editor of his “Discourses,” and his biographer, procured a genuine copy of them, as transcribed by a gentleman then at Eton school from the author’s own writing, with such remains as could be found of a Pastoral Elegy, written about the same time by Mr. Littleton, on the death of R. Banks, scholar of the same college. The two former are now correctly printed in the edition of Dodsley’s Poems of 1782, edited by Isaac Reed. Dr. Morell found also a poetical epistle sent from school to Penyston Powney, esq.; but as this was scarcely intelligible to any but those who were then at Eton, he has not printed it. In 1720 Mr. Littleton was recalled to Eton as an assistant in the school; in which office he was honoured and beloved by his pupils, and so esteemed by the provost and fellows, that on the death of the rev. Mr. Malcher, in 1727, they elected him a fellow, and presented him to the living of Mapledurham, in Oxfordshire. He then married a very amiable woman, Frances, one of the daughters of Barnham Goode, who was under-master of Eton school. In June 1730, he was appointed chaplain in ordinary to their majesties. Though an admired preacher and an excellent scholar, he seems to have been little ambitious of appearing in print. He died of a fever in 1734, and was buried in his own parish church of Mapledurham, leaving behind him a widow and three daughters; for whose benefit, under the favour and encouragement of queen Caroline, his “Discourses” were first printed by Dr. Morell, with an account of the author, from which the above particulars are taken. Dr. Burton, Mr. Littleton’s successor in the living of Mapledurham, afterwards married his widow, as we have noticed in his Jife. 1 -.;.

, a celebrated English judge, descended of an ancient family, was the eldest son of Thomas Westcote, of the county of Devon, esq. by Elizabeth, daughter and sole-heir of Thomas Littleton or Lyttleton, of Frankley in Worcestershire, in compliance with whom she consented that the issue, or at least the eldest son, of that marriage should take the name of Lyttleton, and bear the arms of that family. He was born about the beginning of the fifteenth century at Frankley. Having laid a proper foundation of learning at one of the universities, he removed to the Inner-Temple; and, applying himself to the law, became very eminent in that profession. The first notice we have of his distinguishing himself is from his learned lectures on the statute of Westminster, “de donis conditionalibus,” “of conditional gifts.” He was afterwards made, by Henry VI. steward or judge of the court of the palace, or marshalsea of the king’s household, and, in May 1455, king’s serjeant, in which capacity he went the Northern circuit as a judge of the assize. Upon the revolution of the crown, from the house of Lancaster to that of York) in the time of Edward IV. our judge, who was now made sheriff of Worcestershire, received a pardon from that prince; was continued in his post of king’s serjeant, and also in that of justice of assi/r for the same circuit. This pardon passed in 1462, the second year of Edward IV.; and, in 1466, he was appointed one of the judges of the court of Common Pleas. The same year, he obtained a writ to the commissioners of the customs of London, Bristol, and Kingston-upon-Hull, enjoining them to pay him a hundred and ten marks annually, for the better support of his dignity; a hundred and six shillings and eleven pence farthing, to furnish him whh a furred robe; and six shillings and six-pence more, for another robe called Li num. In 1473, we find him residing near St. Sepulchre’s church, London, in a capital mansion, the property of the abbot of Leicester, which he held on lease at the yearly rent of 1 <'>.-. In 1475 he was created, among others, knight of the Hath, to grace the solemnity of conferring that order upon the king’s eldest son, then prince of Wales, afterwards Edward V. He continued to enjoy the esteem of his sovereign and the nation, on account of his profound knowledge of the laws of England, till his death, Aug. 23, 1481, the day after the date of his will. He was then said to be of a good old age, but its precise length has not been ascertained. He was honourably interred in the cathedral church of Worcester, where a marble tomb, with his statue, was erected to his memory; his picture was also placed in the church of Frankley; and another in that of Hides-Owen, where his descendants purchased a good estate. He married, and had three sons, William, Richard, and Thomas. Kichard, bred to the law, became eminent in thut profession; and it was for his use that our judge drew up his celebrated treatise on tenures or titles, which will probably hand his name down to the latest posterity. The judge’s third son, Thomas, was knighted by Henry VII. for taking Lambert Simnel, the pretended earl of Warwick. His eldest son and successor, sir William Littleton, after living many years in great splendour, at Frankley, died in 1508; and from this branch the late celebrated lord Lyttelton of Frankley co. Worcester, who was created a baron of Great Britain, Nov. 1756, derived his pedigree; but who, owing to the alteration in the spelling of the name (which, however, appears unnecessary) will occur in a future part of this work.

The memory of judge Littleton is preserved by his “Tenures” and the various editions through which his book has passed are the best evidence of its worth. Dr. Middleton supposes the first edition to have been that printed in French by Lettou and Machlima, near the church of All-Saints, or All-Hallows, in London, without date: and he thinks that it was put to press by the author himself in 1481, the year he died; but lord Coke supposes the French edition in folio, printed without date, at Rouen, by W. Le Tailleur, for R. Pinson, to have been the first. The point however has not yet been settled; and perhaps cannot now be settled with precision. The various opinions on the subject may be found in our authorities. That it was often reprinted is a matter of less doubt: the editions from 1539 to 1639 only, amount to twenty-four. The original composition of this celebrated work is justly esteemed as the principal pillar on which the superstructure of the law of real property in this kingdom is supported; and the valuable “Commentary” of lord Coke has uniformly been considered, by the most eminent lawyers, as the result and repository of all his learning on the subjects there treated. Of this work a republication was made in folio, 1738, which, independent of the valuable annotations of lord Hale and lord chancellor Nottingham, has been greatly improved by the learning and indefatigable labours of Mr. Hargrave and Mr. Butler. There was a book written in the reign of Edward III. which is called “Oki Tenures,” to distinguish it from Littleton’s book. It gives an account of the various tenures by which land was holdeu, the nature of estates, and some other incidents relating to landed property. It is a very scanty tract, but has the merit of having led the way to Littleton’s famous work.

, lord keeper of the great seal of England in the reign of Charles I. was descended, by a collateral branch, from the preceding judge Littleton, being grandson of John Littleton, parson of Mouuslow in Shropshire, and son of sir Edward Littleton of Henley in that county, one of the justices of the inarches, and judge of North Wales. He was born in 1589, and admitted a gentleman commoner of Christchurch, Oxford, in 1606, where he took the degree of bachelor of arts in 1609. Some time after, being designed for the law by his father, he removed to the InnerTemple, and soon became eminent in his profession. In 1628, we find him in parliament; and on the 6th of May he was appointed, together with sir Edward Coke and sir Dudley Digges, to carry up the petition of right to the house of lords. He had also the management of the charge made against the duke of Buckingham, concerning king James’s death; on which occasion he behaved himself with universal applause, although he had to consult both the jealousy of the people and the honour of the court. His first preferment in the law was the appointment to succeed his father as a Welch judge; after which he was elected recorder of London, and about the same time counsel for the university of Oxford. In 1632, he was chosen summer-reader of the Inner-Temple, and in 1634, appointed solicitor-general, and received the honour of knighthood in 1635. In 1639, he was constituted lord chief-justice of the common-pleas; and, in 1640, on the flight of lord-keeper Finch from the resentment of the parliament, the great seal was put into his custody, with the same title. In February following, he was created a peer of England, by the title of lord Littleton, baron of Mounslow in Shropshire.

In this station he preserved the esteem of both parties for some time, and the two houses of parliament agreed to return their thanks by him to the king, for passing the triennial bill, and that of the subsidies; but, as he concurred in the votes for raising an army, and seizing the militia, in March 1641, measures very hostile to the royal cause, the king sent an order from York to lord Falkland, to demand the seal from him, and to consult about a successor with Hyde, afterwards earl of Clarendon; but this last step prevented the former order from being put into execution. Hyde, who always entertained a great regard for the keeper, had, upon his late behaviour, paid him a visit at Exeter-house, on which occasion the keeper freely disclosed his mind, lamenting that he had been removed from the common-pleas, of which court he was acquainted with the business aud the persons with whom he had to deal, to an higher office, which involved him with another sort of men, and in affairs to which he was a stranger; and this without his having one friend among them, to whom he could confide any difficulty that occurred to him. Adverting likewise to the unhappy state of the king’s affairs, he said that the party in hostility to the court “would never have done what they had already, unless they had been determined to do more: that he foresaw it would not be long before a war would break out, and of what importance it was, in that season, that the great seal should be with his majesty; that the prospect of this necessity had made him comply to a certain degree with that party; that there had lately been a consultation, whether, in case the king might send for him, or the great seal be taken from him, it were advisable to keep it in some secure place, where the keeper should receive it upon occasion, they having no mind to disoblige him: that the knowledge of this had induced him to vote as he did in the late debates; and by that compliance, which he knew would give the king a bad impression of him, he had gained so much credit with them, that he should be able to preserve the seal in his own hands till his majesty should demand it, and then he would be ready to wait on the king with it, declaring that no man should be more willing to perish with and for his majesty than himself.” Mr. Hyde acquainted lord Falkland with this conference; and, being confident that the lord-keeper would keep his promise, recommended to advise his majesty to write a kind invitation to the keeper to come to York, and bring the seal with him, rather than, think of giving it to any other person. The advice was embraced by the king, who, though he still had his doubts of Littleton’s sincerity, was influenced by the reasons assigned; and accordingly the seal was sent to York on the f2d, and followed by the keeper on the 23d of May, 1642. But, notwithstanding this piece of service and eminent proof of his loyalty, at the risk of his life, he could never totally regain the king’s confidence, or the esteem of the court-party. He continued, however, to enjoy his post, in which he attended his majesty to Oxford, was there created doctor of laws, and made one of the king’s privycouncil, and colonel of a regiment of foot in the same service, some time before his death, which happened Aug. 27, 1645, at Oxford. His body was interred in the cathedral of Christ church; uu which Qccasioa a funeral oration was pronounced by the celebrated Dr. Hammond, then orator to the university. In May 1683, a monument was erected there to his memory, by his only daughter and heiress, the lady Anne Lyttelton, widow of sir Thomas Lyttelton; and the same year came out his “Reports,” in folio, which, however, Mr. Stevens, in his introduction to lord Bacon’s Letters, edition 1702, p. 21, thinks were not composed by him, many of the cases being the same verbatim as in Hetley’s reports. Lord Clarendon says of sir Edward Littleton, that “he was a man of great reputation in the profession of the law, for learning, and all other advantages which attend the most eminent men. He was of a very good extraction in Shropshire, and inherited a fair fortune and inheritance from his father. He was a handsome and a proper man, of a very graceful presence, and notorious courage, which in his youth he had manifested with his sword. He had taken great pains in the hardest and most knotty part of the law, as well as that which was most customary; and was not only ready and expert in the books, but exceedingly versed in records, in studying and examining whereof he had kept Mr. Selden company, with whom he had great friendship, and who had much assisted him: so that he was looked upon as the best antiquary of his profession, who gave himself up to practice; and, upon the mere strength of his abilities, he had raised himself into the first of the practisers of the common law courts, and was chosen recorder of London before he was called to the bench, and grew presently into the highest practice in all the other courts, as well as those of the law.” Whitelocke also observes, that he was a man of courage, and of excellent parts and learning. But we fear he cannot be altogether acquitted of unsteadiness in some parts of his conduct, although it must at the same time be owned that when he found he could no longer retain the seal with credit, he delivered it, with his own hands, to his unhappy sovereign, and died firmly attached to his cause.

He was twice married; first to Anne, daughter of Johiv Lyttelton, by whom he had a son and two daughters, who all died infants. His second wife was the lady Sidney Calverley, relict of sir George Calverley of Cheshire, and daughter of sir William Jones, judge of the king’s-bench, by whom he had the above-mentioned Anna, whose son Edward died in 1664, and lies interred in the Temple church. In the south window of the Inner Temple hall, is a fine shield of the keeper’s arms, with fifteen quarterings, distinguished by a crescent within a mullet, which shews him to have been a second son of the third house.

, a rigid but pious presbyter of the church of Scotland, was born in 1603. In 1617, he was sent to the college of Glasgow, where he remained until he passed M. A. in 1621. After this, he exercised the ministry in various places, as occasion oflered, till 1628, when he was, by the sentence of the general assembly, sent to Ancrum in Teviot-dale. He was twice suspended by bishop Down, and was one of those who tendered the covenant to king 'Charles II. a little before he landed in Scotland. In 1663, as he would not subscribe or take the oath of allegiance, he was banished out of the kingdom, and retired into Holland, where he preached to the Scots’ congregation at Rotterdam till his death, Aug. 9, 1672, His works are “Letters from Leith, 1663, to his Parishioners at Ancrum;” “Memorable Characteristics of Divine Providence;” and a “Latin Translation of the Old Testament,” not published.

, the most celebrated of the Roman historians, was born at Patavium, or Padua, and descended from an illustrious family, which had given several consuls to Rome. Few circumstances of his life are known, as none of the ancients have left any thing about it; and so reserved has he been with regard to himself, that we should be at a loss to determine the time when his history was written, if it were not for one passage which seems to prove that he was employed on it about the year of Rome 730. He was then at Rome, where he long resided; and some have supposed that he was known to Augustus before, by certain dialogues, which he had dedicated to him. Seneca, without noticing the dedication, mentions these dialogues, whjch he calls historical and philosophical; and also some books, written purposely on the subject of philosophy. All this appears doubtful, but there is reason to think that he began his history as soon as he was settled at Rome; and he seems to have devoted himself entirely to it. The tumults and distractions of that city frequently obliged him to retire to Naples, not only that he might be less interrupted in his historical labours, but enjoy that tranquillity which he could not have at Rome. He appears to have been much dissatisfied with the manners of his age, and tells us, that “he should reap this reward of his labour, in composing the Roman history, that it would take his attention from the present numerous evils, at least while he was employed upon the first and earliest ages.”

It is said that he used to read parts of his history, while he was composing it, to Mæcenas and Augustus; and that Livia conceived so high an opinion of him, as to intend to commit to him the education of young Claudius the brother of Germanicus, but his death prevented his enjoying this honour. On the demise of Augustus, he returned to Padua, where he was received with all imaginable honour and respect; and there died, A. D. 17, at the age of seventy, or seventy-six.

Scarcely any man was ever more honoured, both in his life-time and after his death, than this historian. Pliny the younger relates that a gentleman travelled from Cades, the extreme part of Spain, to see Livy; and, though Rome abounded with more stupendous and curious spectacles than any city in the world, immediately returned; because, after having seen Livy, he thought nothing worthy of his notice. To the following story, however, we cannot so easily give credit. A monument was erected to this historian in the temple of Juno, where the monastery of St. Justina was afterwards founded. There, in 1413, was discovered the following epitaph upon Livy: “Ossa Titi Livii Patavini, omnium mortalium judicio digni, cujus prope invicto Calamo invicti Populi Romani Res gestaa conscriberentur.” In 1451, we are told that Alphonsus, king of Arragon, sent his ambassador, Anthony Panormita, to desire of the citizens of Padua the bone of that arm with which this their famous countryman had written his history; and, obtaining it, caused it to be conveyed to Naples with the greatest ceremony, as a most invaluable relic. He is said to have been assisted in his recovery from an ill state of health, by the pleasure he found in reading this history; and therefore, out of gratitude, was induced to pay extraordinary honours to the memory of the writer."

This ridiculous story, which has been repeated in the former editions of this Dictionary, as well as in other accounts of Livy, took its rise from the ignorance or knavery of those who reported it; and having been refuted by Gudius, and more fully by Morhof (“De Livii Patav.” cap. iii.), ought long ago to have been displaced. The epitaph at Padua was, when written without the contractions, “Vivus fecit Titus Livius, Livice Titi filise quartae, libertus Halys, concordialis Patavi, sibi et suis omnibus;” i. e. This monument was erected by himself and his family by Titus Livius Halys, the freedman of Livia, a daughter of one Titus Livius, who probably lived many ages after the historian. Halys was his name, while he continued in servitude, and Titus Livius the name of his patron or master, which he assumed, as was usual in those cases, when he received his freedom. He had perhaps borne some office in the temple of Concordia at Padua, which might possibly have stood in the place where the epitaph was discovered, and hence the title Concordialis. But the monks of the fifteenth century, who valued themselves on having discovered the bones of the celebrated historian, attended only to the name of Titus Livius; never reflecting, that this was a common name, and might have belonged to twenty others; that in the Augustan age, dead bodies were usually burnt, and not buried within the walls of cities; and that, admitting Livy had been buried, it was very improbable that any of his bones should have remained unconsumed in the ground above 1400 years.

The History of Livy, like other great works of antiquity, is transmitted down to us exceedingly mutilated and imperfect. Its books were originally an hundred and fortytwo, of which are extant only thirty-five. The epitomes of it, from which we learn their number, all remain, except those of the 136th and 137th books. They have been divided into decades, which some think was done by Livy himself, because there is a preface to every decade; while others suppose it to be a modern contrivance, since nothing about it can be gathered from the ancients. The first decade, beginning with the foundation of Rome, is extant, and treats of the affairs of 460 years. The second decade is lost, the years of which are seventy-five. The third decade is extant, and contains the second Punic war, ineluding eighteen years. It is reckoned the most excellent part of the history, as giving an account of a very long and sharp war, in which the Romans gained so many advantages, that no arms could afterwards withstand them. The fourth decade contains the Macedonian war against Philip, and the Asiatic war against Antiochus, which takes up the space of about twenty -three years. The first five books of the fifth decade were found, at Worms, by Simon Grynaeus, in 1431, but are very defective; and the remainder of Livy’s history, which reacheth to the death of Drusus in Germany, in the year 746, together with the second decade, are supplied by Freinshemius. Many discoveries have been reported of the lost books of Livy, but these have generally proved forgeries. The last, by Joseph Vella, was very recently exposed, by Dr. Hager in Better’s Berlin Journal.

The encomiums bestowed upon Livy, by both ancients and moderns, are great and numerous. Quinctiliau speaks of him in the highest terms, and thinks that Herodotus need not take it ill to have Livy equalled with him. In general, probity, candour, and impartiality, are what have distinguished Livy above all historians. Neither complaisance to the times, nor his particular connexions with the emperor, could restrain him from speaking so well of Pompey, as to make Augustus call him a Pompeian. This we learn from Cremutius Cortlus, in Tacitus, who relates also, much to the emperor’s honour, that this gave no interruption to their friendship. Livy, however, has not escaped censure as a writer. In the age in which he lived, Asinius Pollio charged him with Patavinity, a word variously explained by writers, but generally supposed to relate to his style. The most common opinion is, that Pollio, accustomed to the delicacy of the language spoken in the court of Augustus, could not bear with certain provincial idioms, which Livy, as a Paduan, used in various places of his history. Pignorius is of a different opinion, and considers Patavinity as relating to the orthography of certain words, in which Livy used one letter for another, according to the custom of his country, writing “sibe” and “quase” for “sibi” and “quasi;” which he attempts to prove by several ancient inscriptions. Chevreau maintains, that it does not concern the style, but the principles of the historian: the Paduans, he says, preserved a long and constant inclination for a republic, and were therefore attached to Pompey; while Pollio, being of Caesar’s party, was naturally led to attribute to Livy the sentiments of his countrymen, on account of his speaking well of Pompey. It seems remarkable that there should exist such difference of opinion, when Quinctilian, who must be supposed to know the true import of this Patavinity, has referred it entirely to the language of our author. MorhofPs elaborate treatise, however, is highly creditable to his critical skill. The merit of Livy’s history is so well known, as to render it unnecessary to accumulate the encomiums which modern scholars have bestowed on him. With these the school -boy is soon made acquainted, and they meet the advanced scholar in all his researches. His history was first printed at Rome, about 1469, by Sweynheym and Pannartz, in folio. Of this rare edition, lord Spencer is in possession of a fine copy; but the exquisite copy on vellum, formerly in the imperial library at Vienna, now belongs to James Edwards, esq. of Harrow; and is perhaps the most magnificent volume of an ancient classic in the world. Of modern printing the best editions are, that of Gronovius, “cum Notis variorum & suis, Lugd. Bat. 1679,” 3 vols. 8vo; that of Le Clerc, at “Amsterdam, 1709,” 10 vols. 12mo that of Crevier, at “Paris, 1735,” 6 vols. <Ko of Prakenborch, Auist. 1738, 7 vols. 4to of Ruddiman, Edinburgh, 1751, 4 vols. 12mo; of Homer, Lond. 1794, 8 vols. 8vo and that of Oxford, 1800, 6 vols. 8vo. Livy has been translated into every language. The last English translation was that of George Baker, A. M. 6 vols. 8vo, published in 1797, which was preceded by that of Philemon Holland, in 1600; that of Bohun, in 1686; and a third, usually called Hay’s translation, though, no such name appears, printed in 1744, 6 vols. 8vo.

