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

Upon the defeat of Brutus and Cassius by Octavius and Anthony at Philippi, which was owing chiefly to the military skill and bravery of the latter, Anthony obtained the sovereign dominion; and here he presents us with a most uncommon picture of human nature, when we consider how he was roused at once by Caesar’s death from the midst of pleasure and debauch, formed the true plan of his interest, and pursued it with a most surprising vigour and address, till, after many and almost insuperable difficulties, he accomplished at length what he all along aimed at. After the battle at Philippi, Anthony went into Asia, where he had the most splendid court that ever was seen. The kings and princes of Asia came to his levee, and acknowledged no other sovereign in the east but him. Queens and princesses, knowing him doubtless to be a man of gallantry, strove who should win his heart; and the famous Cleopatra of Egypt succeeded. The rest of Anthony’s history, his most luxurious and effeminate manner of living with this princess, and his ignominious death (for such it may be justly called), are all minutely and copiously reluted in the article of Cleopatra, to which we refer the reader. We shall only add a short account of Marcus Ju-' nius Antonius, his son by Fulvia.

This Antonius, after the death of his father, and the conquest of Egypt, was so favoured t by Octavius, now Augustus, that from one office to another he was raised to the consulship in the year of Rome 744. He married Marcella, daughter of Octavia, the sister of Augustus, by which he became next in his favour to Agrippa; but proving ungrateful to the emperor, for he was one of the first who debauched his daughter Julia, and being also suspected of a conspiracy against him, he killed himself, as is said, to prevent the infamy of being condemned. It is to him that Horace addresses the second ode of the fourth book; and the ancient scholiast upon this ode relates, that Antonius wrote a poem of twelve books in heroic verse, entitled “Diomedea.” He left one son very young, named Julius Antonius, in whom seems to have ended this ancient family; an illustrious one, says Tacitus, but unfortunate: “Multa claritudine generis, sed improspera.”

, or Antony of Lebrija or Lebrixa, was born in 1442, at Lebrixa, a town in Andalousia. At the age of fourteen he went to the university of Salamanca, and five years after studied at some of the most celebrated schools in Italy, and such was his application, that within ten years he had run through the whole circle of sciences. He was an able Hebrew, Greek, and Latin scholar, and on that account, on his return to Salamanca, was promoted to the classical chair. During the twenty years that he filled this station, he published various works on the learned languages, the belles lettres, mathematics, medicine, grammar, jurisprudence, and sacred criticism. He had the farther honour of suggesting to cardinal Ximenes, who had invited him to the newly-founded university of Alcala, the plan of his celebrated Polyglot, and assisted in the publication. He finished his labours by inquiries into the history of his country, and intended to have written the lives of the kings of Spain, being appointed historiographer to his majesty, but was too far advanced in life for the undertaking. He died at Alcala de Henarez, July 11, 1522. His eloge, proposed by the academy of Madrid, was published so lately as 1796, by D. I. B. Munoz. The list of his works in the “Bibl. Hispana nova,” is said to be erroneous and defective, yet we know not of a better. Among his works may be mentioned, 1. “Two decades of the history of Ferdinand and Isabella,” Granada, 1545, fol. 2. " Lexicon, Spanish and Latin, and Latin and Spanish, of which, according to D. Clement, there have been eighteen editions, the first and most rare, Alcala, 1532, fol. 3. Explanations on the Holy Scriptures, in the Critici Sacri; commentaries on many ancient authors, &c. His Latin poems were published at Vivamo, 1491.

, of Padua, or of Portugal, of the religious order of St. Francis, and the Thaumaturgus of his age, was the son of Martin Bulhan or Bouillan, and of Mary of Trevera, and born at Lisbon in the year 1195. He first joined the community of the canons of the cathedral of Lisbon, and then associated with the regular canons of St. Vincent in the suburbs of that city, where he lived a retired and austere life, and afterwards became one of the order of St. Francis. He left off his baptismal name of Ferdinand, and adopted that of Antony. Conceiving the design of going to Africa, he embarked for that continent; but his vessel being blown back to Messina, he found himself obliged to remain in Italy, where he studied theology, and preached with much reputation. He afterwards visited Montpellier, Thoulouse, and Padua, and made many converts by the earnestness of his preaching; and his discourses, we are told, were confirmed by miracles. Pope Gregory IX had so high an opinion of him that he named him “The Ark of the New Testament, and the secret Depository of sacred learning.” His long Stay at Padua procured him the surname by which he is distinguished. In this place he died, June 13, 1231, in the thirty-sixth year of his age, and was canonized in the following year by pope Gregory above mentioned. His body was placed in the superb church which bears his name. There are several sermons of this saint extant, and some other works. Father Jean of the Hague, a 4 religious of the same order, and professor of theology, printed a new edition of his works in 1641, to which he added those ascribed to St. Francis, and a life of Antony. These works are entitled, “Sermones dominicales adventus, quadragesimæ, ac reliqui omnes de tempore. Sermones de Sanctis. Interpretatio vel expositio mystica in sacram Scripturam. Concordantiæ morales sacrorum bibliorum.” This last is divided into five books.