, a loyal biographer and historian of the seventeenth century, the son of Hugh Lloyd, was born at Pant Mawr, in the parish of Trawsvinydd, in Merionethshire, Sept. 28, 1625. He was educated in grammar learning at the free-school at Ruthen in Denbighshire, and in 1652 became a servitor of Oriel college, Oxford, at which time, and after, he performed the office of janitor. He took one degree in arts, and by the favour of the warden and society of Merton college, was presented to itie rectory of Ibston near Watlington in Oxfordshire, in May 1658. Next year be took his master’s degree, and after a short time, resigned Ibston, and went to London, where he was appointed reader of the Charter-house. Afterwards he retired to Wales, and became chaplain to Dr. Isaac Barrow, bishop of St. Asaph, who, besides several preferments in his diocese, gave him a canonry in the church of St. Asaph, in August 1670. On Aug. 14, 1671, he was made vicar of Abergeley, and on the same day, as is supposed, prebend of Vaynol in the church of St. Asaph, at which time he resigned his canonry. He afterwards exchanged Abergeley for the vicarage of Northop in Flintshire, where he settled and taught the free-school, until his health began to decay. He then returned, probably to try the effect of his native air, to Pant Mawr, where he died Feb. 16, 1691, and was buried there.

Mr. Lloyd, even by Wood’s account, left an excellent character behind him: “he was a very industrious and zealous person, charitable to the poor, and ready to do good offices in his neighbourhood; he commonly read the service every day in his church at Northop, when he was at home, and usually gave money to such poor children as would come to him to be catechised.” As an author, however, Wood appears to have been a little jealous of Lloyd; speaks of him as being “a conceited and confident per­*on;” who “took too much upon him to transmit to posterity the memoirs of great personages;” by which “he obtained among knowing men not only the character of a most impudent plagiary, but a false writer, and a mere scribbler, especially upon the publication of his * Memoirs,' wherein are almost as many errors as lines.” “At length,” adds Wood, “having been sufficiently admonished of his said errors, and brought into trouble for some extravagancies in his books, he left off writing, retired to Wales, and there gave himself up to the gaining of riches.” That all this is not true, modern inquirers of reputation, who have repeatedly referred to Lloyd, seem to be convinced: he is in truth a compiler, like others of his contemporaries; but, although he must rank greatly under, he certainly belongs to the same class with Fuller and Wood himself. la his style he partakes more of the former than the latter, and having titled the subject of his pen “Worthies,” he is, s, a little too anxious to support their claim, and regardless- of those circumstances which form ajust, if not a perfect, character. Lloyd has preserved many minutiae of eminent men, not to be found, or not easily, to be found, elsewhere. These remarks apply to his two principal works, so often quoted by modern biographers, “The Statesmen and favourites of England since the Reformation, &c.” 166.5, 8vo, reprinted in 1670; and his “Memoirs of the Lives, &c.” of persons who suffered for their loyalty during the rebellion, Lond. 1668, folio. This last is the more valuable of the two, and is so far from deserving the character Wood has given, of containing as “many errors as lines,” that, while we admit it is not free from errors, we have found it in general corroborated by contemporary writers, and even by Wood himself. Of the first of these works, an edition was published by Charles Whitworth, esq. in 1766, 2 vols. 8vo, with additions from other writers, with a view to restore the light and shade of character. “Mr. Lloyd,” says an anonymous critic, “is professedly the white-washer of every character and personage that falls under his brush, particularly of the loyalists of Charles I. and II.; but his editor has seamed it with some sable strokes, some drawn from lord Herbert, and some from his own stores, which are supplied from Rapin, and other republican writers of little credit and less abilities. The true merit of Lloyd is, that notwithstanding the sameness of most of his characters, he serves them up to his readers so differently dressed, that each seems to be a new dish, and to have a peculiar relish.”

Lloyd’s other publications were: 1. “Modern Policy compleated, or the public actions and councils, '&c. of General Monk,” Lond. 1660, 8vo. 2. “The Pourtraictuue of his sacred Majesty Charles II. &c.” ibid. 1660, 8vo. 3. “The Countess of Bridgwater’s Ghost, &c.” Lond. 1663, a character of this amiable lady, published, as Wood allows, “to make her a pattern for other women to imitate;” but we can scarcely credit what he adds, that “the earl being much displeased that the memory of his lady should be perpetuated under such a title, and by such an obscure person, who did not do her the right that was <Jue, he brought him into trouble, and caused him to suffer six months imprisonment /” We have not seen this work; but had it been a libel instead of a panegyric, which last appears to have been the author’s honest intention, it could not have been punished with more severity. 4. “Of Plots, &c.” Lond. 1664, 4to, published under the name of Oliver Foulis. 5. “The Worthies of the World, &c.” an abridgment of Plutarch, ibid. 1665, 8vo. 6. “Dying and Dead men’s Living Words; or a fair warning to a careless world,” 1665, and 1682, 12mo. 7. “Wonders no miracles; or Mr. Valentine Greatrack’s Gift of Healing examined, &c.” ibid. 1665, 4to. 8. “Exposition of the Catechism and Liturgy, &c.” 9. “A Treatise on Moderation,” 1674.

, a learned English writer in the seventeenth century, was son of Mr. George Lloyd, minister of Wonson or Wonsington near Winchester, and grandson of Mr. David Lloyd, vicar of Lockford near Stockbridge in Hampshire. He was born at Hoi ton in Flintshire in 1634, and educated at Wykeham’s school near Winchester, and admitted a scholar of Wadham college, Oxford, from Hart-hall, October 20, 1653. He afterwards became a fellow of Wadham, and July 6, 16.58, took the degree of roaster of arts. In 1665, when Dr. Blandford, warden of that college, became bishop of Oxford, our author was appointed chaplain to him, being about that time rector of St. Martin’s church in Oxford, and continued with the bishop till he was translated to the see of Worcester in 1671. The year following, the rectory of St. Mary Newington, in Surrey, falling void, the bishop of Worcester presented Mr. Lloyd to it, who kept it to his death, which happened Nov. 27, 1680. He was interred in the chancel of the church there, leaving behind him the character of an harmless quiet man, and an excellent philologist. His “Dictionarium Historicum,” &c. although now obsolete, was once reckoned a valuable work. The first edition was published at Oxford in 1670, folio. The second edition was printed at London in 1686, folio, under the fMlowing title: “Dictionarium Historicum, geographicum, poeticum, gentium, hominum, deorum gentilium, regionum, insularum, locorum, civitatum, aequorum, fluviorum, sinuum, portuum, promontoriorum, ac montium, antiqua recentioraque, ad sacras & profanas historias, poetarumque fabulas intelligendas nccessaria, Nomina, quo decet erdine, complectens & illustrans. Opus admodum utile & apprime necessarium; a Carolo Stephano inchoatum; ad incudem vero revocatum, innumerisque pene locis auctum & emaculatum per NicolaumV.Lloydium, Collegii Wadhami in celeberrima Academia Oxoniensi Socium. Editio novissima.” He left several unpublished Mss. consisting principally of commentaries and translations. He had a younger brother, John, somewhat of a poet, who appears to have shared the friendship and esteem of Addison.

, a modern poet, was born in Westminster in 1733. His father, Dr. Pierson Lloyd, was second master of Westminster-school, afterwards chancellor of York, and portionist of Waddesdon in Bucks. His learning, judgment, and moderation, endeared him to all who partook of his instructions during a course of almost fifty years spent in the service of the public at Westminster-school. He had a pension from his majesty of 500l. conferred upon him in his old age, which was ordered to be paid without deduction, and which he enjoyed until his death, Jan. 5, 1781.

Robert was educated at Westminster-school, where unfortunately he had for his associates Churchill, Thornton, Column, and some others, to whose example his erroneous life may be ascribed. In 1751, he stood first on the list of Westminster scholars who went to Trinity college, Cambridge, at the same time that his school-fellow Colman obtained the same rank among those sent to Oxford. In 1755, he took the degree of bachelor, and in 1761 that of master of arts. While at the university, he wrote several pf his smaller pieces, and acquired the reputation of a lively and promising genius. But his conduct was marked by so many irregularities, as to induce his father to wish him more immediately under his eye; and with the hope of reclaiming him to sobriety and study, he procured him the place of usher at Westminster-school. His education had amply qualified him for the employment, but his inclination led him to a renewed connection with such companions as deemed themselves exempt from the duties and decencies of moral life.

At what time he quitted the school, we are not told. In 1760 and 1761, he superintended the poetical department of a short-lived periodical publication, entitled the “Library,” of which the late Dr. Kippis was the editor. In 1760 he published the first of his productions which attracted much notice, “The Actor.” It was recommended by an easy and harmonious versification, and by the liberality of his censures, which were levelled at certain improprieties common to actors in general. By this poem, Churchill is said to have been stimulated to write his *' Rosciad,“in which he descended from general to personal criticism. The subjects, however, were so alike, that Lloyd was for some time supposed to be the author of the” llosciad,“which he took an early opportunity to deny, and not only acknowledged his inferiority, but attached himself more closely than ever to the fame and fortunes of Churchill. In the same year, he attempted a small piece of the musical kind, called” The Tears and Triumphs of Parnassus/' and the following season had another little opera performed at Drury-lane theatre, in honour of their present majesties’ nuptials, entitled “Arcadia; or, The Shepherd’s Wedding.” The profit arising from these pieces was not great, but probably enough to induce him to become an author by profession, although no man ever ventured on that mode of life with fewer qualifications. His poetical productions were of such a trifling cast as to bring him very small supplies, and he had neither taste nor industry for literary employment.

In 1762, he attempted to establish a periodical work, “The St. James’s Magazine,” which was to be the depository of his own efVusions, aided by the contributions of his friends. The latter, however, came in tardily; Churchill, from whom he had great expectations, contributed nothing, although such of his poems as he published during the sale of the magazine, were liberally praised. Thornton gave a very few prose essays, and poetical pieces were furnished by Denis and Emily, two versifiers of forgotten reputation. Lloyd himself had none of the steady industry which a periodical work requires, and his magazine was often made up, partly from books, and partly from the St. James’s Chronicle, of which Colman and Thornton were proprietors, and regular contributors. Lloyd also translated some of Marmontel’s tales for the Magazine, and part of a French play, in order to fix upon Murphy the charge of plagiarism. This magazine, after existing about a year, was dropped for want of encouragement, as far as Lloyd was concerned; but was continued for some time longer by Dr. Kenrick. Lloyd’s imprudence and necessities were now beyond relief or forbearance, and his eretlitors confined him within the Fleet prison, where he afforded a melancholy instance of the unstable friendship of wits. Dr. Kenrick informs us that “even Thornton, though his bosom friend from their infancy, refused to be his security for the liberty of the rules; a circumstance which, giving rise to some ill-natured altercation, induced this quondam friend to become an inveterate enemy, in the quality of his most inexorable creditor.” It was probably during his imprisonment, that he published a very indifferent translation of Klopstock’s “Death of Adam.” After that, his “Capricious Lovers,” a comic opera, was acted for a few nights at Drury-lane theatre. This is an adaptation of Favart’s Ninette a la Cour to the English stage, but Lloyd had no original powers in dramatic composition. Churchill and Wilkes are said to have afforded him a weekly stipend from the commencement of his imprisonment until his final release. How this was paid we knownot. Wilkes had been long out of the kingdom, and Churchill, who left Lloyd in a jail when he went to France, bequeathed him a ring only as a remembrance*. It is more probable that his father assisted him on this occasion, although it might not be in his power to pay his debts. He had in vain tried every means to reclaim him from idleness and intemperance, and had long borne “the drain or burthen” which he was to his family. The known abilities of this unhappy son, “rendered this blow the more grievous to so good a father,” who is characterized by bishop Newton as a man that “with all his troubles and disappointments, with all the sickness and distress in his family, still preserved his calm, placid countenance, his easy cheerful temper, and was at all times an agreeable friend and companion, in all events a true Christian philosopher.”

ap edition of his collected poems. Frqm 1763. loved to associate. In his friendships he was warm, constant, and grateful, *' more sinned against than sinning;“and it would be difficult to find an apology for the conduct of those prosperous friends to whose reputation he had contributed in no inconsiderable degree by his writings. Among these, however, Hogarth appears to have been unjustly ranked. An irreconcileable quarrel had long subsisted between this artist and Churchill’s friends; and, much decayed in health, Hogarth languished for some time at Chiswick, where he died nearly two months before Lloyd. The news of Churchill’s death being announced somewhat abruptly to Lloyd, while he was sitting at dinner, he was seized with a sudden sickness, and saying” I shall follow poor Charles,“took to his bed, from which he never rose. He died December 1$, 1764, and his remains were deposited, without ceremony t on the 19th, in the churchyard of St. Bride’s parish. Ten years afterwards his poetical works were published in two handsome volumes, by Dr. Kenrick, who prefixed some memoirs, written in a negligent manner, and without a single date of birth, death, events, or publications. His poems have been added to the works of the” English Poets," although he certainly merits no very distinguished rank. His chief excellence was the facility with which he wrote a number of smooth and pleasing lines, tinctured with gay humour, on any topic which presented itself. But he has no where attempted, or afforded m much reason to think that by any diligence or effort he could have attained, the higher species of his art. He has neither originality of thought, or elegance of expression. It has been observed that those poets who have been degraded by the licentiousness of their lives, have rarely surpassed the excellence, of whatever degree, which first brought them into notice. Lloyd, however, had not the excuse which has been advanced in some recent instances. He was neither spoiled by patronage, nor flattered into indolence by injudicious praise and extravagant hopes. The friends of his youth were those of his mature years; and of the few whom he lost, he had only the melancholy recollection that some of them had quitted him from shame, and some from ingratitude.

The “Actor” was his most favoured piece, and which. he never surpassed; but it sunk before the “Rosciad.” The rest of his poems are effusions addressed to friends on subjects which relate principally to himself, and with a distinction which friends only would think valuable. Mr. Wilkes’s character of Lloyd represents him as “mild and affable in private life, of gentle manners, and very engaging in conversation. He was an excellent scholar, and an easy natural poet. His peculiar excellence was the dressing up an old thought in a new, neat, and trim mantier. He was contented to scamper round the foot of Parnassus on his little Welsh poney, which seems never to have tired. He left the fury of the winged steed and the daring heights of the sacred mountain to the sublime genius of his friend Churchill.” Although Lloyd followed Churchill in some of his prejudices, and learned to rail at colleges, and at men of prudence, we find him generally good-tempered and playful. His satire is seldom bitter, and probably was not much felt. Having consented to yield the palm to Churchill, the world took him at his word, and his enemies, if he had any, must have been, those who were very easily provoked.

, a very learned English bishop, was originally of Welsh extraction, being grandson of David Lloyd of Henblas, in the isle of Anglesey. He was born at Tilehurst, in Berkshire, in 1627, of which place his father, Mr. Richard Lloyd, was then vicar, and also rector of Sunning, in the same county. Having been carefully instructed by his father in the rudiments of grammar and classical learning, he understood Greek and Latin, and something of Hebrew, at eleven years of age; and was entered, in 1638, a student of Oriel college, in Oxford, whence, the following year, he was elected to a scholarship of Jesus college. In 1642 he proceeded B. A. and left the university, then garrisoned for the use of the king; but, after the surrender of it to the parliament, he returned, was chosen fellow of his college, and commenced M. A. in 1646. In 1649 he was ordained deacon by Dr. Skinner, bishop of Oxford, and afterwards became tutor to the children of sir William Backhouse, of Swallowfield, in Berkshire. In 1654, upon the ejection of Dr. Pordage by the Presbyterian committee, he was presented to the rectory of Bradfield, in the same county, by Elias Ashmole, esq. patron of that living in right of his wife; but this right being disputed by Mr. Fowler and Mr. Ford, two ministers at Reading, who endeavoured to bring in Dr. Temple, pretending the advowson was in sir Humphrey Forster, he chose to resign his presentation to Mr. Ashmole, rather than involve himself in a contest. In 1656 he was ordained priest hy Dr. Brownrig, bishop of Exeter, and the same year went to Wadham college, in Oxford, as governor to John Backhouse, esq. a gentleman-commoner, with whom he continued till 1659. In Sept. 1660, he was incorporated M. A. at Cambridge; and, about the same time, made a prebendary of Rippon, in Yorkshire. In 1666 he was appointed king’s chaplain; and, in 1667, was collated to a prebend of Salisbury, having proceeded D. D. at Oxford in the act preceding. In 1668 he was presented by the crown to the vicarage of St. Mary’s in Reading; and, the same year, was installed archdeacon of Merioneth, in the church of Bangor, of which he was made dean in 1672. This year he obtained also a prebend in the church of St. Paul, London. In 1674 he became residentiary<of Salisbury; and, in 1676, he succeeded Dr. Lamplugh, promoted to the see of Exeter, in the vicarage of St. Martin’s in the Fields, Westminster; upon which occasion he resigned his prebend of St. Paul’s.

Our author had shown his zeal in several tracts against popery; and in the same spirit he published in 1677, “Considerations touching the true way to suppress Popery in this kingdom,” &c. with an historical account of the reformation here in England; but having proposed to tolerate such papists as denied the pope’s infallibility, and his power to depose kings, excluding the rest, a method which had been put in practice both by queen Elizabeth and king James with good success, he was suspected of complying with the court measures. This suspicion increasing upon his being promoted to the bishopric of St. Asaph, in 1680, he thought it necessary to vindicate himself by shewing, that at the very time he made the above proposal, the papists themselves were in great apprehension of the thing, as being the most likely to blast their hopes, and to preserve the nation from that ruin which they were then bringing upon it*.

* Coleman at that time wrote to the those that require it, on conditions pope’s internuncio thus: “There is prejudicial to the authority of the pope, but one thing to be feared (whereof! and so to persecute the rest of them with have a great apprehension) that ran more appearance of justice, and ruin hinder the success of our designs; which the one half of them more easily than is, a division among the catholics them- the whole body at once.” And carselves; by propositions to the parlia- dinal Howard delivered it as their ment to accord their conjunction to judgment at Rome. ' Division of CaAll suspicion, however, of his principles vanished in James IPs reign, when the nation saw him one of the six prelates, who, with archbishop Sancroft, were committed to the Tower in June 1688, for resisting his majesty’s order to distribute and publish in all their churches the royal declaration for liberty of conscience; and about the end of the same year, having concurred heartily in therevolution, he was made lord almoner to king William III. In 1692 he was translated to the see of Litchfield and Coventry, and thence to Worcester in 1699. He continued in the office of lord almoner till 1702, when, together with his son, having too warmly interested himself in the election for the county of Worcester, a complaint was made to the House of Commons, and a resolution passed of addressing the queen “to remove William lord bishop of Worcester from being lord almoner to her majesty; and that Mr. Attorney General do prosecute Mr. Lloyd, the lord bishop of Worcester’s son, for his said offence, after his privilege as a member of the lower house of convocation is out.” In consequence of this vote, an address Was presented to the queen, with which her majesty complied, and dismissed the bishop from his office.

Bishop Lloyd lived to the age of ninety-one; but in the latter part of his life seems to have fallen into some imbecility of mind; as appears from the account given by Swift of the good old prelate’s going to queen Anne, “to prove to her majesty, out of Daniel, and the Revelations, that four years hence there would be a war of religion, that the king of France would be a protestant, and that the popedom should be destroyed.” He died at Hartlebury- castle, August 30, 1717, and was buried in the church of Fladbury, near Kvesham, in Worcestershire, of which his son was rector; where a monument is erected to his memory with a long inscription, setting him forth " as an excellent pattern of virtue and learning, of quick invention, firm memory, exquisite judgment, great candour, piety, and gravity; a faithful historian, accurate chronologer, and skilled in the holy scriptures to a miracle; very charitable, and diligent in a careful discharge of his episcopal

virulent satire upon him on this ucea- Commons. office.“Bishop Burnet speaks of our author with the greatest warmth of friendship, and in the highest style of panegyric. In reality he was indebted to Dr. Lloyd for a great part of his own fame, having undertaken his” History of the Reformation“by his persuasion, and being furnished by him with a large share of the materials; he likewise revised every sheet of the whole work during the printing. The world is likewise indebted to Lloyd for that stupendous work, Pool’s” Synopsis,“which was undertaken by his advice, as appears by a letter of that prelate addressed to Mr. Henry Dodwell, and communicated to Mr. Granger by his son, the late Dr. Dodwell, archdeacon of Berks. Bishop VVilkins, in his preface to” An Essay towards a real character and a philosophical language,“acknowledges himself obliged to” the continual assistance of his most learned and worthy friend Dr. William Lloyd,“and expresses the highest opinion of his” great industry, and accurate judgment in philological and philosophical matters." But no written authority seems to represent bishop Lloyd’s temper and character in a more amiable light than the interesting account of his conduct towards the dissenters of his diocese, as given in the life of the Rev. Philip Henry, to which, from its length, we must refer. It occurs in p. 118 of the edition 1712.

Besides the “Considerations,” &c. mentioned above, he wrote, 1. “The late Apology in behalf of Papists, reprinted and answered, in behalf of the Royalists,” 1667, 4to. 2. “A seasonable Discourse, shewing the necessity of maintaining the Established Religion in opposition to Popery,” 1672, 4to, which passed through five editions in the following year. 3. “A reasonable Defence of the Seasonable Discourse,” &c. 1673, 4to, in answer to the earl of Castlemain’s observations on the preceding article. 4. “The difference between the Church and the Court of Rome considered,” 1673, 4to. All the preceding were published without the author’s name, nor were they at first acknowledged by, though generally attributed to him. They were reprinted in 1689, 4to. 5. “An Alarm for Sinners,” 1679, 4to. This was published by our author when dean of Bangor, from an original copy containing the confession, prayers, letters, and last words of Robert Foulks, vicar of Stanton-Lucy, in Shropshire, who was executed at Tyburn, in 1678, for the murder of a natural child; and whom Dr. Lloyd and Dr. Buraet attended during his imprisonment. 6. Various occasional Sermons, printed separately. 7. “An historical account of Church Government,” 1684, 8vo. 8. “A Letter to Dr. William Sherlock, in vindication of that part of Josephus’s History, which gives an account of Jaddua the high priest’s submitting to Alexander the Great,” 1691, 4to. 9. “A Discourse of God’s ways of disposing Kingdoms,” 1691, 4to. 10. “The Pretences of the French Invasion examined,” &c. 1692, 4to. 11. “A Dissertation upon Daniel’s 70 Weeks,” the substance of which is inserted in the chronology of sir Isaac Newton. 12. An exposition of the same subject, left printed imperfect, and not published. 13. *‘ A Letter upon the same subject, printed in the ’ Life of Dr. Humphrey Prideaux,' p. 288, edit. 1758,“8vo. 14.” A System of Chronology,“left imperfect, but out of it his chaplain, Benjamin Marshall, composed his” Chronological Tables,“printed at Oxford, 1712, 1713. 15.” A Harmony of the Gospels,“partly printed in 4to, but left imperfect. 16.” A Chronological account of the Life of Pythagoras,“&c. 1699. 17. He is supposed to have had a hand in a book published by his son at Oxford, 1700, in folio, entitled” Series Chronologica Olympiadum,“&c. He wrote also some” Explications of some of the Prophecies in the Revelations,“and added the chronological dates at the head of the several columns, with an index to the Bible, and many of the references and parallel places, first printed in the fine edition of the Bible published in folio, under the direction of archbishop Tenison, in 1701. He left a Bible interlined with notes in short hand, which was in the possession of Mr. Marshall, his chaplain, who married a relation, and would have published these notes had he met with encouragement, as Whiston informs us, who always, even in his index, calls Dr. Lloyd” the great bishop,“and in speaking of Wasse says,” one more learned than any bishop in England since bishop Lloyd."

, a physician of considerable reputation, was the son of Stephen Lobb, a dissenting minister, and grandson of Richard Lobb, esq. M. P. for St. Michael in Cornwall. He was born Aug. 17, 1678, and educated for the ministry among the dissenters, which he exchanged for the study of medicine, and having obtained a diploma from Scotland, practised in London, and left several works on medical topics. He died May 19, 1763, in the eightyfifth year of his age. The following are the titles of his publications: “Treatise of the Small-pox,” London, 1731, 1748, 8vo, which was translated into French in 1749. “Rational method of curing Fevers, deduced from the structure of the human body,” ibid. 1734, 8vo, in this work he adopted the doctrines of Boerhaave. “Medical Practice in curing Fevers,” ibid. 1735, 8vo; “A practical treatise on painful Distempers, with some effectual methods of curing them,” ibid. 1739; “A Treatise on Solvents of the Stone, and on curing the Stone and the Gout by Aliments,” ibid. 1739, which passed through several editions, and was translated into Latin and French. The author considered the matter of urinary calculi and of gout as of an alkaline nature, and vegetable acids as the remedy. “Letters concerning the Plague and other contagious Distempers,” ibid. 1745; “A Compendium of the Practice of Physic,” ibid. 1747. Besides these works, he was the author of several papers printed in the Gentleman’s Magazine; of a sermon preached by him at the ordination of the Rev. John Greene and of some pious tracts.

, or L'Obel (Matthias de), a botanist, was born in 1538, at Lisle, in Flanders, where his father practised in the law. He bad an early taste for plants, and had good opportunities of advancing his knowledge at Montpelier, where he studied physic under the learned Rondeletius, as well as by making some botanical excursions over the south of France. At Narbonne he became acquainted with Pena, afterwards his fellow^labourer in the “Adversaria,” the first edition of which was published, at London, in 1570, small folio, and dedicated to queen Elizabeth. The few cuts dispersed through this volume are mostly original, but inferior in style and accuracy, as well as in size, to those of Clusius, with whom he was contemporary. Before the publication of the “Adversaria,” our author had extended his travels to Switzerland, the Tyrol, some parts of Germany, and Italy; had settled as a physician -at Antwerp, afterwards at Delft; and had been appointed physician to the illustrious William prince of Orange, and to the States of Holland. Dr. Pulteney has not been able to ascertain the time of Lobel’s removal to England, but justly concludes it to have been before 1570, or most probably some years earlier. The aim of the authors of the “Adversaria” was to investigate the botany and materia medica of the ancients, and especially of Dioscorides. It was reprinted at Antwerp in 1576, the dedication being, of course, there suppressed, and new titlepages were printed to help the sale of the original in 1571 and 1572. Some copies of the Antwerp impression appear to have been made up into a new edition at London in 1605, with an ample Pharmacopeia, and an appendix. This volume is dedicated to Edward lord Zouch, whom Lobel had attended on his embassy to Denmark in 1592, and he calls himself, in the title, botanist to king James I. Dr. Pulteney observes, after Haller, that this work exhibits some traces of a natural distribution of plants, but without any remarks, and with little precision. His work is much more valuable for the accounts of new plants discovered by himself in England or elsewhere, although Ray accuses him of having made several mistakes, from having trusted too much to his memory.

The “Stirpium Historia” of this author, a volume in small folio similar to his “Adversaria,” which was published at Antwerp in 1576, is much less copious in matter, the pages being mostly occupied with wooden cuts, which are those of Clusius, borrowed for the present occasion by the printer, Plantin. An impression of these cuts, of an oblong shape, was struck off, with names’ only, in 1581, and another in 1591. Linnæus possessed both. This publication is in very general use, and well known by the title of Lobel’s “Icones.” It is, when complete, accompanied by an index in seven languages. Lobel seems to have had a very large work in contemplation, which he intended to call “Stirpium Illustratio.nes.” A fragment of it was published in quarto, without plates, by Dr. W. How, in 1655, making 170 pages, besides a caustic preface of the author, aimed chiefly at Gerarde, as the notes by Dr. How are against Parkinson; but Dr. Pulteney blames Lobel for this gross abuse of Gerarde after his death, though he had formerly on every occasion extolled him. In other respects the botanical contents of this fragment are very honourable to Lobel. He laboured to an advanced age in the pursuit of his favourite study, and procured from his correspondents abroad many new plants for the gardens of his friends. He had the superintendance of a garden at Hackney, cultivated at the expence of lord Zouch; and appears to have resided, in the decline of life, at Highgate, where he had a daughter, married to a Mr. James Coel. His wife is recorded as having assisted him in his botanical researches. He died in 1616, aged seventy-eight.

, a Benedictine of the congregation de St. Maur, was born 1663, at Rennes. He entered his order in 1683, devoted his whole life to the study of history, and died at an abbey near St. Malo, June 3, 1727, aged sixty-one. His principal work is a “History of Bretany,” in 2 vols. fol. but the second only, which contains the titles, is valued. The abbé Vertot, and the abbé Claudius Moulinet, sieur des Thuilleries, have violently attacked that part of this history, in which his partiality to his own country has led him to disregard the rights of Normandy. Lobineau also translated a “History of the two Conquests of Spain by the Moors,” &c. from the Spanish of Miguel de Luna, a work of no authority. He was more usefully employed in completing and publishing the “History of the City of Paris,” 5 vols. fol. which Felibien had begun and made a considerable progress in before his death. The last three volumes contain many curious and interesting pieces; and an excellent dissertation is prefixed to the first volume, on the origin of the H6tel de Ville, and the corps municipal, by M. le Hoi, senior master jd warden of the goldsmiths, and controller of the rents of the Hotel de Ville. A satirical work, entitled “Les Avantures de Pomponius, chevalier Romain,” 12mo, has been attributed to Dom. Lobiweau, but without sufficient authority.

, a Jesuit missionary, born at Lisbon in 15y3, entered among the Jesuits in his sixteenth year, and in 1622 he went out as one of their missionaries to the East Indies. He was at Goa when the reigning emperor of Abyssinia became a convert to the church of Rome, and many of his subjects followed his example. The missionaries already in the country being desirous of coadjutors to extend their religion, Lobo was deputed to go to Abyssinia, where he resided some years, subject to much danger and many hardships and sufferings; and on his return he was ship, wrecked, and narrowly escaped destruction. He afterwards promoted the interest of the Abyssinian mission at Madrid and Rome; and, notwithstanding his former dangers and hardships, took a second voyage to the Indies. He returned to Lisbon in 1658, and was made rector of the college of Coimbra, where he died in 1678, at the age of eighty-four. He was author of “An Historical Account of Abyssinia,” containing much curious and valuable information, which was translated from the Portuguese language into the French by the abbé le Grand, with additions. An abridgment of this, in 1735, constituted the first publication of Dr. Samuel Johnson.

, an eminent English musical composer in the time of Charles II. was a native of Exeter, and became a chorister in the cathedral of that city. He had afterwards instructions in music from Edward Gibbons; and had so much distinguished himself as a professor of abilities, that we are told he was appointed to compose the music for the public entry of the king at the restoration.

He seems first to have appeared as an author in 1657, during the interregnum, by the publication of his “little consort of three parts for viols or violins, consisting of pavans, ayres, corants, sarabands, in two several varieties, the first twenty of which are for two trebles and a base.” Some of his compositions appear in the second part of John Playford’s continuation of Hilton’s “Catch that catch can,” in 1667; and among them the most pleasing of Lock’s compositions, “Never trouble thyself about times or their turnings,” a glee for three voices. He was the first Who attempted dramatic music for the English stage, if we except the masques that were performed at court, and at the houses of the nobility, in the time of Charles I. and during the reign of Charles II. When musical dramas were first attempted, which Dryden calls heroic plays and dramatic operas, Lock was employed to set most of them, particularly the semi-operas, as they were called, the Tempest, Macbeth,] and Psyche, translated from the French of Moliere, by Shadwell. The Tempest and Psyche were printed in 1675, and dedicated to James duke of Monmouth. There is a preface of some length by Lock, which, like his music, is rough and nervous, exactly corresponding with the idea which is generated of his private character, by the perusal of his controversy with Salmon, and the sight of his picture in the music-school at Oxford. It is written with that natural petulance which probably gave birth to most of the quarrels in which he was involved. It includes, however, a short history of these early attempts at dramatic music on our stage, in which, as in the most successful representations of this kind in later times, the chief part of the dialogue was spoken, and recitative, or musical declamation, which seems to be the true criterion and characteristic of Italian operas, but seldom used, unless merely to introduce some particular airs and choruses. Upon examining this music, it appears to have been very much composed on Lulli’s model. The melody is neither recitative nor air, but partaking of both, with a change of measure as frequent as in any old French opera which we ever saw.

Lock had genius and abilities in harmony sufficient to have surpassed his model, or to have casthis movements in a mould of his own making but such was the passion af Charles II. and consequently of his court, at this time, for every thing French, that in all probability Lock was instructed to imitate Cambert and Lulli. His music for the witches in Macbeth, which, when produced in 1674, was as smooth and airy as any of the time, has now obtained by age, that wild and savage cast which is admirably suited to the characters that are supposed to perform it.

In the third introductory music to the Tempest, which is called a curtain tune, probably from the curtain being first drawn up during the performance of this species of overture, he has, for the first time that is come to one knowledge, introduced the use of crescendo (louder by degrees), with diminuendo and lentando, under the words soft and slow by degrees. No other instruments are mentioned in the score of his opera of Psyche, than violins for the ritornels; and yet, so slow was the progress of that instrument during the last century, that in a general catalogue of music in 1701, scarce any compositions appear to have been printed for its use. This musician was of so irascible a disposition, that he seems never to have been without a quarrel or two on his hands. For his furious attack on Salmon, for proposing to reduce all the clefs in music to one, he had a quarrel with the gentlemen of the chapel royal, early in Charles II.'s reign. Being composer in ordinary to the king, he produced for the chapel royal a morning-service, in which he set the prayer after each of the ten commandments to different music from that to which the singers had been long accustomed, which was deemed an unpardonable innovation, and on the first day of April, 1666, at the performance of it before the king, there was a disturbance and an obstruction for some time to the performance. To convince the public that it was not from the meanness or inaccuracy of the composition that this impediment to its performance happened, Lock thought it necessary to print the whole service; and it came abroad in score on a single sheet, with a long and laboured vindication, by way of preface, under the following title, “Modern church musick pre-accused, censured, and obstructed in its performance before his majesty.” Lock was long suspected of being a Roman catholic, and it is probable that this new service, by leaning a little more towards the mass than the service of the 1 protestant cathedral, may have given offence to some zealous members of the church of England.

The public were indebted to Lock for the first rules that were ever published in England, for a basso continuo, or thorough base; these rules he gave the world, in a book entitled “Melothesia,” London, 1673, oblong 4to. It is dedicated to Roger L‘Estrange, esq. afterwards sir Roger L’Estrange, himself a good musician, and an encourager of its professors. It contains, besides the thorough-bass rules, some lessons for the harpsichord and organ, by Lock himself, and others. He was author likewise of several songs printed in “The Treasury of Music,” “The Theatre of Music,” and other collections of songs. In the 4atter of these is a dialogue, “When death shall part us from these kids,” which, with Dr. Blow’s “Go, perjured man,” was ranked among the best vocal compositions of the time.

It is presumed that when he was appointed composer in ordinary to the king, he was professionally a member of the church of England; but it is certain that he went over to the Romish communion afterwards, and became organist to queen Catherine of Portugal, the consort of Charles II. and died a papist in 1677.

, one of the greatest philosophers this country has produced, was the son of John Locke, of Pensford, a market-town in Somersetshire, five miles from Bristol, by Anne his wife, daughter of Edmund Keen, or Ken, of Wrington, tanner. His father, who was first a clerk only to a neighbouring justice of the peace, Francis Baber, of Chew Magna, was advanced by col. Alexander Popham, whose seat was near Pensford, to be a captain in the parliament’s service. After the restoration, he practised as an attorney, and was clerk of the sewers in Somersetshire *. Although our philosopher’s age is not to be found in the registers of Wrington, which is the parish church of Pensford, it has been ascertained that he wasborn there Aug. 29, 1632. By the interest of col, Popham, he was admitted a scholar at Westminster, whence in 1652 he was elected to Christ church, Oxford. Here he took the degree of B. A. in 1655, and that of M. A. in 1658; but although he made a considerable progress in the usual course of studies at that time, he often said that what he learned was of little use to enlighten and enlarge his mind. The first books which gave him a relish for the study of philosophy, were the writings of Des Cartes, whom he always found perspicuous, although he did not always approve of his sentiments.

After taking his degrees in arts, he applied for some time to the study of physic, not so much, we are told, with a view to public practice, as for the benefit of his own constitution, which was but weak. But he must have made his skill more generally known than this amounts to, for we find that among the learned in his faculty who had a good opinion of his medical knowledge, the celebrated Dr. Sydenham, in his work on acute diseases, gives him the following high encomium “You know,” says he, "how much my method has been approved of by a person who has examined it to the bottom, End who is our common friend; I mean Mr. John Locke, who, if we consider

* /But an intelligent writer, who ap- minority, and the other our celebrated pears to have had access to the best metaphysician. See Gent. Mag. vol. authorities, asserts that Mr. Locke’s LXII. See also a letter on the same father was killed at Bristol in 1645, subject, in vol. LXIX. p. Ul. leaving two sons, one who died in his his genius, and penetrating and exact judgment, or the purity of his morals, has scarce any superior, and few equals now living." Hence he was often saluted by his acquaintance with the title, though he never took the degree, of doctor, which we think would have been the case had he intended medicine as a profession, or had not been diverted from it by other studies and avocations f.

In 1664, sir William Swan being appointed envoy from the English court to the elector of Brandenburgh, and some other German princes, Mr. Locke attended him as his secretary, but returned to England within the year, and applied himself again with great vigour to his studies, and particularly to that of natural philosophy. While at Oxford, in 1666, he became acquainted with lord Ashley, afterwards earl of Shaftesbury, and that in the character of a medical practitioner. Lord Ashley by a fall had hurt his breast in such a manner, that there was an abscess formed in it, and being advised to drink the mineral waters at Astrop, wrote to Dr. Thomas, a physician at Oxford, to procure a quantity of those waters, which might be ready on his arrival. Dr. Thomas, being obliged to be absent from Oxford at that time, desired his friend Mr. Locke to execute this commission. By some accident or neglect, the waters were not ready the day after lord Ashley’s arrival, and Mr. Locke thought it his duty to wait on his lordship to make an apology, which he received with his usual civility, and was so pleased with Locke’s conversation as to detain him to supper, and engaged him to dine with him next day, that he might have the more of his company. And when his lordship left Oxford to go to Surinirig-hill, where he drank the waters, he made Mr. Locke promise to come thither, as he did in the summer of 1667. Lord Ashley afterwards returned, and obliged him to promise that he would come and lodge at his house. Mr. Locke accordingly went thither, and though not a regular practitioner, his lordship confided entirely in his advice, with regard to the operation, which was to be performed by opening the abscess in his breast, and which saved his life, though it never closed.