, first geographer to the king of France, member of the academy of inscriptions and belles lettres, and of the society of antiquaries, London, and joint-geographer of the academy of sciences, was born at Paris on the 11th of July, 1697. His father’s name was Hubert Bourignon, and his mother’s Charlotte Vaugon.

M. d'Anville discovered a taste for geography from his earliest years, excited by meeting accidentally with a chart when about twelve years old, and throughout the course of his youthful studies, he paid less attention to the language or sentiment of a classic than to the maps of the countries treated of, which he endeavoured to delineate, and to trace the sites of battles, and the march of generals. He had so improved himself in this branch that, at the age of twenty-two, he published some charts which obtained the approbation of the abbe de Longuerre, whose opinion was then considered as highly honourable. In these charts, it has been said that he exhibited every thing that was known, and was ignorant in nothing but that of which it was impossible for him to have acquired a knowledge at the time he delineated them.

To the study of modern geography, M. d'Anville joined that of ancient geography and of the middle ages, which unites the two. He perused with care the works of geographers, philosophers, historians, orators, and even poets, solely with a view to the object of his researches; but in the study of ancient geography he had to encounter with many difficulties. Such was the state of science when he undertook the task, that he had no guide but a few very inaccurate astronomical observations, and no geometrical determination of positions and distances. He was likewise obliged to take an infinite deal of pains in ascertaining the kinds of measurement employed by the ancients, sometimes because the same measures went under different names, and sometimes, although bearing the same names, because they differed according to the country or age in which they were adopted. In a word, this study was so much in its infancy when M. d'Anville began his researches, that he had innumerable difficulties to surmount, of which they who have profited by his labours aud by the advanced state of knowledge, can have no idea.

In the pursuit of all his studies he had every advantage of nature and disposition, a strong memory, an indefatigable ardour, and a depth of judgment which enabled him to compare, select, and decide upon the most accurate principles. While thus employed, he was elected a member of the academy of belles lettres, whose volumes he enriched with many valuable papers. The accuracy of M. d'Anville’s maps will, perhaps, appear the more extraordinary when it is considered that he had never travelled, and knew very little either of geometry or astronomy. When the question of the oblate figure of the earth was debated among the astronomers, he endeavoured to resolve it from the geographical knowledge he had acquired, and published a work entitled “Mesure conjecturale de la terre sous l’equateur,” and his result was contrary to that which had been founded on astronomical observations.

In 1773, the academy of sciences appointed him joint-­geographer, and although he was now enfeebled by age, he wished to testify his respect for the honour, by presenting the society with some memoirs. In the first and most important of these, he corrected an egregious error which had appeared in every map, respecting the situation of Mesopotamia, and this he had been enabled to do by examining the astronomical observations of the Arabians.

M. d‘Anville had made an immense collection of maps, which he had an opportunity to increase by the reputation he enjoyed in foreign countries, and his correspondence with men of learning, navigators, and statesmen of liberal and enlightened minds; every one, indeed, who cultivated the study of geography, was desirous to obtain his opinion, and happy to add to his collection, as to a general fund for the benefit of mankind. This collection was purchased by the late king of France in reversion, and the last employment of M. d’Anville’s life was to arrange and methodize the various articles, that they might be consulted with ease as well as advantage: he had no sooner finished this labour than his faculties rapidly decayed, and he died of age and infirmity on the 28th of January 1782. His countrymen have spoken in high terms of his character and accomplishments. He appears to have been an ardent enthusiast in his favourite study, and to have relished no branches of science that had not some distant connection with it. In conversation he maintained the opinions he had formed with resoluteness, and did not bear tamely to be contradicted by those who, he knew, had not taken equal pains to attain knowledge: on other occasions he was mild and unassuming.

His constitution was delicate, and yet, until he was nearly sixty years of age, he studied at the rate of fifteen hours a day: his habits of temperance, and regularity, and the pleasing varieties of a study which was every day becoming easier, and every day becoming honourable, no doubt made such excessive application more safe than it might have proved under less prudent management, or less favourable circumstances. In 1730 he married Mad. Testard, by whom he left two daughters; one of them took the veil, and the other was married to M. de Hauteclair, treasurer of France. His wife died about a year before him, but such was his imbecility of mind at that time, that he was incapable of being made acquainted with his loss.

Besides his numerous maps, he published the following treatises, “Geographic ancienne abregée,” 1768, 3 vols. 12mo. “Traité des Mesures itineraires anciennes et modernes,” 1769, 8vo. “Dissertation sur l‘etendue de l’ancienne Jerusalem,” 1747, 8vo. “Memoir sur l'Egypt ancienne et moderne, avec une description de Golphe Arabique,” 1766, 4to. “Etats formés en Europe apres la chute de l'empire Romain en Occident,” 1771, 4to. “Notice de l'ancienne Gaul, tirée des monumens Remains,” 1761, 4to. “Proposition d'une mesure de la terre dont il resulte une diminution considerable vers sa circonference sur les paralleles,” 1735, 12mo. “Mesure conjecturale de la terre sur l‘equateur, en consequence de l’etendue de la mer du Sud,” 1736, 12mo. “Analyse geographique de l'Italie,” 1744, 4to. “Eclaircissement sur la carte du Canada,” 1755, 4to. “Memoire sur la carte des côtes de la Grèce,” 1751, 4to. “L'empire Turc considéré dans son etablissment et ses accroissemens,” 1772, 12mo. “L'empire de Russie, considéré dans son origine et ses accroissemens,” 1772, 12mo. “Memoires sur la Chine,” 1776, 8vo. “Memoires sur la mer Caspienne, sur le cour de l'Euphrate et du Tigre, sur la Mesopotamie et l'Irak,” 1774. Besides these, he was the author of two Memoirs in the academy of sciences, and of thirty-seven in the volumes of the royal academy of inscriptions and belles lettres, beginning with vol. XXVI. His “Compendium of Ancient Geography” was translated into English, and published in two volumes 8vo, in 1791, illustrated with maps, and with very useful prolegomena and notes by the translator.

, or Anvari, one of the most celebrated poets of Persia, was born in the twelfth century, and was incited to turn poet from the honours bestowed on that class by the sultan Sandjar. He presented a composition to that sultan, who admitted him to his court, and here Raschidi was his rival. These two poets were for some time of opposite parties; Anvari was in the camp of Sangiar when he attacked Alsitz, governor and afterwards sultan of the Kouarasmians, with whom Raschidi had shut himself up. Whilst the two sultans were assailing and repulsing each other, the two versifiers were skirmishing in their own method, reciprocally throwing at one another rhymes fastened to the end of an arrow. Our poet was at the same time an astrologer; but in his predictions he was particularly unfortunate, and his enemies took advantage of this to injure him with the sultan, and he was obliged to retire to the town of Balke, where he died in 1200. This Persian bard corrected the licentiousness that had been customary in the poetry of his country, but nothing of his remains except two small pieces, one of which is inserted in the Asiatic Miscellany, No. I. 1786, and translated by capt. Kirkpatrick; the other, translated into German by Chezy, was published in the secoud number of the Oriental Mine, a journal printed at Vienna, under the patronage and at the expense of count Rzewuski.

, a modem Latin poet, was born at Naples about the year 1472, and to oblige his father studied law; but, from an irresistible inclination, devoted himself to poetry, travelling frequently to different parts of Naples, and to Rome, where he formed an intimacy with several members of the academy, and, according to a very common practice then, assumed the classical name of Janus Anysius. He is said to have been an ecclesiastic, but we have no account of him in that profession. As a Latin poet he acquired great reputation, which, it is thought, he would have preserved in the opinion of posterity, had he been more select in what he published. Ctelio Calcagnini, however, bestows the highest praise on him, as inimitable, or rarely equalled. He died about the year 1540. His works are entitled, 1. “Jani Anysii Pomata et Satyrae, ad Pompeium Columnam cardinalem,” Naples, 1531, 4to; but in this title we ought to read “Sententias” instead of “Satyrae,” which no where appear. His “Sententiae,” in iambic verse, were reprinted in “Recueil des divers auteurs sur l'education des enfans,” Basil, 1541, and his Eclogues in “Collection des auteurs bucoliques,” ibid. 1546, 8vo. 2. “Satyrae ad Pompeiurn Columnam cardinalem,” Naples, 1532, 4to. 3. “Protogenos,” a tragedy, Naples, 1536, 4to. The hero is Adam, but the piece is prolix, and in a bad style: the oppositipn it met with occasioned his next publications. 4. “Commentariolus in tragcediam: Apologia: Epistolae: Correctiones,” pieces printed without date. 5. “Epistolae de religione, et epigrammata,” Naples, 1538, 4to. Anysius had a brother Cosmo, a physician by profession, and also a Latin poet. His works published at Naples, 1537, 4to, consist of different pieces of poetry, satires, epigrams from the Greek, and a commentary on the satires of his brother Janus.