After this cure, his lordship, by frequent conversations, discovered qualities in Locke, which made him regard his medical skill as the least of his merits; and foreseeing the bent of his talents, advised him to apply himself to the study of political and religious topics, on which his lordship seems often to have consulted him. By his acquaintance with this nobleman, he was introduced to some persons of eminence, such as Villiers duke of Buckingham, lord Halifax, and other noblemen of wit and parts, who were all charmed with his conversation, and more so, it appears, than he was sometimes with theirs. One day, three or four of these lords having met at lord Ashley’s when Mr. Locke was there, after some compliments, cards were brought in, before scarce any conversation had passed between them. Mr. Locke looked upon them for some time while they were at play, and taking his pocket book began to write with great attention. One of the lords asked him what he was writing: “My lord,” said he, “I am endeavouring to profit as far as I am able, in your company; for having waited with impatience for the honour of being in an assembly of the greatest geniuses of this age, and at last having obtained the good fortune, I thought I could not do better than write down your conversation; and indeed I have set down the substance of what has been said for this hour or two.” This rebuke appears to have been taken in good part; the company quitted their play, and passed the rest of their time in a. manner more suitable to the rational character.

In 1668, he attended the earl and countess of Northumberland into France; but the earl’s death did not allow him to remain long in that country. On his return, Mr. Locke lived, as before, at lord Ashley’s, who was then chancellor of the exchequer, but made frequent visits to Oxford, in the prosecution of his studies, as well as for change of air, which appeared to be necessary to his health. While he was at lord Ashley’s, he had the care of the education of that nobleman’s eldest son, who was then about sixteen years of age. This province he executed with great care, and to the full satisfaction of his noble patron. The young lord being of a weakly constitution, his father wished to see him married, lest the family should be extinct by his death; and as he thought him too young to make a proper choice for himself, he not only consulted Mr. Locke on the subject, but even requested he would make a suitable choice for the youth. This was an affair of some delicacy, and no small risk; for, although lord Ashley did not regard fortune, yet he conditioned for a lady of a good family, an agreeable temper, and a fine person; of good education, and of good understanding, and whose conduct would be different from that of the generality of court-ladies. In all these respects Mr.Xocke had the happiness to succeed, and the marriage was fruitful. The eldest son, afterwards the author of the “Characteristics,” was committed to the care of Mr. Locke in his education, and his pupil, when lord Shaftesbury, always spoke of Mr. Locke with the highest esteem, and manifested on all occasions a grateful sense of his obliga r tions to him, but there are some passages in his works, in which he speaks of Mr. Locke’s philosophy with great severity. It will not, however, be thought a very serious objection to Mr. Locke, that his philosophy did not give entire satisfaction to lord Shaftesbury.

In 1675, Mr. Locke travelled into France on account of his health, and at Montpelier became first acquainted with Mr. Herbert, afterwards earl of Pembroke, to whom he dedicated his “Essay on Human Understanding.” From Montpelier he went to Paris, where he was introduced to various men of letters. In 1679 he was recalled to London, on the earl of Shaftesbury’s having regained his favour at court and been made president of the council, but this was of short duration. The earl lost his place in a few months, for refusing to comply with the designs of the Court, which aimed at the establishment of popery and arbitrary power; attd having incurred the implacable hatred of the duke of York, on account of his supporting the exclusion-bill, he was, in 1681, committed to the lower, and although acquitted upon trial, thought it most safe to retire to Holland, where he died in 1683. Mr. Locke, also thinking himself not quite secure in England, followed his lordship to Holland, and was introduced to many of the learned men of Amsterdam, particularly 1 anborrh, and Le Clerc, whose intimacy and friendship he preserved throughout life.

During his residence in Holland, he was accused at court of having written certain tracts against the government of his country, which were afterwards discovered to be the production of another person; and upon that suspicion he was deprived of his studentship of Christ-church. This part of Mr. Locke’s history requires some detail. The writer of his life in the Biographia Britannica (Nicoll) says that “being observed to join in company with several English malcontents at the Hague, this conduct was communicated by our resident there to the earl of Sunderland, then secretary of state; who acquainting the king therewith, his majesty ordered the proper methods to be taken for expelling him from the college, and application to be made for that purpose to bishop Fell, the dean; in obedience to this command, the necessary information was given by his lordship, who at the same time wrote to our author, to appear and answer for himself on the first of January ensuing, but immediately receiving an express command to turn him out, was obliged to comply therewith, and, accordingly, Air. Locke was removed from his student’s place on the 15th of Nov. 1684.” This account, however, is not correct. All that lord Sunderland did, was to impart his majesty’s displeasure to the dean, and to request his opinion as to the proper method of removing Mr. Locke. The dean’s answer, dated Nov. 8, contains the following particulars of Mr. Locke, and of his own advice and proceedings against him. “I have,” says the dean, “for divers years had an eye upon him; but so close has his guard been on himself, that after several strict inquiries, I may confidently affirm there is not any man inthe college, however familiar with him, who had heard him speak a word either against or so much as concerning the government; and although very frequently, both in public and private, discourses have been purposely introduced to the disparagement of his master, the earl of Shaftesbury, his party and designs, he never could be provoked to take any notice, or discover in word or look the least concern. So that I believe there is not a man in the world so much master of taciturnity and passion. He has here a physician’s place (he had taken the degree of B. M. in 1674) which frees him from the exercise of the college, and the obligations which others have to residence in it; and he is now abroad for want of health.”

Thus far we might suppose the dean had advanced enough in behalf of the innocence of Mr. Locke. What follows, however, will be read with regret, that so good a man as bishop Fell should have given such advice. “Notwithstanding this, I have summoned him to return home, which is done with this prospect, that if he comes not back, he will be liable to expulsion for contumacy; and if he does, he will be answerable to the law for that which he shall be found to have done amiss. It being probable that, though he may have been thus cautious here, where he knew himself suspected, he has laid himself more open at London, where a general liberty of speaking was used, and where the execrable designs against his majesty and government were managed and pursued. If he don't r^­turn by the first of January, which is the time limited to him, I shall be enabled of course to proceed against him to expulsion. But if this method seems not effectual or speedy enough, and his majesty, our founder and visitor, shall please to command his immediate remove, upon the receipt thereof, directed to the dean and chapter, it shall accordingly be executed.” In consequence of this, a warrant came down to the dean and chapter, dated Nov. 12, in these words: “Whereas we have received information of the factious and disloyal behaviour of Locke, one of the students of that our college; we have thought fit hereby to signify our will and pleasure to you, that you forthwith remove him from his student’s place, and deprive him of all rights and advantages thereunto belonging, for which this shall be your warrant,” &c. And thus, on the 16th following, one of the greatest men of his time was, expelled the college at the command of Charles II. without, as far as ia known, any form of trial or inquiry. After the death of Charles II. William Penn, the celebrated quaker, who had known Mr. Locke at the university, used his interest with king James to procure a pardon for him) an J would have obtained it, if Mr. Locke had not said, that he had no occasion for a pardon, since he had not been guilty of any crime.

In 1685, when the duke of Monmouth was making preparations in Holland for his unfortunate enterprize, the English envoy at the Hague had orders to demand Mr. Locke and eighty-three other persons to be delivered up by the States- General. M. Le Clerc observes, that Mr. Locke had no correspondence with the duke of Monmouth, having no great opinion of his undertaking. Besides, iiis natural temper was timorous, not resolute, and he was far from being fond of commotions. It was proper, however, now to conceal himself, which his friends at Amsterdam enabled him to do, at the house of a Mr. Veen. In the mean time Limborch took care that his letters should be delivered to him, and was entrusted with his will, to be sent to certain relations whom he named, in case of his death. So highly was be respected, that one of the magistrates declared that although they could not protect him, if the king of England should demand him, yet he should not be betrayed, and his landlord should have timely notice. In 1686 he began to appear again in public, when it was sufficiently known that he had no share in the duke of Monmouth’s invasion.

During this concealment Mr. Locke wrote his “Letter on Toleration,” in Latin, which was printed at Gouda, 1689, under the title “Epistola de Tolerantia, ad clarissimum virum T. A. R. P. T. o. L. A. (i. e. Theologiae apud remonstrautes professorem, tyrannidis osorem, Limburgium Amstelodamensem) scripta a. P. A. p. o. I. L. A. (i. e. Pacis amico, persecutions osore, Joanne Lockio Anglo). This letter was translated into English by Mr. Popple (who was nephew to Andrew Marvell, and author of the” Rational Catechism,") and printed twice in London, 1689, 4to, and 16l>0, 12mo. It involved Mr. Locke in a controversy with the rev. Jonas Proast, M. A. of Queen’s-college, Oxford; and some pamphlets passed between them, to the last of which, published by Mr. Proast, a short time before Mr. Locke’s death, the latter left a reply unfinished, which was published in his posthumous works. While at Amsterdam, Mr. Locke formed a weekly assembly, consisting of Limborch, Le Clerc, and others, for conversation upon important subjects, and had drawn up in Latin rules to be observed by them; but those conferences were much interrupted by the frequent changes he was obliged to make of his places of residence.

He was now at full liberty to pursue his speculations, and, accordingly, in 1689, published his celebrated “Essay on Human Understanding,” and the same year his “Two Treatises on Government,” in which he fully vindicated the principles upon which the revolution was founded. His writings had now procured him such high reputation, and he had merited so much of the new government, that it would have been easy for him to have obtained a very considerable place; but he contented himself with that of commissioner of appeals, worth about 200l. per annum. He was offered to go abroad in a public character, and it was left to his choice whether he would be envoy at the court of the emperor, the elector of Brandenburgh, or any other, where he thought the air most suitable to him, but he declined it on account of his bad health.

About this time Mr. Locke’s attention was directed to the state of the coin, which had been so much clipped, as to want above a third of its real value; and although his sentiments on the subject were at first disregarded, the parliament at length was obliged to take the matter into consideration, aud to assist the members in forming a right opinion on the matter, aud introduce a proper remedy. Mr. Locke, therefore, published “Some considerations of the consequence of the lowering of the interest, and raising the value of money,” and shortly followed it by two more on the same subject, in answer to objections. These writings extended his acquaintance among men of rank in the political world, with some of whom he used to associate on the most familiar terms. He had weekly interviews with the earl of Pembroke, then lord keeper of the privy seal; and when the air of London began to affect his lungs, he went for some days to the earl of Peterborough’s seat at Parsons’ Green, near Fulham, where he always met with the most friendly reception: but was obliged afterwards entirely to leave London*, at least during the whole of the winter season.

Having paid frequent visits to sir Francis Masham, at Oates, in Essex, he found the air so good for his constitution, and the society so delightful, that he was easily prevailed upon to become one of the family, and to settle there during his life. The air used to restore him in a few hours after his return at any time from the town, although quite spent and unable to support himself. Besides this advantage here, he found in lady Masham, the daughter of Dr. Cudworth, a friend and companion exactly to his heart’s wish; a lady of contemplative and studious complexion, and particularly inured, from her infancy, to speculations in theology, metaphysics, and morality. She was also so much devoted to Mr. Locke, that, to engage Uis residence there, she provided an apartment for him, of which he was wholly master; and took care that he should live in the family with as much ease as if the whole house had been his own. He had too the additional satisfaction of seeing this lady breed up her only son exactly upon the plan which be had laid down for the best method of education; and, what pleased him still more, the success of it was such as seemed to give a sanction to his judgment in the choice of that method, which he published in 1693, under the title of “Thoughts concerning the Education of Children,” and afterwards improved considerably.'

Some time before this, Toland published his “Christianity not. mysterious,” in which he endeavoured to prove, that there is nothing in the Christian religion contrary to or above reason; and in explaining some of his notions, used several arguments drawn from Locke’s “Essay on Human Understanding.” Some Socinians,also about this time published several treatises, in which they affirmed, that there was nothing in the Christian religion but what was rational and intelligible; and Mr. Locke having asserted in his writings that revelation delivers nothing contrary to reason; all this induced Dr. Stillingfleet, the learned bishop of Worcester, to publish a treatise, in which he vindicated the doctrine of the Trinity against Toland and the Socinians, and likewise opposed some of Mr. Locke’s principles, as favourable to the above-mentioned writings. This produced a controversy, in the course of which our author endeavoured to show the perfect agreement of his principles with the Christian religion, and that he had advanced nothing which had the least tendency to scepticism, which the bishop had charged him with. But Stillingfleet dying some time after, the dispute ended, and ended as such disputes have frequently done, each party claiming the victory. On whichever side it lay, we may be permitted to add, that some of Mr. Locke’s biographers have spoken of Stillingfleet’s writings with unpardonable arrogance and contempt.

In 1695, Mr. Locke was appointed one of the commissioners of trade and plantations, a place wprth 1000l. per annum. The duties of this post he discharged with great ability and diligence until 1700, when the increase of his asthmatic disorder, obliged him to resign it. On this occasion he acquainted no person with his intention, until he had given up his commission into the king’s hand. His majesty, who knew his worth, was very unwilling to part with him, and said he would be well pleased with his continuance in office, although he should give little or no attendance, and certainly would not wish him to remain in towji one day to the detriment of his health. But Mr. Locke told the king that he could not in conscience hold a place to which such a salary was annexed, without discharging the duties of it; and therefore he begged leave to resign it, which was accepted.

From this time, which was the year 1700, he lived altogether at Oates, and applied himself, without interruption, entirely to the study of the holy scriptures; and in this employment he found so much pleasure, that he regretted his not having devoted more of his time to it in the former part of his life. On one occasion, in answer to a young gentleman, who asked what was the shortest and surest way for a person to attain a true knowledge of the Christian religion? he replied, “Let him study the holy scripture, especially the New Testament. It has God for its author; salvation for its end; and truth, without any mixture of error, for its matter.” In 1703 he suffered much from his asthmatic disorder, but the pangs of bodily complaint were alleviated by the kind attentions of lady Masham: still he foresaw that his dissolution was not far distant, and he could anticipate it without dread, and speak of it with perfect calmness and composure. After receiving the sacrament at home, in company with some friends, he told the minister, “that he was in perfect charity with all men, and in a sincere communion with the church of Christ, by what name soever it might be distinguished.” He lived some months after this, which he spent in acts of piety and devotion: when he was meditating on the wisdom and goodness of the Creator, he could not forbear crying out, *' Oh the depth of the riches of the goodness and knowledge of God:“what he felt himself on this subject he was anxious to infuse into the hearts of others. On the day previously to uis departure he said,” he had lived long enough, and was thankful that he had enjoyed a happy life but that, after all, he looked upon this life to be nothing but vanity,“or, as he expresses a similar sentiment, in a letter which he left behind him for his friend Mr. Anthony Collins, one that” affords no solid satisfaction but in the consciousness of doing well, and in the hopes of another life." He had no rest that night, and begged in the morning to be carried into his study,; where, being placed in an easy chair, he had a refreshing sleep for a considerable time. He then requested lady Masham to read aloud some of the psalms, to which he appeared exceedingly attentive, till feeling, probably, the approach of the last messenger, he begged her to desist, and in a few minutes expired, on the 28th of October 1704, in the 73d year of his age.

“You will not perhaps dislike to know that the last scene of Mr. Locke’s life was no less admirable than any thing else in him. All the faculties of his mind were perfect to the last; but his weakness, of which only he died, made such gradual and visible advances, that few people, I think, do so sensibly see death approach them as he did. During all which time, no one could observe the least alteration in his humour: always chearful, civil, conversible, tojthe last day; thoughtful of all the concerns of his friends, and omitting no tit occasion of giving Christian advice to all about him. In short, his death was like his life, truly pious, yet natural, easy, and unaffected; nor can time, I think, ever produce a more eminent example of reason and religion than he was, living and [dying. — Oates, Nov. 8, 1704.”

Mr. Locke, says his latest biographer, had great knowledge of the world, and was prudent without cunning, easy, affable, and condescending without any mean complaisance. If there was any thing he could not bear, it was ill manners, and a rude behaviour. This was ever ungrateful to him, unless, when he perceived that it proceeded from ignorance; but when it was the effect of pride, ill- nature, or brutality, he detested it. He looked on civility not only as a duty of humanity, but Christianity; and he thought that it ought to be more pressed and urged upon men than it commonly is. He recommended on this occasion a treatise in the moral essays written by the gentlemen of the Port Roval, *-' concerning the means of preserving peace among men,“and was a great admirer of Dr. Whichcote’s Sermons on the subject. He was exact to his word, and religiously performed whatever he promised. He was very scrupulous of giving recommendations of persons whom he did not well know, and would by no means commend those whom he thought not to deserve it. If he was told that his recommendation had not produced the effect expected, he would say,” the reason was because he never deceived any person by saying more than he knew; that he never passed his word for any but such as he believed would answer the character he gave of them; and that if he should do otherwise, his recommendations would be worth nothing."

He was naturally very active, and employed himself as much as his health would permit. Sometimes he diverted himself by working in the garden, which he well understood. He loved walking, but not being able to walk much, through the disorder of his lungs, he used to ride out after dinner; and when he could not bear a horse, he went in a chaise. He always chose to have company with him, though it were but a child, for he took pleasure in talking with children of a good education. His bad health was a disturbance to none but himself; and any person might be with him without any other concern than that of seeing him suffer. He did not differ from others in his diet, except that he drank water only, which he thought was the means of lengthening his life. To this he also attributed the preservation of his sight in a great measure, for he could read by candle-light all sorts of books to the last, if they were not of a very small print, without the use of spectacles. He had no other distemper but his asthma, except a deafness for about six months, which helamented in a letter to one of his friends, telling him “he thought it better to be blind than deaf, as it deprived him of all conversation.” Many, interesting particulars of Mr. Locke’s private life may be seen in Coste’s character of him, printed in the ninth volume of the last edition of his works.

This edition contains, principally, the following treatises, to which we have here appended the years of their first publication 1. “Three Letters upon Toleration;” the first, printed at London in 168y, was in Latin. 2. “A Register of the Changes of the Air observed at Oxford,” inserted in Mr. Boyle’s “General History of the Air,” 1692, 8ro. 3. “New Method for a Common-place Book,” 1686. 4. “Essay concerning Human Understanding,” 1690, fol. 5. “Two Treatises of Civil Government,” &c. 1690, 8vo; again in 1694, and in 1698. A French translation at Amsterdam, and then at Geneva, in 1722. 6. “Some Considerations of the Consequences of lowering the Interest, and raising the Value, of Money,” 1691, 8vo, and again in 1695. 7. Some observations on a printed paper, entitled, “For coining silver Money in England,” &c. “Farther Observations concerning the raising the Value of Money,” &c. 9. “Some Thoughts concerning Education,” &c. 1693, 8vo, and again in 1694 and 1698; again after his death, with great additions; and in French, entitled, “De l'Education des Enfans,” Amster. 1695. 10. “The Reasonableness of Christianity,” &c. 1695, 8vo. 11. “Vindication of the Reasonableness,” &c. 1696, 8vo. 12. “A second Vindication,” &c. 1696, 8vo. 13. “A Letter to the Bishop of Worcester,” 1697, 8vo. 14. “Reply to the Bishop of Worcester,” &c. 1697, 4to. 15. “Reply, in answer to the Bishop’s second Letter,” 1698. 16. Posthumous Works of Mr. John Locke, viz. “Of the Conduct of the Understanding;” “An Examination of Malebranche’s Opinion,” &.c. “A Discourse of Miracles;” “Part of a fourth Letter for Toleration;” “Memoirs relating to the Life of Anthony first earl of Shaftesbury,” &c. &c. He deft behind him several Mss. from which his executors, sir Peter King aud Anthony Collins, esq. published, in 1705, his paraphrase and notes upon St. Paul’s epistle to the Galatians, which were soon followed by those upon the Corintbians, Romans, and Ephesians, with an essay prefixed, “For the understanding of St. Paul’s epistles, by consulting St. Paul himself.” In the following year the posthumous works of Mr. Locke were published, comprising a treatise “On the Conduct of the Understanding,” intended as a supplement to the “Essay:” “An Examination of Malebranche’s Opinion of seeing all Things in God.” In 1708, some familiar letters between Mr. Locke and several of his friends were published. All the works of this great man have been collected, and frequently reprinted in different sizes; in three vols. folio, in four vols. quarto, by bishop Law, and lately in nine vols. 8vo.