, a man of singular character and learning of the seventeenth century, was born in Transylvania, in the village of Apatza, and was sent at the expense of the government of his country to Utrecht, where he studied the Oriental languages, theology, and philosophy, with such distinguished success as to be offered the rank of professor. But this he refused out of regard to his country, to which he returned in 1653. He was then appointed to teach geography, natural philosophy, and astronomy, in the college of Weissenburgh, but having declared in favour of the philosophy of Descartes, and many of the opinions of the reformed church, his enemies were so inveterate as to sentence him to be thrown from the top of a high tower. By powerful intercession, however, they were induced to change his sentence to banishment. He now went to Clausenburgh, and taught for some time, but a fresh persecution arose, in which he would probably have been sacrificed, had he not died a natural death in 1659. He wrote “Dissertatio continens introductionem ad philosophiam sacram,” Utrecht, 1650. 2. “Magyar Encyclopedia!, &c.” an Encyclopedia in the Hungarian language, Utrecht, 1653. 3. “A system of Logic,” in the same, Weissenburgh, 1636. 4. “Oratio tie studio sapientiae,” Utrecht, 1655. 5. “Dissertatio de politia ecclesiastica,” Clausenburgh, 1658.

, a lawyer, the contemporary of Luther, was one of the professors of the university of Wittemberg, and assisted in the reformation. He was born at Nuremberg, in 1486, of which place his father was a citizen. Having married a nun while canon of Wurzburgh, he was arrested by orders of the bishop, but protected by an imperial regiment in the garrison of^ Nuremberg. He was, however, obliged to resign all his preferments, in lieu of which he was afterwards appointed advocate of the republic of Nuremberg, and counsellor to the elector of Brandenburgh. He died at Nuremberg in 1536. He published a defence of his marriage, addressed to the prince bishop of Wurzburgh, entitled l.“DefensioJo. Apelli pro suo conjugio,” with a preface by Luther, Wittemberg, 1523, 4to. 2. “Methodica dialectices ratio, adjurisprudentiam accommodata,” Norimb. 1535, 4to. This is a treatise on the Roman law, or rather a system of logic applicable to that study, and divested of the rage for allegory which had long prevailed in the schools. Reusner reprinted it in his “Cynosura.” 3. “Brachylogus juris civilisj sive corpus legum,” an abridgment of the civil law, which was long thought to be a production of the sixth century, and was even attributed to the emperor Justinian.

, one of the most celebrated painters of antiquity, was born in the isle of Cos, according to Pliny, but Lucian and Strabo assign Ephesus as the place of his birth, and Suidas, Colophon. He flourished in the fourth century B. C. and in the time of Alexander the Great. He was in high favour with this prince, who made a law that no other person should draw his picture but Apelles: he accordingly drew him, holding a thunderbolt in his hand, and the piece was finished with so much skill and dexterity, that it used to be said there were two Alexanders; one invincible, the son of Philip, the other inimitable, the production of Apelles. Alexander gave him likewise another remarkable proof of his regard: for when he employed Apelles to draw Campaspe, one of his mistresses, having found that he had conceived an affection for her, he resigned her to him; and it was from her that Apelles is said to have drawn his Venus Anadyomene. This prince went often to see Apelles when at work; and one day, as he was overlooking him, he is said to have talked so absurdly about painting, that Apelles desired him to hold his tongue; telling him that the very boys who mixed the colours laughed at him. Freinshemius, however, thinks it incredible that Apelles would make use of such an expression to Alexander; or that the latter, who had so good an education, and so fine a genius, would talk so impertinently of painting: nor, perhaps, would Apelles have expressed himself to this prince in such a manner upon any other occasion. Alexander, as we are told, having seen his picture drawn by Apelles, did not commend it so much as it deserved: a little after, a horse happened to be brought, which neighed at sight of the horse painted in the same picture: upon which Apelles is said to have addressed Alexander, “Sir, it is plain this horse understands painting better than your majesty.” Bayle, with some reason, doubts the truth of these anecdotes, and thinks, if true, he must have been a capricious buffoon, which is not consistent with the character usually given of him.

One of Apelles’s chief excellences was the making his pictures so exactly resemble the persons represented, that the physiognomists were able to form a judgment as readily from his portraits, as if they had seen the originals. His readiness and dexterity at taking a likeness was of singular service in extricating him from a difficulty in which he was involved at the court of Egypt. He had not the good fortune to be in favour with Ptolemy, but a storm forced him to take shelter at Alexandria, during the reign of this prince; where a mischievous fellow went to him, and in the king’s name invited him to dinner. Apelles went; and seeing the king in a violent passion, told him, by way of excuse, that he should not have come to Ins table but by his order. He was commanded to shew the man who had invited him; which was impossible, the person who had put the trick upon him not being present; Apelles, however, drew a sketch of his image upon the wall with a coal, the first lines of which discovered him immediately to Ptolemy.