Of all Mr. Locke’s works, his “Essay on Human Understanding,” is that which has contributed most to his fame, and the reputation which it had from the beginning, and which it has gradually acquired abroad, is a sufficient testimony of its merit. There is perhaps no book of the metaphysical kind that has been so generally read by those who understand the language, or that is more adapted to teach men to think with precision, and to inspire them with that candour and love of truth, which is the genuine spirit of philosophy. He gave, Dr. Reid thinks, the first example in the English language of writing on such abstract subjects, with a remarkable degree of simplicity and perspicuity; and in this he has been happily imitated by others that came after him. No author has. more successfully pointed out the danger of ambiguous words, and the importance of having distinct and determinate notions in judging and reasoning. His observations on the various powers of the human understanding, on the use and abuse of words, and on the extent and limits of human knowledge, are drawn from attentive reflection on the operations of his own mind, the true source of all real knowledge on those subjects; and show an uncommon degree of penetration and judgment Such is the opinion of the learned and candid Dr. Reid, who says, “I mention these things that when I have occasion to differ from him, I may not be thought insensible of the merit of an author whom I highly respect, and to whom I owe my first lights in those studies, as well as my attachment to them.” Dr. Reid has ably pointed out what he thought defective in Locke’s system, which indeed has been more or less the subject of discussion in every work on metaphysics during the last century. The late Mr. Home Tooke, in his “Diversions of Purley,” differs from all others in advancing one of those singular opinions which are peculiar to that gentleman. He calls Locke’s Essay, merely “a grammatical treatise, or a treatise on words, or on language;” and says, that “it was a lucky mistake which Mr. Locke made when he called his book an Essay on the Human Understanding. For some part of the inestimable benefit of that book has, merely on account of its title, reached to thousands more than, I fear, it would have done, had he called it a Grammatical Essay. The human mind, or the human understanding, appears to be a grand and noble theme, and all men, even the most insufficient, conceive ttut to be a proper object for their contemplation, while inquiries into the nature of language are supposed to be beneath the concern of their exalted understanding.”

son of Stephen Locker, esq. or Lockier (for that was the family name in the reign of Charles II. as appears by the signature pf one of their ancestors to a lease in that reign), was of a gentleman’s family in Middlesex, where they possessed a considerable property, which, it is said, they lost, as many others did, by their loyalty. He was bred at MerchantTaylors’ school, whence he went to Merton-college, Oxford; after which he travelled abroad with his friend Mr. Twisleton, who was probably of the same college. He was entered at Gray’s Inn, where he studied the law in the same chambers formerly occupied by his admired lord Bacon; and having been called to the bar, was afterwards clerk of the companies of leather-sellers and clock-makers, and a commissioner of bankrupts. He married (the families being before related) miss Elizabeth Stillingfleet, who was remarkable for her many excellent qualities as well as personal charms. She was grand-daughter to the eminent bishop of Worcester by his lordship’s first wife, and sister to Benjamin Stillingfleet, esq. much distinguished by his ingenious writings and worthy character. By this lady, who died August 12, 1759, he had nine children. Mr. Locker is noticed by Dr. Johnson , in his Life of Addison, as eminent for curiosity and literature; as he is by Dr. Ward, in his Lives of the Gresham Professors, as a gentleman much esteemed for his knowledge of polite literature. He was remarkable for his skill in the Greek language; and attained the modern, which he could write very well, in a very extraordinary manner. Coming home late one evening, he was addressed in that language by a poor Greek, from the Archipelago, who had lost his way in the streets of London. Mr. Locker took him home, where he was maintained, for some time, by the kindness of himself and Dr. Mead; and, by this accidental circumstance, Mr. Locker acquired his knowledge of modern Greek. He almost adored lord Bacon; and had collected from original manuscripts and other papers, many curious things of his lordship’s not mentioned by others, which it was his intention to publish, but his death prevented it; however, this fell into such good hands, that the public are now in possession of them, as is mentioned in the last edition of lord Bacon’s works, by Dr. Birch and Mr. Mallet, 1765. Mr. Locker also wrote the preface to Voltaire’s Life of Charles XII. of Sweden, and translated the two first books; and Dr. Jebb the rest. He died, very much regretted, in May 1760, not quite a year after the loss of his amiable lady, which it was thought accelerated his own death. They both were buried in St. Helen’s church, Bishopsgate-street, London. Their son William, bred to the naval service, but a man of some literary talents, died lieutenant-governor of Greenwich-hospital, on December 26, 1800, at the age of seventy. Some particulars of him are to be found in our authority.

, a man of much literary industry, and known for half a century as a translator, was born in 1698. Of his early history we find no particulars recorded. He appears to have been acquainted with Pope, and to have been respected by that poet, doubtless, on account of his amiable and inoffensive character, which procured him, among the wits of that time, the name of the Lamb. The only time he ever deviated from the gentleness of this animal was when Cooke, the translator of Hesiod, abused his poetry to his face. On this provocation Mr. Lockman proved his relationship to the genus irritabile, by retorting, with a quickness not usual to him, “It may be so; but thank God! my name is not at full length in the Dunciad.” Mr. Lockman’s poetical talents were certainly not very extensive, as the greatest part of his effusions are only a few songs, odas, &c. written on temporary subjects, and set to music for Vauxhall and other places of public entertainment. Mr. Reed, however, found two pieces of the dramatic kind, both of them designed to be set to music; but only the second of them, he thinks, was ever performed, viz. 1. “Rosalinda, a musical drama, 1740,” 4to. 2. “David’s Lamentations, an oratorio;” which we believe were not successful.

In 1762, he issued proposals for a complete edition of his poems, to be printed, by subscription, in two volumes 4to. He frequently went to court to present his poems to the royal family and after he became secretary to the British herring-fishery, tendered to the same illustrious personages presents of pickled herrings, &o. all which, both poems and herrings, he took care to inform the public “were most graciously received.” He was employed in compiling some of the lives in the “General Dictionary, including Bayle;” and translated various works from the French. In all his employments he maintained an amiable and unblemished character, and died much lamented at his house in Brownlow-street, Long Acre, of a paralytic stroke, Feb. 2, 1771.

, a non-conformist divine, the son of William Lockyer of Glastonbury in Somersetshire, was born in that county in 1612, and in 162.9 studied in New-Inn hall, Oxford, where he took the degree of bachelor of arts. He afterwards went into holy orders, and had a cure, but siding with the presbyterian party, became a leading man in their committees, and other measures for reforming the church. He obtained, by the same interest, a fellowship of Eton* college, and in 1658 was made provost, but was ejected at the Restoration. He passed the remainder of his life at Woodford in Essex, where, as Wood says, he died “a wealthy man,” March 13, 1684-5; and was buried in St. Mary’s-church, Whitechapel. His works, of which Wood has given a very copious list, consist of sermons, and tracts of practical piety. Calamy, who gives but a slight account of him, says, that " his writings shew him to have been very zealous and affectionate; earnestly bent upon the conversion of souls.

, a dramatic poet, descended from a family which had its residence in Lincolnshire; but whether the doctor himself was born there, seems not very easy to be ascertained. Langbaine and Jacob, and, after them, Wincop and Chetwood, who, in the general, are little more than copiers, say that he was educated at Cambridge, but Wood informs us, that it was at Oxford, where he made his first appearance about 1573, and was afterwards a scholar under the learned Dr. Hobye, of Trinitycollege. Here he made very considerable advances in learning, dedicating his leisure time to the reading the poets of antiquity; and, having himself a turn to poetry, especially of the satirical kind, he became known by various compositions of that nature, which obtained him no 1 inconsiderable reputation as a wit and poet. Mr. Lodge, however, sensible how seldom the study of poetry yields a competent provision to its professors, after having taken one degree in arts, applied himself, with great assiduity, to the more profitable study of physic, and for further improvement went abroad. After staying a sufficient time at Avignon to be entitled to the degree of doctor in that university, he returned, and, in the latter end of queen Elizabeth’s reign, was incorporated in the university of Cambridge. He afterwards settled in London, where, by his skill and interest with the Roman Catholic party, in which persuasion, it is said, he was brought up, he attained great practice. In what year Dr. Lodge was born does not evidently appear; but be died in 1625, and had tributes paid to his memory by many of his contemporary poets, who have characterized him as a man of very considerable genius.

His dramatic works are, 1. “Wounds of Civil War, a tragedy, 1594,” 4to. 2. “Looking-Glass for London and England, a tragi-comedy, 1598:” (assisted by Robert Green.) Winstanly has named four more dramatic pieces besides the first of the two above named, which he asserts to have been written by this author, in conjunction with Robert Green, 1. “Lady Alimony,” a comedy. 2. “Laws of Nature,” a comedy. 3. “Liberalitie and Prodigalitie,” a comedy. 4. “Luminalia.” But the first three of these, though they might be brought to agree in point of time, yet are all printed anonymously; and, as to the last, it was written on a particular occasion, and that not till two years after Dr. Lodge’s death, and full thirty -five after that of Robert Green.

, a spirited and tasteful engraver of the seventeenth century, was the son of a merchant at Leeds, where he was born July 4, 1649, and inherited an estate of 300l. a year. From school he was sent to Jesus college, Cambridge, and thence to Lincoln’s-inn, where his studies appear to have ended. He afterwards went abroad with Thomas lord Bellassis, in his embassy to Venice, and meeting with Barri’s “Viaggio Pittoresco,” he translated it, and added heads of the painters of his own engraving, and a map of Italy. This was printed in 1679, 8vo. While on his travels, he drew various views, which he afterwards etched. Returning to England, he assisted Dr. Lister of York, in drawing various subjects of natural history, inserted in the Philosophical Transactions. He died at Leeds, in August 1689, and was buried in Harwood church. Besides the portraits above mentioned, there are several views by this artist, etched in a slight but spirited style, from his own designs, which he made both at home and abroad. They bear the marks of genius and a good taste,

, a very learned oriental scholar, was the second son of sir Adam Loftus, and great grandson of Dr. Adam Loftus, who was archbishop of Armagh, then of Dublin, and one of the lords justices, and lord chancellor of Ireland. He was born in 1618, at Rathfarnam, near Dublin, a stately castle built by his ancestor the archbishop, and was educated in Trinity college, where he was admitted fellow- commoner in 1635. About the time he took his first degree in arts, the extraordinary proficiency he had made in languages attracted the notice of arciibishop Usher, who earnestly advised his father to send him to Oxford, where he might improve his oriental learning, a matter which that worthy prelate considered as highly important in the investigation of the history and principles of the Christian religion. Mr. Loftus was accordingly sent by his father to Oxford, and entered of University college, where he was incorporated B. A. in November 1639, About this time he commenced the study of the law, with a view to take his bachelor’s degree in that faculty, but at the persuasion of his friends in University college, took his degree of master of arts in 1641, and then returned to Ireland at the moment the rebellion broke out. His father, who was at that time vice-treasurer, and one of the privy council, procured a garrison to be placed in his castle of Rathfarnam, and gave the command of it to his son Dudley, who displayed his skill and courage, by defending the city from the incursions of the Irish inhabiting the neighbouring mountains. He was afterwards made one of the masters in chancery, vicargeneral of Ireland, and judge of the prerogative court and faculties, all which offices he held to the time of his death. He was also a doctor of the civil law, and esteemed the most learned of any of his countrymen in that faculty. Towards the latter part of his life, his talents and memory were very much impaired, and when about seventy-six years of age, he married a second wife, but died the year following, in June 1695, and was buried in St. Patrick’s church, Dublin.

Mr. Loftus’s greatest excellence lay in the knowledge of various languages, especially the oriental; and it is said, that when only twenty years of age, he was able to translate as many languages into English. Among archbishop Usher’s letters is one from him to that prelate, which, although short, shews his avidity to search out oriental books and Mss.; as well as his high respect and gratitude to Usher, who first directed his attention to the treasures of the Bodleian library. Yet his character in other respects does not correspond with his parts or learning. He was accounted, says Harris, an improvident and unwise man, and his many levities and want of conduct gave the world too much reason to think so. The same biographer mentions “a great, but free-spoken prelate,” who said of Mr. Loftus, that “he never knew so much learning in the keeping of a fool.”

His learning, indeed, and his industry appear very evident by his many writings. Besides the ^thiopic New Testament which he translated into Latin, at the request of Usher and Selden, for the Polyglot, and which procured him from Walton the character of “vir doctissimus, tain generis prosapia, quam linguaruoi orientalium scientia, nobilis,” he published, 1. “Logica Armeniaca in Latinam traducta,” Dublin, 1657, 12mo. 2. “Introductio in totam Aristotelis Philosophiam,” ibid. 1657, 12mo. 3. “The Proceedings observed in order to, and in the consecration of, the twelve Bishops in St. Patrick’s Church in Dublin, Jan. 27, 1660,” Lond. 1661, 4to. 4. “Liber Psalmorum Davidis ex Armeniaco idiotnate in Latinum traductus,” Dublin, 1661, 12mo. 5. “Oratio funebris habita post exuvias nuperi Rev. jbatris Joan. (Bramhall) archiepiscopi Armacbani,” ibid. 1663, 4to. 6. “The Speech of James duke of Ormond, made in a parliament at Dublin, Sept. 17, 1662, translated into the Italian,” ibid. 1664. 7. “Reductio litium de libero arbitrio, proedestinatione, et reprobatione ad arbitrium boni viri,” ibid. 1670, 4to. 8. “A, Book demonstrating that it was inconsistent with the English government, that the Irish rebels should be admitted to their former condition with impunity, by topics drawn from principles of law, policy, and conscience,” published under the name of Philo-Britannicus. 9. “Lettera esortatoria di mettere opera a fare sincera penitenza mandata alia signora F. M. L. P. &c.” 1667, 4to. This piece was written on account of a lady of Irish birth, with whom he was criminally connected, and whom he wished to pass for an Italian, as she was educated in Italy. Her name was Francisca Maria Lucretia Plunket. It was to her he wrote this exhortatory letter, which was followed soon after by, 10. “The Vindication of an injured lady, F. M. Lucretia Plunket, one of the ladies of the privy chamber to the queen mother of England,” Lond. 1667, J-to. i I Two pamphlets of the “Case of Ware and Shirley,” a gentleman who married an heiress against her will. 12. “A Speech delivered at the Visitation held in the diocese of Clogher, se.de vacant e, Sept. 27, 1671,” Dublin, 1671, 4to. 13. “The first marriage of Katherine Fitzgerald (now lady Decies), &c. asserted,” Lond. 1677, 4to. Readers of the present times will be surprised to be told, that this pamphlet relates to the marriage of lord Decies, aged eight years, to Katherine Fitz-gerald, aged twelve and a half. The little lady in about twenty months took another husband, Edward Villiers, esq. Mr. Loftus’s opinion was, that the first marriage was legal. His argument was answered by Robert Thomson, LL. D. in a pamphlet under the title of “Sponsa nondum uxor,” Lond. 1678, 4to. 14. “Several Chapters of Dionysius Syrus’s Comment on St. John the Evangelist, concerning the Life and Death of our Saviour,” Dublin, 4 to. 15. “The Commentary on the Four Evangelists, by Dionysius Syrus, out of the Syriac tongue.” 16. “Commentary on St. Paul’s Epistles, by Moses Bar-Cepha, out of the Syriac.” 17. “Exposition of Dionysius Syrus, on St. Mark,” Dublin, 1676, 4to, according to Harris, but by the Bodleian catalogue it would appear that most, if not all, the four preceding articles were published together in 1672. 18. “History of the Eastern and Western Churches, by Gregory Maphrino, translated into Latin from the Syriac.” 19. “Commentary on the general Epistles, and Acts of the Apostles, by Gregory Maphrino.” 20 “Praxis cultusdivini juxta ritus primoevorum Christianorum,” containing various ancient liturgies, &c. Dublin, 1693, 4to. 21. “A clear and learned Explication of the History of our Blessed Saviour, taken out of above thirty Greek, Syriac, and other oriental authors, by way of Catena, by Dionysius Syrus, translated into English,” Dublin, 1695, 4to. Harris mentions a few other translations from the Armenian, Arabic, and Syriac, but without date or place, and which probably were printed with some of the preceding.

, a polite scholar, and magistrate of some eminence in America, was born in Scotland about 1674. He was one of the people called Quakers, and accompanied William Penn in his last voyage to Pennsylvania. For many years of his life he was employed in public business, and rose to the offices of chief justice and governor of the province: but he felt always an ardour of study, and by husbanding his leisure hours, found time to write several treatises in Latin, of which one on the generation of plants, was translated into English by Dr. Fothergill. When advanced in years, he withdrew from the tumult of public business to the solitude of his country-seat, near Germantown, where he corresponded with the most distinguished literary characters of Europe. He also made a version of “Cicero de Senectute,” which was published with notes by the celebrated Dr. Franklin. Mr. Logan died in 1751, at the age of seventy-seven, leaving his library, which he had been fifty years in collecting, to the people of Pennsylvania. The following extract from his will affords a pleasing idea of his literary enthusiasm: " In my library, which I have left to the city of Philadelphia, for the advancement and facilitating of classical learning, are above an hundred volumes of authors in folio, all in Greek, with mostly their versions. All the Roman classics without exception. All the whole Greek mathematicians, viz. Archimedes, Euclid, Ptolemy, both his Geography, and Almagest, which I had in Greek (with Theon’s commentary in folio, above 700 pages) from my learned friend Fabricius, who published 14 volumes of his ‘ Bibliotheque Grecque,’ in 4to, in which, after he had finished his account of Ptolemy, on my inquiring of him

sought for it in vain in England; he sent it me out of his own library, telling me it was so scarce, that neither prayers nor price could purchase it. Besides there are many of the most valuable Latin authors, and a great number of modern mathematicians, with all the three editions of Newton, Dr. Wall is, Halley, &C."

, a Scotch divine and poet, was born about the beginning of 1747-8, at Soutra, in the parish of Fala, on the southern extremity of Mid- Lothian, where his father rented a small farm. He appears to have been taught the first rudiments of learning at the school of Musselburgh, near Edinburgh; and here, as well as at home, was zealously instructed in the principles of the Calvinistic system of religion, as professed by the seceders, a species of dissenters from the established church of Scotland. In 1762, he entered on the usual courses of study at the university of Edinburgh, where he made uncommon proficiency in the learned languages, but discovered no great inclination for mathematics, or metaphysics, although he took care not to be so deficient in these branches as to incur any censure, or create any hindrance to his academical progress. His turn being originally to works of imagination, he found much that was congenial in a course of lectures then read by professor John Stevenson, on Aristotle’s Art of Poetry, and on Longinus; and while these directed his taste, he employed his leisure hours in acquiring a more perfect knowledge of Homer, whose beauties he relished with poetical enthusiasm. The writings of Milton, and other eminent poets of the English series, became likewise his favourite studies, and the discovery of

* The date here in Davis’s Travels in America, 1803, 8?o, ft om which tbis account is taken, is 1772, which must be wrong. Ossian’s poems, which took place when he was at college, opened new sources of admiration;ind improvement.

At what time he began to imitate his favourite models, is doubtful, but as an inclination to write poetry is generally precipitate, it is probable that he had produced many of his lesser pieces while at the university; and he had the advice and encouragement of Dr. John Main of Athelstoneford, a clergyman of classical taste, in pursuing a track which genius seemed to have pointed out. He had also acquired the friendship and patronage of lord Elibank, and of the celebrated Dr. Blair, who regarded him as a youth of promising talents, and unusual acumen in matters of criticism. By the recommendation of Dr. Blair, he was, in 1768, received into the family of Sinclair, as private tutor to the present baronet of Ulbster, the editor of those statistical reports which have done so much honour to the clerical character of Scotland. Here, however, Logan did not remain long, but returned to Edinburgh to attend the divinity lectures, with a view of entering into the church. Either by reading, or by the company he kept, he had already overcome the scruples which inclined his parents to dissent, and determined to take orders in the establishment.

In 1770, he published a volume under the title of “Poems on several occasions, by Michael Bruce,” a youth who died at the age of twenty-one, after exhibiting considerable talents for poetry. In this volume, however, Logan chose to insert several pieces of his own, without specifying them, a circumstance which has since given rise to a controversy between the respective friends of Bruce and Logan. In 1770, after going through the usual probationary periods, Logan was admitted a preacher, and in 1773 was invited to the pastoral charge at South Leith, which he accepted. His poems, which had been hitherto circulated only in private, or perhaps occasionally inserted in the literary journals, pointed him out as a proper person to assist in a scheme for revising the psalmody of the church. For this purpose he was, in 1775, appointed one of the committee ordered by the General Assembly (the highest ecclesiastical authority in Scotland), and took a very active part in their proceedings, not only revising and improving some of the old versions, but adding others of his own composition. This collection of “Translations and Paraphrases” was published in 1781, under the sanction of the General Assembly. About two years before this publication appeared, he had prepared a course of lectures on the philosophy of history, and had on this occasion consulted Drs. Robertson, Blair, Carlisle, and other eminent men connected with the university of Edinburgh, who seemed liberally inclined to promote his success. The first request, however, which he had to make, happened not to be within their power. He desired the use of a room in the college for the delivery of his lectures, but by the statutes no indulgence of that kind could be granted to persons teaching or lecturing on subjects for which regular professors were already appointed. He then hired a chapel, in which he delivered his first course of lectures in 1779 So, and his auditors, if not very numerous, were of that kind whose report was of great consequence to his fame. In his second course, he had a larger auditory, and attracted so much notice, that he entertained very sanguine hopes of being promoted to the professorship of history, which became vacant about this time.

Here, however, an obstacle presented itself, which he had not foreseen, and which his friends could not remove. It had been the invariable practice of the patrons to present to this office a member of the faculty of advocates, and in the present instance their choice fell upon Mr. FrazerTytler, the late lord Woodhouselee, a gentleman whose talents (had talents been the criterion) must have excluded all competition. Whether owing to this appointment, or to the decay of public curiosity, Logan’s lectures were no longer encouraged; but in 1781, he published an analysis of them, entitled “Elements of the Philosophy of History,” and soon after one entire lecture in the form of an “Essayon the Manners of Asia.” Both were favourably received, yet without those decisive proofs of encouragement which could justify his publishing the whole course, as he probably intended. In the same year appeared his volume of “Poems,” which were so eagerly bought up, that a second edition became necessary within a few months. Such popularity induced him to complete a tragedy which he had been for some time preparing, entitled “Kunamede,” and founded upon the history of the great charter. This tragedy was accepted by the manager of Covent-garden theatre, but was interdicted by the licenser of the stage as containing political allusions that were improper. It was printed, however, in 1783, and afterwards acted on the Edinburgh theatre, but met with no extraordinary applause either in the closet or on the stage. In this attempt, indeed, the author seems to have mistaken his talents. In Scotland, his biographer informs us, he had to encounter the general prejudices of that country against the interference of the clergy in theatrical concerns.

These disappointments, we are told, “preyed with pungent keenness upon a mind uncommonly susceptible. His temper,” it is added, “was still further fretted by the umbrage which some of his parish had unjustly taken at his engaging in studies foreign to his profession, and which others, with more reason, had conceived, on account of certain deviations from the propriety and decorum of his clerical character; though not a few of them were sufficiently liberal in their allowances for irregularities which could only be attributed to inequality of spirits and irritability of nerves.” This vindication is specious, but will not bear examination. There could surely be no great injustice in complaining of studies which diverted him from his profession a profession which he had voluntarily chosen, and in which he was liberally settled; or of irregularities which unfitted him to perform its duties, and obliged him at last to compound for his inability or neglect by retiring upon a small annuity. Yet such was the case; and with this annuity, or with the promise of it, he came to London in 1786, and for some time subsisted by furnishing articles for the “English Review,” and perhaps other periodical publications. He wrote also a pamphlet, entitled “A Review of the Principal Charges against Mr. Hastings,” which was a very able and eloquent vindication of that gentleman; and probably appeared in that light to the public at large, for the publisher, against whom the friends of the impeachment directed a prosecution, was acquitted by the verdict of a jury. This last consequence, Logan did not live to witness. His health had been for some time broken, and he died at his apartments in Marlborough-street, Dec. 28, 1738, in the fortieth year of his age.

Notwithstanding his failings, it is with pleasure we copy the following passage from the Life prefixed to the late; edition of his poems. “The end of Logan was truly Christian. When he became too weak to hold a book, he employed his time in hearing such young persons as visited him read the Scriptures. His conversation turned chiefly on serious subjects, and was most affecting and instructive. He foresaw and prepared for the approach of death, gave directions about his funeral with the utmost composure, and dictated a distinct and judicious will, appointing Dr. Donald Grant, and his ancient and steady friend Dr. Robertson, his executors, and bequeathing to them his property, books, and Mss. to be converted into money, for the payment of legacies to those relations and friends who had the strongest claims upon his affectionate remembrance in his dying moments.”

Dr. Robertson accordingly prepared a volume of his Sermons, which was published in 1790, and a second in the following year. They are in general elegant and perspicuous, but occasionally burst into passages of the declamatory kind, which, however, are perhaps not unsuitable to the warmth of pulpit oratory. They have been uncommonly successful, the fifth edition having made its appearance in 1807. He left several other manuscripts, which were once intended for publication. Among these are his Lectures on History, and three or four tragedies. In 1805 a new edition of his poems was published at Edinburgh and London, to which a life is prefixed by an anonymous writer. From this the facts contained in the present more succinct sketch have been borrowed. Logan deserves a very high rank among our minor poets. The chief character of his poetry is the pathetic, and it will not, perhaps, be easy to produce any pieces from the whole range of English poetry more exquisitely tender and pathetic than “The Braes of Yarrow,” *f The Ode on the Death of a Young Lady,“or” A Visit to the Country in Autumn.“” The Lovers“seems to assume a higher character; the opening lines, spoken by Harrietj rise to sublimity by noble gradations of terror, and an accumulation of images, which are, with peculiar felicity, made to vanish on the appearance of her lover. In the whole of Logan’s poems are passages of true poetic spirit and sensibility. With a fancy so various and regulated, it is to be regretted he did not more frequently cultivate his talents. The episode of” Levina," among the pieces attributed to him, indicates powers that might have appeared to advantage in a regular poem of narration and description. His sacred pieces are allowed to be of the inferior kind, but they are inferior only as they are ixot original he strives to throw an air of modern elegance over the simple language of the East, consecrated by use and devotional spirit; and he fails where Watts and others have failed before him, and where Cowper only has escaped without injury to his general character.

, a very useful, if not an eminent engraver, was a native of Dantzic, and born probably in 1635. He is said to have received some instructions from Simon Pass, in Denmark. Passing through Holland, he studied under Hondius, and came to England before the restoration. Being at Oxford, and making a drawing for himself of All-souls college, he was taken notice of, and invited to undertake plates of all the colleges and public buildings of that university, which he executed, and by which he first distinguished himself. He afterwards performed the same for Cambridge, where he is said to have hurt his eye-sight in delineating the fine chapel of King’s college. He also engraved on eleven folio plates, the academical habits of Oxford, from the doctor to the lowest servant. At Oxford he was much caressed, obtained a licence for vending his “Oxonia Illustrata,” for fifteen years, and on July 9, 1672, was matriculated as universityengraver, by the name of “David Loggan, Gedanensis.” He was the most considerable engraver of heads in his time, but their merit as work* of art has not been rated very high. His “Oxonia” and “Cantabrigia illustrata,” however, will perpetuate his name, and his correctness may still be traced in those colleges which have not undergone alterations. He married a Mrs. Jordan, of a good family near Witney, in Oxfordshire, and left at least one son, who was fellow of Magdalen-college, Oxford, and B. D. in 1707. Loggan died in Leicester-fields, where he had resided in the latter part of his days, either in 1693 or 1700, for Vertue gives both dates in different places.

, sometimes called Abre Anam, or father of Anam, was a philosopher of great account among the Easterns, but his personal history is involved in much obscurity, and what we have is probably fabulous. Some say he was an Abyssinian of Ethiopia or Nubia, and was sold as a slave among the Israelites, in the reigns of David and Solomon. According to the Arabians, he was tlje son of Baura, son or grandson of a sister or aunt of Job. Some say he worked as a carpenter, others as a tailor, while a third sort will have him to be a shepherd; however that be, he was certainly an extraordinary person, endowed with great wisdom and eloquence, and we have an account of the particular manner in which he received these divine gifts; being one day asleep about noon, the angels saluted Lokman without making themselves visible, in these terms: “We are the messengers of God, thy creator and ours; and he has sent us to declare to thee that he will make thee a monarch, and his vice-gerent upon earth.” Lokman replied, “If it is by an absolute command of God that I am to become such a one as you say, his will be done in all things; and I hope if this should happen, that he will bestow on me all the grace necessary for enabling me to execute his commands faithfully; however, if he would grant me the liberty to chuse my condition of life, I had rather continue in my present state, and be kept from offending him; otherwise, all the grandeur and splendours of the world would be troublesome to me.” This answer, we are told, was so pleasing to God, that he immediately bestowed on him the gift of wisdom in an eminent degree; and he was able to instruct all men, by a multitude of maxims, sentences, and parables, amounting to ten thousand in number, every one of which his admirers reckon greater than the whole world in value.

This story is evidently of the same cast with that of Solomon, and was perhaps taken from it; but Lokman himself gives a different account of his perfections. Being seated in the midst of a number of people who were listening to him, a man of eminence among the Jews, seeing so great a crowd of auditors round him, asked him, “Whether he was not the black slave who a little before looked after the sheep of a person he named?” To which Lokman assenting; “How has it been possible,” continued the Jew, “for thee to attain so exalted a pitch of wisdom and virtue” Lokman replied, “It was by the following means by always speaking the truth, by keeping my word Inviolably, and by never intermeddling in affairs that did not concern me.” Accordingly, we find inscribed to him this apophthegm: “Be a learned man, disciple of the learned, or an auditor of the learned; at least be a lover of knowledge, and desirous of improvement.” Lokman, it is said, hud not only consummate knowledge, but was equally good and virtuous; and so many admirable qualifies could not always be held in slavery. His master giving him a bitter melon to eat, Lokman ate it all; when his master, surprised at his exact obedience, says, “Hovr was it possible for you to eat so nauseous a fruit?” Lokman replied, “I have received so many favours from you, that it is no wonder I should once in my life eat a bitter melon from your hand.” This generous answer struck the master to such a degree, that he immediately gave him his liberty.

It is said that he lived three hundred years, and died in the age of the prophet Jonas. He was buried not far from Jerusalem; and his sepulchre was to be seen not above a century ago, at Ramlah, a small town not far from Jerusalem, his remains being deposited near those of the seventy prophets who were starved to death by the Jews, and all died in one day. He was of the Jewish religion, and some time served in the troops of king David, with whom he had been conversant in Palestine, and was greatly esteemed by that monarch. The relics of his fables were published by Erpenius in Arabic and Latin, with his Arabic Grammar, at Leyden, 1636, 4to, and 1656, 4to, and Tannaquil Faber gave an edition of them in elegant Latin verse. Galland translated them into French, with those of Pilpay, in 1714, 2 vols. 12mo; and a new volume was translated into the same language by M. Cardonne, in 1778. There is a more recent French edition by Marcel, in 1799, 4to. The work seems rather a collection of ancient fables than the production of any one writer. From the similarity of many of them to those of JEsop, some have inferred that Lokman and Æsop were different names for the same person but Brucker thinks it more likely that the compiler of these fables had seen those of Æsop, and chose to insert some of them in his collection. Whoever was the writer, the fables afford no inelegant specvmen of the moral doctrine of the Arabians.

, well known by the title of Master or“the Sentences, was born at Novara, in Lombardy, whence he took his surname. He was educated at Bologna, and Rheims, under St. Bernard, and afterwards removed to Paris, where, as one of the professors in that university, he distinguished himself so much, that the canonry of Chartres was conferred upon him. He was some time tutor to Philip, son of king Lewis le Gros, and brother of Lewis the young; and was so much esteemed by him, that upon the vacancy of the bishopric of Paris, that noble personage, being intended for the see, declined it for the sake of Lombard, who was accordingly promoted to it about 1160, and died in 1164. He was interred in the church of Marcellus, in the suburb of that name, where his epitaph is still to be seen. His work of the Sentences, divided into four books, contains an illustration of the doctrines of the church, in a collection of sentences or passages taken from the fathers. This was so favourably received, that in a short time it was the only work taught in the schools, and the author was, by way of eminence, called the” Master of the Sentences,“and was accounted the chief of the scholastic divines. His work was first printed at Venice, 1477, fol. and innumerable commentaries have been written on it. In our own universities the being admitted” to read the Sentences“was, as may be frequently seen in Wood’s Athenae, a mark of great progress in study, for a greater veneration was paid to Lombard’s work than to the Scriptures. Bacon, in a letter to Clement IV. mentions this preference as an absurdity.” The bachelor,“says he,” who reads the Scriptures, gives place to the reader of the * Sentences,' who everywhere is honoured and preferred. The reader of the Sentences has his choice of the most eligible time, and holds a call and society with the religious; but the biblical reader has neither; and must beg for such an hour as the reader of the Sentences is pleased to assign him. He who reads the Lombardine thesis, may anywhere dispute and be esteemed a master; but he who reads the text of Scripture is admitted to no such honour: the absurdity of this conduct is evident," &C.

, was born in 1635, the son of that count de Brienne who was ambassador in England in 1624. He had the reversion of the secretary of state’s office which his father held, and was made counsellor of state in 1651, when a boy of sixteen, with permission to exercise this office when he should attain the age of twenty- five. During this interval, be travelled over Italy, Germany, and the north, to acquire a knowledge of the countries he was afterward to treat with, and on his return, although only twenty-three years old, the king permitted him to act as secretary of state; but after his wife’s death, in 1665, Louis XIV. obliged him to resign his post. M. de Lomenie then retired to the fathers of the oratory, and was sub-deacon, but left them, and went to the court of Christian Louis, duke of Mecklenburgh, in 1672. His residence at that court was the origin of all the troubles which he brought upon himself; for, having entertained a criminal passion for the princess of Mecklenburg, he had the audacity to acquaint her with it. She complained of this affront to Louis XIV. who ordered him to return to Paris, and confined him in the abbey of St. Germain-des-Prez, then at St. Benolt-sur- Loire, afterwards at St. Lazare, and lastly, at the abbey of St. Severin, at Chateau Landon, where he died, April 17, 1698. He left an account of his travels, in Latin,entitled “Itinerarinm,” 8vo, written with elegance and perspicuity. 2. “Recueil de Poesies diverses et Chre”­tiennes,“Paris, 1671, 3 vols. 12mo. 3.” Remarques sur les Regies de la Poésie Françoise,“which are at the end of the” Nouvelle Methode Latine“of Port Royal, the seventh edition, 8vo. M. de Châlons has borrowed, without any acknowledgment, almost the whole of these remarks, in his treatise” Des Regies de la Poésie Fransoise.“Lomenie also published a translation of the” Institutions of Thanlerus," 8vo and 12mo, &c. and left in ms. memoirs of his life, and some poems. It appears from his works, that he possessed wit and genius, but that a capricious, fickle, and inconstant disposition, joined to a depraved fancy, rendered them useless to him, ad in some measure to the world.

, a medical writer of reputation, was born at Buren, in Guelderland, about the commencement of the sixteenth century, and after a liberal education, studied medicine principally at Paris, and practised for a considerable time at Tournay, to which city he was pensionary physician in 1557; he removed to Brussels at an advanced period of life, about 1560, and was living in this city in 1562, beyond which period there is no record of him. He left three small works, in very elegant Latin, viz. “Commentarii de Sanitate tuenda in primum librum C. Celsi,” Louvain, 1558, 12mo. This is an ample commentaryt upon Celsus, taken entirely from the ancients. “Observationum Medicinalium Libri tres,” Antwerp, 1560. This work has passed through many editions: it consists of histories of disease, related with the simple perspicuity of Celsus, and containing many useful and valuable observations on the diagnostics, prognostics, and cure. “De curandis Febribus continuis Liber,” Antwerp, 1563. This little treatise, like the foregoing, has been several times printed and translated. These works were published together at Amsterdam, in 1745, in 3 vols. 12mo, under the title of“Opera omnia.”

, a celebrated Russian poet, the great refiner of his native tongue, was the son of a person who trafficked in fish at Kolmogori: he was born in 1711, and was fortunately taught to read; a rare instance for a person of so low a station in Russia. His natural genius for poetry was first kindled by the perusal of a metrical translation of the Song of Solomon, by Polotski, whose rude compositions, perhaps scarcely superior to our version of the Psalms by Sternhold and Hopkins, inspired him with such an irresistible passion for the muses, that he fled from his father, who was desirous of compelling him to marry, and took refuge in the Kaikonospaski monastery at Moscow; there he had an opportunity of indulging his taste for letters, and of studying the Greek and Latin languages. In this seminary he made so considerable a progress in polite literature, as to be noticed and employed by the Imperial academy of sciences. In 1736 he was sent at the expence of that society, to the university of Marburgh in Hesse Cassel, where he became a scholar of the celebrated Christian Wolf, under whom he studied universal grammar, rhetoric, and philosophy. He continued at Marburgh four years, during which time he applied himself with indefatigable diligence to chemistry, which he afterwards pursued with still greater success, under the famous Henckel, at Freyberg, in Saxony. In 1741 he returned into Russia; was chosen in 1742 adjunct to the Imperial academy; and in the ensuing year, member of that society, and professor of chemistry. In 1760 he was appointed inspector of the seminary, then annexed to the academy; in 1764 he was gratified by the late empress Catherine with the title of counsellor of state; and died April 4 that year, in the fifty-fourth year of his age. Lomonozof excelled in various kinds of composition; but his chief merit, by which he bears the first rank among the Russian writers, is derived from his poetical compositions, the finest of which are his odes. The first was written in 1739, while he studied in Germany, upon the taking of Kotschin, a fortress of Crim Tartary, by marshal Munich. The odes of Lomonozof are greatly admired for originality of invention, sublimity of sentiment, and energy of language; and compensate for the turgid style, which in some instances have been imputed to them, by that spirit and fire which are the principal characteristics in this species of composition. Pindar was his great model; and if we may give credit to Levesque, a gentleman well versed in the Russian tongue, he has succeeded in this daring attempt to imitate the Theban bard, without incurring the censure of Horace: “Pindarum quisquis studet emulari,” &c. In this, as well as several other species of composition, he enriched his native language with various kinds of metre, and seems to have merited the appellation bestowed upon him, of the Father of Russian Poetry. A brief recapitulation of the principal works of Lomonozof, which were printed in 3 vols. 8vo, will serve to shew the versatility of his genius, and his extensive knowledge in various branches of literature.