Apelles left many excellent pictures, which are men^ tioned with great honour by the ancients; but his Venus Anadyomene is reckoned his master-piece. His Antigonus has also been much celebrated: this was drawn with a side-face, to hide the deformity of Antigonus, who had lost an eye. His picture of Calumny has also been much noticed, and is thus explained by Lucian: Antiphilus the painter, being piqued at the favour shown to Apelles at the court of Ptolemy, accused him of being an accomplice in the conspiracy of Theodotus, governor of Phoenicia: he affirmed that he had seen Apelles at dinner with Theodotus, and whispering to him all the time of his entertainment. Ptolemy was also informed by the same person, that by the advice of Apelles, the city of Tyre had revolted, and that of Pelnsium was taken. Although it was certain that Apelles had never been at Tyre, and that he was not acquainted with Theodotus, Ptolemy was so enraged, that, without examining into the affair, he determined to put to death the person accused; and if one of the conspirators had not convinced him that this was a mere calumny of Antiphilus, Apelles must undoubtedly have suffered death upon this accusation. But as soon as Ptolemy knew the truth of this affair, he condemned Antiphilus to be a slave to Apelles, and gave the latter a hundred talents. Mr. Bayle remarks upon this account of Lucian, that he has fallen into a great anachronism; for the conspiracy of Theoclotus was in the reign of Ptolemy Philopater, which did not begin till an hundred years after the death of Alexander the Great; and for what he asserts, he quotes the authority of Polybius (lib. iv. and v.) “We must therefore,” says he, “suppose one or other of these two things; either that Lucian speaks of an Apelles, different from him who was in such reputation at Alexandria; or that he has confounded some plot which was contrived under Ptolemy Philadelphus, with the conspiracy of Theo dotus.”

To this account of Apelles, taken principally from Bayle, it may be necessary to add the opinion of a very superior critic, who observes, that “The name of Apelles in Pliny is the synonime of unrivalled and unattainable excellence, but the enumeration of his works points out the modiiication which we ought to apply to that superiority: it neither comprises exclusive sublimity of invention, the most acute discrimination of character, the widest sphere of comprehension, the most judicious and best balanced composition, nor the deepest pathos of expression: his great prerogative consisted more in the unison than in the extent of his powers: he knew better what he could do, what ought to be done, at what point he could arrive, and what lay beyond his reach, than any other artist. Grace of conception and refinement of taste were his elements, and went hand in hand with grace of execution and taste in finish, powerful and seldom possessed singly, irresistible when united: that he built both on the firm basis of the former system, not on its subversion, his well-known contest of lines with Protogenes, not a legendary tale, but a well-attested fact, irrefragably proves; what those lines were, drawn with nearly miraculous subtlety in different colours, one upon the other, or rather within each other, it would be equally unavailing and useless to inquire; but the corollaries we may deduce from the contest, are obviously these: that the schools of Greece recognized all one elemental principle; that acuteness and fidelity of eye and obedience of hand form precision, precision proportion, proportion beauty: that it is the `little more or less’ imperceptible to vulgar eyes, which constitutes grace, and establishes the superiority of one artist over another; that the knowledge of the degrees of things, or taste, presupposes a perfect knowledge of the things themselves: that colour, grace, and taste, are ornaments, not substitutes of form, expression, and character, and when they usurp that title, degenerate into splendid faults. Such were the principles on which Apelles formed his Venus, or rather the personification of the birthday of love, the wonder of art, the despair of artists; whose outline baffled every attempt at emendation, whilst imitation shrunk from the purity, the force, the brilliancy, the evanescent gradations of her tints.”

, an heretic of the second century, was a native of Syria; whence coming to Rome, he was corrupted in his doctrine by a woman, who was called Philumena, and pretended to prophetic illuminations. He became a rigid disciple of Marcus, but, being excommunicated for his incontinence, he fled to Alexandria, where he broached a new heresy, which chiefly diffused itself through Egypt and Asia. Tertullian speaks thus: “The Holy Ghost foresaw an angel of seduction in a certain virgin named Philumena, transforming itself into an angel of light, by whose delusion Apelles should be taught a new heresy.” By the oracular responses of this demoniac virgin, he learned to deny the veracity of the prophets, the resurrection of the body, to reject the law of Moses, and in many writings to blaspheme the divine oracle. Deceived by her diabolical possession, he wrote the revelations which he learned from her. The book was entitled “The Prophecies and Revelations of Philumena,” but no part of his works is extant, and indeed much of his history is doubtful. Apelles lived to be very old, and in his latter days appeared very grave and rigid. Du Fresnoy places this sect A.D. 175; Echard, A.D. 180; Danaeus, 181. They were called Apellites, Apelleians, or Apellicians.