, an eminent French historian and bibliographer, was born at Paris, April 19, 1665. His mother dying while he was very young, his father married again, and entrusted his education to one of his relations, a priest, who was director of the religious at Estampes. After he had been taught grammar and Latin for two or three years under this ecclesiastic, his father sent him to Malta, with a view to procure him admission among the clerks of the order of St. John of Jerusalem. He had scarcely arrived here when the plague broke out, to which he incautiously exposed himself; but although he escaped the contagion, he fancied that the air of Malta did not agree with him, and obtained leave of his superiors to return to Paris, where he might prosecute his studies in the classics, philosophy, and divinity. As he had not taken the vows in the order of St. John, he had no sooner completed his studies at home, than he entered into the congregation of the oratory. His year of probation being passed, he was sent to the college of Jully, where he taught mathematics, and went afterwards to the seminary of Notre Dame des Vertus, where he employed his leisure time in study, particularly of philosophy, which brought him acquainted with father Malbranche. On his return to Paris he was appointed to the care of the library belonging to the fathers of the oratory, a place for which he was admirably qualified, as he was not only acquainted with Latin, Greek, Hebrew, and the Chaldean, but with the Italian, Spanish, Portuguese and English languages, and had a very extensive knowledge of literary history, of books, editions, and printing. The continual pains, however, which he bestowed on this library, and on his own publications, undermined his constitution, which was originally delicate, and brought on a complaint in the chest, which proved fatal, Aug. 13, 1721, in the fifty. sixth year of his life. His time for many years had been divided between devotion and study; he allowed very little to sleep, and less to the table. Although a man of extensive knowledge, and often consulted, he was equally modest and unaffected. In all his researches he shewed much acuteness and judgment, but the course of his studies had alienated him from works of taste and imagination, for which he had little relish. His principal object was the ascertaining of truth in matters of literary history; and the recovery of dates and other minutiae, on which he was frequently obliged to bestow the time that seemed disproportionate, was to him a matter of great importance, nor was he to be diverted from such accuracy by his friend Malbranche, who did not think philosophy concerned in such matters. “Truth,” said Le Long, “is so valuable, that we ought not to neglect it even in trifles.” His works are, 1. “Methode Hebraique du P. Renou,” 1708, 8vo. 2. “Bibliotheca Sacra, sive syllabus omnium ferme Sacrse Scripture eclitionum ac versionum,” Paris, 1709, 8vo, 2 vols. Of this a very much enlarged edition was published at Paris in 1723, 2 vols. fol. by Desmolets. Another edition was begun by Masch in 1778, and between that and 1790, 5 vols. 4to were published, but the plan is yet unfinished. 3. “Discours historique sur les principales Editions des Bibles Polyglottes,” Paris, 1713, 8vo, a very curious work. 4. “Histoire des demelez du pape Boniface VIII. avec Philippe Le Bel, roi de France,” 1718, 12mo, a posthumous work of M. Baillet, to which Le Long added some documents illustrating that period of French history. 5. “Bibliotheque Historique de France,” 1719, fol. a work of vast labour and research, and perhaps the greatest of all his undertakings. It has since been enlarged by Ferret de Fontette and others, to 5 vols. fol. 1768—78, and is the most comprehensive collection of the kind in any language. The only other publication of M. Le Long was a letter to M. Martin, minister of Utrecht, with whom he had a short controversy respecting the disputed text in 1 John, v. 7.

, author of a valuable History of Jamaica, was the fourth son of Samuel Long, esq. of Longville, in the island of Jamaica, and Tredudwell in the county of Cornwall, by his wife Mary, second daughter of Bartholomew Tate, of Delapre in the county of Northampton, esq. He was born Aug. 23, 1734, at Rosilian, in the parish of St. Blaize, in Cornwall. He was placed first at Bury school, under Dr. Kinnesman, and was removed thence about 1746, probably on account of his father’s residence in the country, to a school at Liskeard, in Cornwall, under the management of the Rev. Mr. Haydon. In 1752 he left this place, and after two years private instruction in London, he was entered at Gray’s Inn, and fixed with Mr. Wflmot. His father dying, in 1757, in Jamaica, he resolved to embark for that Island; but, not having completed his terms, he obtained an ex gratia call to the bar before he sailed. On his arrival in Jamaica, he at first filled the post of private secretary to his brother-in-law, sir Henry Moore, bart. then lieutenant-governor of the island; and was afterwards appointed judge of the vice-admiralty court. On Aug. 12, 1758, he married Mary, second daughter, and at length sole heiress, of Thomas Beckford, esq. Mr. Long’s ill health compelled him to leave the island in 1769; and he never returned to it, but passed the remainder of his life in retirement, devoting his leisure to literary pursuits, and particularly to the com 7 pletion of his “History of Jamaica,” which was published in 1774, 3 vols. 4to. His high station in the island afforded him every opportunity of procuring authentic materials, which he digested with ingenuity and candour, although perhaps a little too hastily. He saw its imperfections, however, and had been making preparations for a new edition at the time of his death. In 1797 he resigned his office of judge of the vice-admiralty court; and died March 13, 1813, at the house of his son-in-law, Henry Howard Molyneux, esq. M. P. of Arundel Park, Sussex, and was buried in the chancel of Slindon church in that county. Besides his “History of Jamaica,” Mr. Long contributed to public information or amusement by a variety of lesser productions. Early in life he wrote some essays in “The Prater, by Nicholas Babble, esq.” 1756. 2. “The Antigallican, or the History and Adventures of Harry Cobham, esq.” 1757, 12mo. 3. “The Trial of farmer Carter’s Dog Porter, for murder,” 1771, 8vo. 4. “Reflections on the Negro Cause,” 1772, 8vo. 5. “The Sentimental Exhibition, or Portraits and Sketches of the Times,” 1774, 8vo. 6. “Letters on the Colonies,” 1775, 8vo. 7. “English Humanity no Paradox,” 1778, 8vo. 8. A pamphlet on “The Sugar Trade, 1782, 8vo. He was likewise editor of” Memoirs of the Reign of Bossa Ahaclee, king of Dahomy, with a short account of the African slave trade, by Robert Norris," 1789, v 8vo.

, an English divine and astronomer, was born about 1680, and was educated at Pembroke hall, Cambridge, of which he was A. B. in 1700, A.M. 1704, and S. T. P. in 1728. In 1733 he was elected master of Pembroke hall, and in 1749 Lowndes’s professor of astronomy. He is chiefly known as an author by a “Treatise on Astronomy,” in two volumes 4to; the first of which was published in 1742, and the second in 1764. He was the inventor of a curious astronomical machine, erected in a room at Pembroke hail, of which he has himself given the following description: “I have, in a room lately built in Pembroke hall, erected a sphere of 18 feet diameter, wherein above thirty persons may sit conveniently; the entrance into it is over the south pole by six steps; the frame of the sphere consists of a number of iron meridians, not complete semi-circles, the northern ends of which are screwed to a large plate of brass, with a hole in the centre of it; through this hole, from a beam in the cieling, comes the north pole, a round iron rod, about three inches long, and supports the upper parts of the sphere to its proper elvation for the latitude of Cambridge; the lower part of the sphere, so much of it as is invisible in England, is cut off; and the lower or southern ends of the meridians, or truncated semi-circles, terminate on, and are screwed down to, a strong circle of oak, of about thirteen feet diameter, which, when the sphere is put into motion, runs upon large rollers of lignum vitae, in the manner that the tops of some wind-mills are made to turn round. Upon the iron meridians is fixed a zodiac of tin painted blue, whereon the ecliptic and heliocentric orbits of the planets are drawn, and the constellations and stars traced; the great and little Bear and Draco are already painted in their places round the north pole; the rest of the constellations are proposed to follow; the whole is turned with a small winch, with as little labour as it takes to wind up a jack, though the weight of the iron, tin^ and wooden circle, is about a thousand pounds. When it is made use of, a planetarium will be placed in the middle thereof. The whole, with the floor, is well-supported by a frame of large timber.” Thus far Dr. Long, before this curious piece of mechanism was perfected. Since the above was written, the sphere has been completely finished; all the constellations and stars of the northern hemisphere, visible at Cambridge, are painted in their proper places upon plates of iron joined together, which form one concave surface.

Besides his astronomical work,- he published in 1731, under the name of Dicaiophilus Cantabrigiensis, “The Rights of Churches and Colleges defended; in answer to a pamphlet called * An Enquiry into the customary estates and tenant-rights of those who hold lands of church and other foundations, by the term of three lives, &c. by Everard Fleetwood, esq.;' with remarks upon some other pieces on the same subject,” 8vo. The author of this pamphlet, to which our author replied, was not Fleetwood, which was an assumed name, but Samuel Burroughs, esq. a master in chancery. Dr. Long published also a “Commencement-Sermon, 1728;” and an answer to Dr. Gally’s pamphlet “On Greek Accents.” We shall subjoin a few traits of him, as delineated in 1769, by Mr. Jones: " He is now in the eighty-eighth year of his age, and, for his years, vegete and active. He was lately (in October) put in nomination for the office of vice-chancellor. He executed that trust before; I think in the year 1737. A very ingenious person, and sometimes very facetious. At the public commencement in the year 1713, Dr. Greene (master of Bene't college, and afterwards bishop of Ely) being then vice-chancellor, Mr. Long was pitched upon for the tripos-performance; it was witty and humourous, and has passed through divers editions. Some that remembered the delivery of it told me, that, in addressing ttye vice chancellor (whom the university-wags usually styled Miss Greene), the tripos-orator, being a native of Norfolk, and assuming the Norfolk dialect, instead of saying, Domine vice-cancellarie, did very archly pronounce the words thus, Domina vice-cancellaria; which occasioned a general smile in that great auditory. His friend the late Mr. Bonfoy of Ripton told me this little incident: `That he and Dr. Long walking together in Cambridge, in a dusky evening, and coming to a short post fixed in the pavement, which Mr. B. in the midst of chat and inattention, took to be a boy standing in his way, he said in a hurry, `Get out of my way, boy.‘ `That boy, sir,’ said the doctor very calmly and slily, `is a post-boy, who turns out of his way for nobody.'

“I could recollect several other ingenious repartees if there were occasion. One thing is remarkable. He never was a hale and hearty man; always of a tender and delicate constitution, yet took care of it. His common drink, water. He always dines with the fellows in the hall. Of late years, he has left off eating flesh-meats; in the room thereof, puddings, vegetables, &c. Sometimes a glass or two of wine.”

, a learned divine of the church of England, was born at Exeter in 1621, and became a servitor of Exeter college, Oxford, in 1638. In 1642 he took the degree of B. A. but soon after left the university, and obtained the vicarage of St. Lawrence Clist, near Exeter. After the restoration he was, per literas regias, created B. D. and made prebendary of Exeter, which he held until the revolution, when refusing to take the oaths to the new government, he was ejected. He died in 1700. Wood characterizes him as “well read in the fathers, Jewish and other ancient writings,” and he appears also to have made himself master of all the controversies of his time in which subjects of political or ecclesiastical government were concerned, and took a very active part against the various classes of separatists, particularly those whose cause Mr, Baxter pleaded.

, a Greek scholar and critic, was born at Dijon Oct. 18, 1659. By much study he made himself master of the beauties of the Greek tongue, a merit not common in his time; and has left us poetical translations of Anacreon, Sappho, Bion, and Moschus, with notes. He wrote several tragedies in imitation of the Greek poets; and he copied them chiefly in thisj that, in subjects of terror and cruelty, he never introduced love. But he also copied them in common-place prolixity and want of action and plot; while he could never equal the beauty of their diction. Of those tragedies in the Grecian taste h never brought but two upon the stage, viz. the “Medea” and “Electra.” He died March 30, 1721.

, the author of an admired work “On the Sublime,” was a Grecian, and probably an Athenian, though some authors fancy him a Syrian. He was born in the third century. His father’s name is entirely unknown; by his mother Frontonis he was allied to Plutarch. We know nothing of the employment of his parents, their station in life, or the beginning of his education; but from a fragment of his it appears, that his youth was spent in travelling with them, which gave him an opportunity to increase his knowledge and improve his mind. Wherever men of learning were to be found, he was present, and lost no opportunity of forming a familiarity and intimacy with them. Ammonius and Origen, philosophers of great reputation in that age, were two of those whom he visited, and heard with the greatest attention. The travels of Longinus ended with his arrival at Athens, where he fixed his residence. Here he pursued the studies of humanity and philosophy with the greatest application. Here also he published hit “Treatise on the Sublime,” which raised his reputation to such a height, as no critic either before or since could ever reach. His contemporaries there had so great an opinion of his judgment and taste, that they appointed him sovereign judge of all authors; and every thing was received or rejected by the public according to the decision of Longinus.

His stay at Athens seems to have been of long continuance; and, whilst he taught there, he had, amongst others, the famous Porphyry for his pupil. The system of philosophy, which he adopted, was the academic; for whose founder (Plato) he had so great a veneration, that he celebrated the anniversary of his birth with the highest solemnity. But it was his lot to be drawn from the contemplative shades of Athens, to mix in more active scenes: to train up young princes to virtue and glory; to guide the busy and ambitious passions of the great to noble ends; to struggle for, and, at last, to die in, the cause of liberty. Zenobia, queen of the East, prevailed upon him to undertake the education of her sons. He quickly gained an uncommon share in her esteem; and in his conversation she spent the vacant hours of her life, modelling her sentiments by his instructions, and steering herself by his counsels in the whole series of her conduct. Zenobia was at war with the emperor Aurelian, was defeated by him near Antioch, and was compelled to retire to her fortified capital, Palmyra. The emperor sent her a written summons to surrender; to which she returned an answer drawn up by Longinus, which raised his highest indignation. The emperor exerted every effort, and the Palmyrians were at length obliged to open their gates, and receive the conqueror. The queen and Longinus endeavoured to fly into Persia, but were overtaken and made prisoners as they were crossing the Euphrates. When the captive qoeen was brought before the emperor, her spirits sunk; she laid the blame of her conduct on her counsellors, and fixed the odium of the affronting letter on its true author. This was no sooner heard, than Aurelian, who was hero enough to conquer, but not to forgive, poured all his vengeance on the head of Longinus. He was carried away to immediate execution, amidst the generous condolence of those who knew his merit. He pitied Zenobia, and comforted his friends. He looked upon death as a blessing, since it rescued his body from slavery, and gave his soul the most desirable freedom. “This world,” said he, with his expiring breath, “is nothing but a prison; happy therefore he, who gets soonest out of it, and gains his liberty.” His death took place in the year 273.

But this last line, so often quoted, forms the great objection which modern critics have advanced against this celebrated treatise, viz. his exemplifying rather than explaining the sublime. His taste and sensibility were exquisite, but his observations are too general, and his method too loose. The precision of the true philosophical critic, says Warton, is lost in the declamation of the florid rhetorician. Instead of shewing for what reason a sentiment or image is sublime, and discovering the secret power by which they affect a reader with pleasure, he is ever intent on producing something sublime himself. It has likewise been objected, that although he defines the sublime with precision, he frequently departs from his own rule, and includes whatever, in any composition, pleases highly. Some, therefore, of his instances of the sublime are mere elegancies, without the most distant relation to sublimity. His work, however, in other respects, is one of the most valuable relics of antiquity, and is admirably calculated to give excellent general ideas of beauty in writing. Brurker remarks that Longinus must have seen the Jewish scriptur.es, as he quotes a passage from the writings of Moses, as an example of the sublime (Gen. i. 3) “And God said, Let there be light, and there was light.”

The first edition of Longinus was that of Robertelli, printed at Basil, in 1554, 4to, with a preface by the printer, Oporinus. The best editions since, are those of Tollius, Utrecht, 1694, 4to, Gr. Lat. and French; of Hudson, Oxon. 1710, 1718, and 1730, 8vo; of Pearce, Lond. 1724, 4to and 8vo, often reprinted; and the very celebrated edition of Toup, Oxford, 1778, 4to and 8vo, which reflects the highest honour on the learning and judgment of that excellent scholar. There is an accurate Oxford edition of 1806, formed on the basis of Toup, in 8vo.

, a learned prelate, was born in 1473 at Henley in Oxfordshire, and educated at Magdalen -college, Oxford, where he was much esteemed as a man of eloquence, and of a regular life. His character is recorded in the East window of the founder’s chamber over the great gate of this college, in these lines:

After becoming a fellow of his college, he was in 1505 chosen principal of Magdalen-hall, which he resigned in 1507. In 1510 he was admitted to the reading of the sentences, and took his degree of B. D. and that of D. D. in the following year. In 1514 he was promoted to be dean of Salisbury, and in 1519 had the additional preferment of a canonry of Windsor. At this time he was in such favour with Henry VIII. as to be appointed his confessor, and upon the death of Atwater, bishop of Lincoln, he was by papal provision advanced to this see in 1520, and was consecrated May 3, 1521. In the same year (1520) we find him at Oxford assisting in drawing up the privileges for the new statutes of the university. In 1523 he was at the same place as one of those whom. Wolsey consulted in the establishment of his new college; and when the foundation was laid on July 15, 1525, Longland preached a sermon, which, with two others on the same occasion, he dedicated to archbishop Warham. He was afterwards employed at Oxford by the king, to gain over the learned men of the university fo sanction his memorable divorce. It is said, indeed, that when Henry’s scruples, or, as we agree with the catholic historian, his pretended scruples, began to be started, bishop Longland was the first that suggested the measure of a divorce. The excuse made for him is, that he was himself over-persuaded to what was not consistent with his usual character by Wolsey, who thought that Longland’s authority would add great weight to the cause; and it is said that he expressed to his chancellor, Dr. Draycot, his sorrow for being concerned in that affair. In 1533 he was chosen chancellor of the university of Oxford, to which he proved in many respects a liberal benefactor, and to poor students a generous patron. The libraries of Brazenose, Magdalen, and Oriel colleges, he enriched with many valuable books; and in 1540 he recovered the salary of the lady Margaret professorship, which had almost been lost, owing to the abbey from which it issued being dissolved. It must not be disguised, however, that he was inflexible in his pursuit and persecution of what he termed heresy. In 1531, we find him giving a commission to the infamous Dr. London, warden of New college, and others, to search for certain heretical books commonly sold at St. Frideswyde’s fair near Oxford. He died May 7, 1547, at Wooburn in Bedfordshire, where his bowels were interred; while his heart was carried to Lincoln cathedral, and his body deposited in Eton-college chapel, where it is thought he once had some preferment. He built a curious chapel in Lincoln cathedral in the east part, in imitation of bishop Russel’s chapel, with a tomb, &c. He also gave the second bell at Wooburn church, and built almshouses at Henley, his birth-place.

, the reputed author of “The Visions of Pierce Plowman,” is considered as one of our most ancient English poets, and one of the first disciples of Wickliff. He was a secular priest, born at Mortimer’s Cleobury, in Shropshire, and was a fellow of Oriel college, Oxford. According to Bale, he completed his work in 1369, when John Chichester was mayor of London. It is divided into twenty parts (passus, as he styles them), and consists of many distinct visions, which have no mutual dependance upon each other, but form a satire on almost every occupation of lite, particularly on the Romish clergy, in censuring whom his master Wickliff had led the way. The piece abounds with humour, spirit, and imagination; all which are drest to great disadvantage in a very uncouth versification and obsolete language. It is written without rhyme, an ornament which the poet has endeavoured to supply, by making every verse to consist of words beginning with the same letter. This practice has contributed not a little to render his poem obscure and perplexed, exclusive of its obsolete style; for, to introduce his alliteration, he must have been often necessarily compelled to depart from the natural and obvious way of expressing himself. Dr. Hickes observes, that this alliterative versification was drawn by Langelande from the practice of the Saxon poets, and that these visions abound with many Saxonisms. As he did not follow the example of Gower and Chaucer, who sought to reform the roughness of their native tongue, by naturalizing many new words from the Latin, French, and Italian, and who introduced the seven-lined stanza from Petrarch and Dante into our poetry, the inquirer into the original of our language will find in him a greater fund of materials to elucidate the progress of the Saxon tongue.