, one of the finest orators of his time, was a Gaul by birth, and flourished in the first century. His inclination leading him to travelling, he extended his journey as far as Britain, but afterwards returned to Rome, where he fixed his residence, attended the bar, and acquired great reputation for wit and eloquence. Although considered at Rome as a foreigner, this circumstance did not prevent his rising to the highest offices, as he became senator, questor, tribune, and prsetor; but none of these promotions had charms so attractive to him as his original profession. He is most celebrated for his “Dialogue on the corruption of eloquence,” the object of which is to prefer the modern to the ancient eloquence. This dialogue is supposed to have been written in the 16th year of Vespasian, or the year 74 of our aera, and his death has been fixed at the year 83. The dialogue, however, has been attributed to Quintilian and to Tacitus, and is usually printed in their works, but modern critics are of opinion it was not written by either, and D. Rivet, from whom this article is taken, attributes it, in his literary history of France, to Aper, and advances such proofs as appear to have great weight. An excellent dissertation on it may be seem in Murphy’s translation of Tacitus, vol. IV. p. 445.

, of Antioch, a celebrated rhetorician and sophist, who lived in the third century, wrote in Greek a treatise on rhetoric which has descended to us, and some other works. His rhetoric has been translated into Latin. The best edition was printed by the Elzivirs at Amsterdam, 1645, 12mo, under the title “Aphthonii Progymnasmata, partim a Rodolpho Agricola, partim a Joanne-Maria Catanaeo latinitate donata, cum scholiis R. Lorichii.”

. There were three ancient Romans of this name, all very illustrious; not for genius, for virtue, for great or good qualities, but for gluttony: or, if we may soften the term in complaisance to the growing taste of the times we write in, for the art of refining in the science of eating. The first lived under Sylla, the second under Augustus and Tiberius, and the third under Trajan. The second however is the most illustrious personage of the three, and is doubtless the same of whom Seneca, Pliny, Juvenal, Martial, &c. so much speak. Athenaeus places him under Tiberius, and tells us, that he spent immense sums in gratifying his appetite, and invented divers sorts of cakes, which bore his name. We learn from, Seneca, that he lived in his time, and kept as it were a school of gluttony at Rome; that he spent two millions and an half in entertainments; that, finding himself very much in debt, he was forced at length to look into the state of his affairs; and that, seeing he had but 250,000 crowns remaining, he poisoned himself from an apprehension of being starved with such a sum. Dion relates the same story. Pliny mentions very frequently the ragouts he invented, and calls him the completest glutton that ever appeared in the world: “nepotutn omnium altissimus gurges.” The third Apicius lived under Trajan: he had an admirable secret to preserve oysters, which he shewed by sending Trajan some as far as Parthia, very fresh when they arrived.

The name of Apicius was applied long after to several sorts of meat: it made also a sect among the cooks. There is extant a treatise, “De re culinaria,” under the name of Caelius Apicius, which is judged by the critics to be very ancient, though they do not suppose it to be written by any of the above three. A fair edition of it was given by Martin Lister, with the title of “De obsoniis et condimentis, sive de arte coquinaria,” London, 1705, 8vo, and reprinted at Amsterdam in 1709, 12mo. Bernhold published a new edition at Lubeck, in 1791, 8vo. It was humourously ridiculed by Dr. King in his “Art of Cookery.”

, called in German Brenkwitz, a celebrated astronomer and mathematician, was born at Leisnig or Leipsic in Misnia, 1495, and made professor of mathematics at Ingolstadt in 1524, where he died in 1552, aged fifty-seven. He wrote treatises upon many of the mathematical sciences, and greatly improved them, especially astronomy and astrology, which in that age were much the same thing: also geometry, geography, arithmetic. He particularly enriched astronomy with many instruments, and observations of eclipses, comets, &c. His principal work was the “Astronomicum Caesareum,” published in folio at Ingolstadt in 1540, and which contains a number of interesting observations, with the descriptions and divisions of instruments. In this work he predicts eclipses, and constructs the figures of them in piano. In the second part of the work, or the “Meteoroscopium Planum,” he gives the description of the most accurate astronomical quadrant, and its uses. To it are added observations of five different comets, viz. in the years 1531, 1532, 1533, 1538, and 1539: where he first shows that the tails of a comet are always projected in a direction from the sun.