In the introduction to the vision, the poet (shadowed by the name and character of Peter or Pierse, a plowman) represents himself as weary of wandering, on a May-morning, and at last laid down to sleep by the side of a brook; where, in a vision, he sees a stately tower upon a hill, with a dungeon, and dark dismal ditches belonging to it, and a very deep dale under the hill. Before the tower a large field or plain is supposed, filled with men of every rank or occupation, all being respectively engaged in their several pursuits; when suddenly a beautiful lady appears to him, and unravels to him the mystery of what he had seen. Before every vision the manner and circumstances of his falling asleep are distinctly described; before one of them in particular, P. Plowman is supposed, with equal humour and satire, to fall asleep while he is bidding his beads. In the course of the poem, the satire is carried on by means of several allegorical personages, such as Avarice, Simony, Conscience, Sloth, &c. Selden mentions this author with honour; and by Hickes he is frequently styled, “Celeberrimus il-le Satyrographus, morum vindex acerrimus,” Sue. Chaucer, in the “Plowman’s Tale,” seems to have copied from our author. Spenser, in his Pastorals, seems to have attempted an imitation of his visions; and Milton is considered as under some obligations to him. The memory of this satire has been of late years revived by Percy, Warton, and Ellis, in whose works more ample information may be found than it is necessary to admit in a work professedly biographical. Perhaps indeed it does not belong to our department, since some of the most profound of our poetical critics have considered it as anonymous; Mr Tycwhitt remarks that in the best Mss. the author is called William, without any surname, and the name of Robert Longland, or Langlande, rests upon the authority only of Crowley, its earliest editor. Three of Crowley’s editions were published in 1550, doubtless owing to its justifying the Reformation then begun under king Edward, by exposing the abuses of the Romish church. There is also an edition printed in 1561, by Owen Rogers, to which is sometimes annexed a poem of nearly the same tendency, and written in the same metre, called “Pierce the Plowman’s Crede,” the first edition of which, however, was printed by Wolfe in 1553. Of both these works, new editions have recently been announced.

, an eminent astronomer, was born at Longomontum, a town in Denmark, whence he took his name, in 1562. Vossius, by mistake, calls him Christopher. He was the son of Severinus, a poor labourer, and was obliged to divide his time between following the plow and attending to the lessons which the minister of the parish gave him, by which he profited so much as to acquire considerable knowledge, especially in the mathematics. At length, when he was fifteen, he stole from his family, and went to Wiburg, where there was a college, in which he spent eleven years, supporting himself by his talents: and on his removing thence to Copenhagen, the professors of this university soon conceived a high esteem for him, and recommended him to Tycho Brahe, who received him very kindly. He lived eight years with this eminent astronomer, and assisted him so much in his observations and calculations, that Tycho conceived a very particular affection for him, and having left his native country to settle in Germany, he was desirous of having the company of Longomontanus, who accordingly attended him. Afterwards being, in 1600, desirous of a professor’s chair in Denmark, Tycho generously consented to give up his assistant and friend, with the highest testimonies of his merit, and supplied him plentifully with money for his journey. On his return to Denmark, he deviated from his road, in order to view the places whence Copernicus had made his astronomical observations; and passed so much time in this journey, that it was not till 1605 that he was nominated to the professorship of mathematics in the university of Copenhagen. In this situation he continued till his death, in 1647, when he was eighty-five years old. He married, and had children; but the whole of his family died before him. He was the author of several works, in mathematics and astronomy. His “Astronomia Danica,” first printed in 1611, 4to, and afterwards at Amsterdam, 1640, in folio, is the most distinguished. He amused himself with endeavouring to square the circle, and pretended that he had made the discovery of it; but our countryman Dr. John Pell attacked him warmly on the subject, and proved that he was mistaken. It is remarkable, that, obscure as his village and father might be, he dignified and perpetuated both; for he took his name from his village, and, in the title-page of his works, wrote himself “Christianus Longomontanus Severini films.”

, or Longolius, a very elegant scholar, was born in 1490, at Mechlin, although some have called him a Parisian, and Erasmus makes him a native of Schoohhoven in Holland. He was the natural son of Antony de Longueil, bishop of Leon, who being on some occasion in the Netherlands, had an intrigue with a female of Mechlin, of which this son was the issue. He remained with his mother until eight or aine years old; when he was brought to Paris for education, in the course of which he fur exceeded his fellowscholars, and was able at a very early age to read and understand the most difficult authors. He had also an extraordinary memory, although he did not trust entirely to it, but made extracts from whatever he read, and showed great discrimination in the selection of these. His taste led him chiefly to the study of the belles lettres, but his friends wished to direct his attention to the bar, and accordingly he went to Valence in Dauphiny, where he studied civil law under professor Philip Decius, for six years, and returning then to Paris, made so distinguished a figure at the bar, that in less than two years, he was appointed counsellor of the parliament of Paris, according to his biographer, cardinal Pole, but this has been questioned on account of its never having been customary to appoint persons so young to that office; Pole has likewise made another mistake, about which there can be less doubt, in asserting that the king of Spain, Philip, appointed Longueil his secretary of state, for Philip died in 1506, when our author was only sixteen years of age.

In the mean time, it is certain that his attachment to other studies soon diverted him from his law practice. He appears in particular to have considered Pliny as an author meriting his most assiduous application, and whose works would furnish him with employment for many years. With this view he not only studied Pliny’s “Natural History,” with the greatest care, as well as every author who had treated on the same subject, but determined also to travel in pursuit of farther information, as well as to inspect the productions of nature, wherever found. But before this it became necessary for him to learn Greek, with which he had hitherto been unacquainted, and he is said to have made such progress, as to be able, within a year, to read the best Greek authors, on whom he found employment for about five years. Besides selecting from these works whatever might serve to illustrate his favourite Pliny, he now determined to commence his travels, and accordingly went to England, Germany, and Italy, and would have travelled to the East had not the war with the Turks prevented him. In England, in which he appears to have been in 1518, he became very intimate with Pace and Linacre. He encountered many dangers, however, in his continental tour. As he was travelling, with two friends, through Switzerland, the natives of that country, who, after the battle of Marignan, regarded the French with horror, conceived that Longueil and his party were spies, and pursued them as far as the banks of the Rhone. One was killed, the other made his escape by swimming; but Longueil, being wounded in the arm, was taken prisoner, and treated with great severity for about a month, at the end of which he was released by the interposition of the bishop of Sion, who furnished him with money and a horse, to convey him to France. At Rome he was afterwards honoured with the rank of citizen, and received with kindness by Leo X. who had a great opinion of his talents and eloquence, made him his secretary, and employed him to write against Luther. He visited France once more after this, but the rec<*ption he met with in Italy determined him to settle there, at Padua, where he resided, first with Stephen Sauli, a noble Genoese, and on his departure, with Reginald Pole, afterwards the celebrated cardinal, to whom we are indebted for a life of Longueil. Here he died Sept. 11, 1522, in the thirty-third year of his age, and was interred in the church of the Franciscans, in the habit of that order, as he had desired. He was honoured with a Latin epitaph by Bembo, who was one of his principal friends, and recommended to him the writings of Cicero, as a model of style. Longueil became so captivated with Cicero, as to be justly censured by Erasmus on this account. Longueil, however, was not to be diverted by this, but declared himself so dissatisfied with what he ha4 written before he knew the beauties of Cicero’s style, *s to order all his Mss. written previous to that period, to be destroyed. We have, therefore, but little of Longueil left. Among the Mss. destroyed was probably his commentary on Pliny, which some think was published, but this is very doubtful. We can with more certainty attribute to him, 1. “Oratio de laudibus D. Ludovici Francorum regis, &c.” Paris, 1510, 4to. Some remarks on the court of Rome in this harangue occasioned its being omitted in the collection of his works, but Du Chesne printed it in the fifth volume of his collection of French historians. 2. “Christ. Longolii, civis Roman ae perduellionis rei defensiones duae,” Venice, 8vo. This is a vindication of himself against a charge preferred against him, when at Rome, that he had advanced sentiments dishonourable to the character of the Romans in the preceding oration. 3. “Ad Lutheranos jam damnatos Oratio,” Cologn, 1529, 8vo. It appears from his letters that he had been, requested both to write for and against Luther, that he was long in great perplexity on the subject, but that at length Leo X. prevailed with him to write the above. These last two pieces with his letters, &c. have been often reprinted, under the title of “Christ. Longolii Orationes, Epistolcc, et Vita, necnon Bembi et Sadoleti epistolse,” the first edition, at Paris, 1533, 8vo. There are many curious particulars of literary history and character scattered through this correspondence. The life prefixed is now known to have been written by Pole, who was his most intimate friend and admirer, and to whom he bequeathed his library.

, a skilful physician of the sixteenth century, was born in 1507, at Utrecht, and died in 1543, at Cologn, aged thirty-six. He was physician to Herman, archbishop of that city, and left the following works, “Lexicon Graeco-Latinum,” 1533, 8vo; “Remarks in Latin on Ovid’s Metamorphoses, Plautus, Cornelius Nepos, the Rhetoric of Herennius, and on Laurentius Valla,” in several volumes 8vo an edition in Greek and Latin of the “Life of Apollonius Tyaneus,” by Philostratus, 8vo, and a Latin translation of Plutarch’s seven “Gpuscula,” 8vo Notes on Cicero’s familiar Epistles, and a second edition of the Council of Nice, &c.

, son of Peter Dufour, seigneur de Longuerue, a Norman gentleman, king’s lieutenant of Charleville, in which city he was born, 1652, discovered such uncommon genius for learning t four years old, that Louis XIV. passing through Charleville, and hearing him mentioned, desired to see him. His tutor was the celebrated Richelet; and Peter d'Ablancourt, who was related to him, superintended his education and studies. He was taught both the oriental and European languages, and acquired an extensive knowledge of history, antiquities, the sacred writings, the holy fathers, &c. To an uncommon memory he joined very considerable critical talents. He held two abbeys, that of Sept- Fontaines in the diocese of Rheims, and of Jard in the diocese of Sens. He died November 22, 1733, at Paris, aged eighty-two. Hi works are, 1. A Dissertation in Latin, on Tatian, in the edition of that author, published at Oxford, 1700, 8vo 2. “La Description Historique de la France,” Paris, 1719, folio. This work his countrymen think unworthy of the abbe“de Longuerue, from the changes which have been made in it, and the hurry in which it was printed. The original maps, which have been altered, may be found in some copies. 3.” Annales Arsacidarum,“Strasburg, 1732. 4.” Dissertation on Transubstantiation," which passed under the name of his friend the minister Allix, because unfavourable to the catholic faith. He wrote also Remarks on the Life of Cardinal Wolsey, and left numerous works in Mss. on different subjects in several volumes, folio. There is a collection of his bon mots among the Ana.

, a learned French ecclesiastical historian, was born at Santerre in Picardy in 1680, and was educated at Amiens and Paris. In 1699 he entered into the society of the Jesuits at Paris, and devoted himself with great ardour to writing a “History of the Gallican Church.” Of this he published the first eight volumes, and had nearly completed the ninth and tenth, when he died of an apoplexy, January 14, 1735, aged fifty-four. Besides this history, which is his principal work, and has been continued by the fathers Fontenai, Brumoy, and Berthier, to J 8 vols. 4to, he left a treatise “On Schism,” 1718, 12mo; a “Dissertation on Miracles,” 4to, and some other works, which all display great genius, and are written with much spirit, and in pure language. The first eight volumes of the “History of the Gallican Church,” contain learned remarks on the religion of the ancient Gauls, en the ancient geography of Gaul, on the religion of the French, and on many other important subjects.

was an ancient Greek author, probably of the fifth century, who seems to have written after Heliodorus, and, in some places, to have imitated him. He is called a sophist; but we have no remains of his except four books of “Pastorals upon the Loves of Daphnis and Cloe.” Huet speaks advantageously of this work, and had proposed, when he was young, to have made a translation of it; but he also takes notice of several defects in it, and, doubtless, its obscenities made him lay aside his purpose of translating it. None of the ancient writers mention Longus. There is a good edition of the original by Petrus Moll, a professor of the Greek language at Franeker, 1660, in 4to, but Villoison’s, Gr. and Lat. Paris, 1778, '2 vols. 8va, is the best. It was translated into English by George Thorney, and printed at London in 1657. The last edition of the English version, of which there have been four, is inscribed to James Craggs, esq. secretary of state. The French, with whom this work has always been a favourite, have many translations of it. That by Amyot has passed through many editions; the most elegant of which is that of 1718, 12mo, with 29 plates, drawn by the regent, Philip duke of Orleans, and engraved by Benoft Audran; the 29th is not his engraving, and is seldom found in the edition of 1718, the reason of which, some say, was, that only 250 copies were taken, which the prince disposed of as presents; but Brunei thinks it is too common for so small an impression. Next to this edition, that of 1745, 8vo, is preferred, with the same plates retouched.

, an eminent Italian poet, was born at Home, Oct. 12, 1680. He was in his twenty-second year received into the society of the Jesuits, among whom he had been educated, but owing to bad health, was obliged to quit them, and after much consideration, and a conflict with his taste, which was decide.ily for polite literature, he studied and practised the law for some time, until iiis inclination for more favourite studies returning, he entered, in 1705, into the academy of the Arcadi, the chief object of which was the reformation of the bad taste which had infected Italian poetry. He is said to have excelled in melo-dramas, or pieces on religious subjects, adapted to being sung, written in the Latin language; and has been denominated the Michael Angelo of Italian poets, on account of the boldness and energy of his expressions. In 1728, on the death of Crescembini, he was chosen president of the academy, and besides founding five academical colonies in the neighbouring towns, instituted a private weekly meeting of the Arcadi, at which the plays of Plautus or Terence, in the original language, were performed by youths trained for the purpose But the want of a regular profession, and his constant attendance to these pursuits, often deranged his finances; and he appears not to have acquired permanent patronage until cardinal Borghese enrolled him among his noble domestics, and paid him liberally. In 1741, he took up his residence in the Borghese palace, where he died in June 1743. His Italian poems, which are much admired, have been printed at Milan, Venice, Florence, Naples, &c. and in many of the collections. His Latin “Sacred Dramas” were separately published at Rome; and his other Latin poetry, among those of the academicians of the Arcadi.

, commonly called Glareanus, from Claris, a town in Switzerland, where he was born in 1488, was educated at Cologne, Basil, and Paris, and in the course of his studies acquired the friendship of some eminent scholars, particularly Erasmus. He had a strong turn to music, and made it a great part ol his study. After having contributed to the advancement of letters, both by discourse and writing, he died in 1563, aged seventy- five. He composed the following works: 1. “Isagoge in Arithmeticam.” 2. “Descriptio de Situ Helvetia & vicinis Gentibus.” 3. “De quatuor Helvetiorum Fcedere Panegyricon.” 4. “Isagoge in Musicatn.” 5. “De Geographia Liber.” 6. “Judicium in Terentii Carmina.” 7. “In Horatium Annotationes.” 8. “Annotationes in Ovidii Metamorphoses.” 9. “Annotationes in Ciceronis Librum de Senectute.” 10. “Annotationes in Sallustii, quae adhuc extant, Historiarum Fragmenta.” 11. “Commentariusin Arithmeticam & Musicam Boethii.” 12. “Annotationes in Johannis Csesarii Dialecticam.” 13. “Annotationes in Ccesaris Cotnmentaria.” 14. “Annotationes in Titum Liviurn.” 15. “Annotationes & Cbronologia in totam Historiam Romanam.” 16. “Annotationes in Dionysiurn Halicarnasseum.” 17. “Elegiarum Libri duo.” 18. “De Arte Musica.” 19. “De Ponderibus ac Mensuris.” 20. “Annotationes in Valerium, Suetonium, & Lucanum.” 21. “Annotationes in Eutropium.” 22. “Epistola ad Johannem Hervagium.” 23. “Scholia in J\n Donati Methodum.” 24. “Brevis Isagoge de Katione Syllabarum & de Figuris quibus Poetae utuntur.” 25. “De Asse Libellus.”

, master of the works to the French kin;', was born at Lyons about the beginning of the sixteenth century. At fourteen, he went into Italy, to study the beauties of antiquity. There he became acquainted with Cervius, afterwards pope Marceilus II. who had a good taste for the polite arts, and, conceiving a great esteem for Lorme, communicated to him every thing that he knew. Enriched with the spoils of antiquity, he returned to Lyons in 1536, and banished thence the Gothic taste. At length, going to Paris, to work for the cardinal de Bellay, he was soon employed in the court of Henry II. He made the Horse-shoe, a fortification at Fontainbleau, built the stately chateau of Anet and Meudon; the palace of the Thuilleries, and repaired and ornamented several of the royal houses, as Villiers, Colerets, St. Germain then called the castle of the Muette, the Louvre, &c. These services were recompensed above his expectations. He was made almoner and counsellor to the king, and had the abbies of St. Eloy and St. Serge of Angers conferred upon him.

Ronsard, the poet, out of envy, published a satire, or satirical sonnet, against him, under the title of “LaTruelle crosse'e,” the Trowel crosier'd. De Lorme revenged himself, by causing the garden-door of the Thuilleries, of which he was governor, to be shut against the poet; and Ronsard, with a pencil, wrote upon the gate these three words: “Fort, reverent, habe.” De Lorme, who understood little Latin, complained of this inscription, as levelled at him, to queen Catharine de Medicis, who, inquiring into the matter, was told by Ronsard, that, by a harmless irony, he had made that inscription for the architect when read in French; but that it suited him still better in Latin, these being the first words abbreviated of a Latin epigram of Ausonius, which begins thus: “Fortunam reverenter habe.” Ronsard added that he only meant that De Lorme should reflect on his primitive grovelling fortune, and not to shut the gate against the Muses. De Lorme died in 1557; leaving several books of architecture, greatly esteemed. These are, 1. “Nouvelles Inventions pour bien bastir & a petit frais,” Paris, 1561, folio, fifty-seven leaves. 2. “Ten Books of Architecture,” 1568, folio.

, an eminent sculptor, was born at Paris in November 1666. From his infancy he made so rapid a progress in the art of designing, that, at eighteen, the celebrated Girardon intrusted him with the care of teaching his children, and of correcting the designs of his disciples. He committed to him also, in conjunction with Noulisson, the execution of the famous tomb of cardinal Richelieu in the Sorbonne, and of his own tomb at St. Landres, in Paris. On his return from Rome, he finished several pieces at Marseilles, which had been left imperfect by the death of M. Pu-get. He was received into the academy of sculpture, Oct. 1701, when he composed his Galatea for his chef d'ceuvre, a work universally esteemed. Lorrain afterwards made a Bacchus for the gardens at Versailles, a fawn for those at Marli, and several bronzes; among others, an Andromeda, &c. The academy elected him professor May 29, 1717; and he died their governor June 1, 1743, aged 77.

The pieces in the episcopal palace of Saverne, which are all of his composition, are much admired. He was a learned designer, with a great deal of genius, and succeeded in his heads, especially those of the young nymphs, with so much truth, and a delicacy so admirable, that his chisel seemed to be directed by Corregio or Parmegiano.

, a French poet, who flourished about the middle of the thirteenth century, was the author of the “Roman de la Rose,” a poem much in request in the middle ages, and known in this country by Chaucer’s translation. It was left unfinished by Lorris, and was completed in the next century by John de Meuu. The part by Lorris, though the shortest, is by much the most poetical, abounding in rich and elegant description, and in lively portraiture of allegorical personages. The early French editions of this poem are of great rarity and value, and are enumerated by Brunei, and other bibliographers. Of the author nothing is known.

, a learned French physician, was born at Crosny, near Paris, in 1725. In 1748, he was admitted doctor of the faculty of medicine at Paris, and became doctor-regent of the faculty. He was author of several works, some of which still maintain their value. His first publication was entitled “Essai sur l'Usage des Alimens, pour servir de Commentaire aux livres diete”­tiques d'Hippocrate,“Paris, 1753, 12mo; the second part of which appeared in 1757. His next publication was an edition of the Aphorisms of Hippocrates, Greek and Latin, in 1759. Afterwards he produced a treatise” De Melancholia et Morbis Melancholicis,“-ibid. 1765, in two volumes 8vo, and edited Dr. Astruc’s” Memoires pour servir a l'Histoire de la Faculte de Medecine dp Montpeliier,“ibid, 1767, 4to; and” Sanctorii de Medicina Statica,“with a commentary, 1770, in 12mo. His last work, which combined the merits of much erudition and accurate observation, with great clearness of arrangement and perspicuity of language, was” Tractatus de Morbis Cutanais," Paris, 1777, in 4to. Dr. Lorry also edited a Latin edition of the works of Mead, and a French one of Barker’s dissertation on the conformity of the doctrines of ancient and modern medicine. He died at the baths of Bourbonne, in 1783.