Apian also wrote a treatise, entitled “Cosmographia,” of which there have been many editions, from 1529, when Frisius published it in 4to, to 1575. In 1533 he made, at Norimberg, a curious instrument, which from its figure he called Folium Poputi, which, by the sun’s rays, shewed the hour in all parts of the earth, and even the unequal hours of the Jews. In 1534 he published his “Inscriptiones sacro-sanctae Vetustatis variae,” Ingost. fol. and in the same year his “Instrumentum Sinuum, sive Prinii Mobilis,” fol. with 100 problems; and was the author of many other works; among which may be mentioned the Ephemerides from the year 1534 for several years, and books upon Shadows, Arithmetical Centilogues: books upon Arith metic, with the rule of Coss (Algebra) demonstrated; upon Guaging; Almanacks, with Astrological directions; a book vipon Conjunctions; Ptolemy with very correct figures, drawn in a quadrangular form; Ptolemy’s works in Greek; books of Eclipses; the works of Azoph, a very ancient astrologer; the works of Gebre; the perspective of Vitello, of Critical Days, and of the Rainbow; a new Astronomical and Geometrical Radius, with various uses of sines and chords; Universal Astrolabe of Numbers; maps of the world, and of particular countries, &c.

Apian left a son, Philip, who many years afterwards taught mathematics at Ingolstadt, and at Tubing. Tycho has preserved his letter to the landgrave of Hesse, in which he gives an opinion on the new star in Cassiopeia, of the year 1572. He died at Tubing in 1589. One of the comets observed by the elder Apian, viz. that of 1532, had its elements nearly the same as of one observed 128 years and a quarter after, viz. in 1661, by Hevelius and other astronomers: from hence Dr. Halley judged that they were the same comet, and that therefore it might be expected to appear again in the beginning of 1789. But it was not found that it returned at this period, although the astronomers then looked anxiously for it: and it is doubtful whether the disappointment might be owing to its passing unobserved, or 'to any errors in the observations of Apian, or to its period being disturbed and greatly altered by the actions of the superior planets.

, a famous grammarian, born at Oasis in Egypt, was a professor at Rome in Tiberius’ s reign. He was undeniably a man of learning, had made the most diligent inquiries into the abstrusest subjects of antiquity, and was master of all those points which give to erudition the character of accuracy and variety. But he appears to have often been an arrogant boaster, and most importantly busied in difficult and insignificant inquiries. Bayle quotes Julius Africanus, as calling him “the most minutely curious of all grammarians;” and he might have applied tohim, what Strabo has to a pedant, “who vainly trifles’ about the reading of a passage,” though the sense was exactly the same, as-far as they were concerned with it, whichever way it was read. An idea may be formed of this writer from his imagining that he had performed something extraordinary, when he discovered that the two first letters of the Iliad, taken numerically, made up 48; and that Homer chose to begin his Iliad with a word, the two first letters of which would shew, that his two poems would contain 48 books.

Apion used to boast, with the greatest confidence, that he gave immortality to those to whom he dedicated his works, but none of these works remain; and his name and person had long ago been buried in oblivion, if other writers had not made mention of them. One of his chief works was “The Antiquities of Egypt,” in which he takes occasion to abuse the Jews; and not content with this, he composed a work expressly against them. He had before shewn his malice against this people: for, being at the head of an embasssy, which the Alexandrians had sent to Caligula, to complain of the Jews in their city, he accused them of several crimes; and insisted principally upon a point, the most likely to provoke the emperor, which was, that, while all the other people of the empire dedicated temples and altars to him, the Jews refused. With regard to his writings against them, Josephus thought himself obliged to confute the calumnies contained in them. He did not however write, on purpose to confute Apion, but several critics having attacked his Jewish Antiquities, he defends himself against them, and against Apion among the rest. Apion was not living when this confutation was published, for it relates the manner of his death, which was singular enough, at least in regard to Apion, who, having greatly ridiculed Jewish ceremonies, and circumcision in particular, was seized at length with a disease, which required an operation of that nature; and which, though submitted to, could not prevent him from dying under the most agonizing tortures. He boasted, that he had roused the soul of Homer from the dead, to inquire concerning his country and family; and we learn from Seneca, that he imposed very much upon Greece, since he was received in every city as a second Homer: which shews, as Bayle observes, that “a man, with some learning, and a good share of impudence and vanity, may easily deceive the mass of the people.”

, an eminent grammarian, was born (as is said) at Carthage, and lived under the Antonines. Helvius Pertinax, who had been his scholar, was his successor in the profession of grammar, and at length became emperor. He is the supposed author of the verses prefixed to the comedies of Terence, and containing the argument of them. The lines by him written upon the order Virgil gave to burn his Æeid:

make us regret the loss of his other verses. Aulus Gellius, who studied under him, gives the highest idea of his learning: and adds, that he had nothing, of that pedantic arrogance, nothing of that magisterial air, which but too often makes learning so very disagreeable, and raises emotions of contempt and anger towards men, even when aiming at our instruction.

, bishop of Hierapolis in Phrygia, about the year 177, presented to Marcus Aurelius an apology for the Christians, which was praised for its eloquence and truth. He wrote other works against the heretics of his time, and especially the Montanists, but these are all lost. Eusebius mentions Five books against the Gentiles; two books of Truth; and two against the Jews. As he had spoken in his Apology of the victory of Marcus Antoninus, which happened in the year 174, and of the thundering legion, Lardner places him at the year 176 or 177, though possibly he was then in the decline of life. There are two fragments ascribed to him in the preface to the Paschal, or, as it is often called, The Alexandrian Chronicle, but these are doubtful.

, the elder, a grammarian and divine, was a native of Alexandria, and flourished about the middie of the fourth century. When, under the reign of Julian, the Christians were prohibited the use of the Greek and Roman classics in their schools, he drew up a grammar in a Christian form, and translated the books of Moses, and the whole history of the Hebrews down to the time of Saul, in Greek heroic verse, divided, in imitation of Homer, into twenty-four books. He translated other parts of the Old Testament into verse, which Sozomen has praised, but of which it is now impossible to form a judgment. He was the father of the Apollinarius in the next article.

, the younger, is mentioned by Jerom, in his Catalogue of Ecclesiastical writers, as bishop of Laodicea in Syria. Jerom adds that he employed his younger days chiefly in grammatical studies, and afterwards published innumerable volumes upon the holy scriptures, and died in the time of the emperor Theodosius; he mentions his thirty books against Porphyry, as being then extant, and esteemed the most valuable of his works. Apollinarius is placed by Cave as flourishing about the year 370, but Tillemont thinks he was bishop of Luodicea in the year 362, at the latest. Lardner thinks it certain tnat he flourished in the time of the emperor Julian, and afterwards; and it seems probable that he died about the year 382. He %vrote commentaries upon almost all the books of holy scripture, none of which have descended to our time except a “Paraphrase on the Psalms,” which has been often reprinted in Greek and Latin, and of which an account may be seen in Fabricius. In his early days, he wrote and preached the orthodox faith, but afterwards swerved so far from it, as to be deemed a heretic, and thus became the founder of a sect called the Apollinarians. This sect denied the proper humanity of Christ, and maintained that the body which he assumed was endowed with a sensitive and not a rational soul; but that the divine nature supplied the place of the intellectual principle in man. Their doctrine was first condemned by a council at Alexandria in the year 362, and afterwards in a more formal manner by a council at Rome in the year 375, and by another council in the year 378, which deposed Apollinarius from his bishopric. He is said to have held the doctrine of the Millenium, or the personal reigh of Christ on earth for a thousand years. The reader may find a very elaborate account of him and of his writings in Dr. Lardner’s works, vol. IV. p. 380—397.

, a celebrated Athenian painter, flourished about the year 408 before the Christian aera. He applied the essential principles of his predecessor Polygnotus to the delineation of the species, by investigating the leading forms that discriminate the various classes of human qualities and passions. The acuteness of his taste led him to discover that as all men were connected by one general form, so they were separated each by some predominant power, which fixed character, and bound them to a class: that in proportion as this specific power partook of individual peculiarities, the farther it was removed from a share in that harmonious system which constitutes nature, and consists in a due balance of all its parts: thence he drew his line of imitation, and personified the central form of the class, to which his object belonged; and to which the rest of its qualities administered without being absorbed: agility was not suffered to destroy firmness, solidity, or weight; nor strength and weight agility: elegance did not degenerate to effeminacy, or grandeur swell to hugeness. Such were his principles of style; his expression extended them to the mind, if we may judge from the two subjects mentioned by Pliny, in which he seems to have personified the characters of devotion and impiety: the former, in the adoring figure of a priest, perhaps of Chryses, expanding his gratitude at the shrine of the God whose arrows avenged his wrongs and restored his daughter: and the latter, in the figure of Ajax wrecked, and from the sea-swept rock hurling defiance unto the murky sky. As neither of these subjects can present themselves to a painter’s mind without a contrast of the most awful and the most terrific tones of colour, magic of light and shade, and unlimited command over the tools of art, we may with Pliny and with Plutarch consider Apollodorus as the first assertor of the pencil’s honours, as the first colourist of his age, and the man who opened the gates of art which Zeuxis entered.

, a celebrated grammarian of Athens, flourished in the 169th Olympiad, or about 104 years before the Christian aera, under the reign of Plotemy Euergetes, king of Egypt. He was the son of Asclepiades, and the disciple of Aristarchus the grammarian, and of the philosopher Panaetius. He composed a very voluminous work on the origin of the gods, of which Harpocration has quoted the sixth book, Macrobius the fourteenth, and Hermolaus the seventeenth. Besides this work he wrote a “Chronicle,” a “Treatise on legislators,” another “on the philosophical sects,” and others which we find mentioned in the writings of the ancients. There is, however, only now extant, an abridgement of his book on the origin of the gods, Rome, 1555, and Antwerp, 1565, of which M. le Fevre of Saumur (Tanaquil Faber), published a Latin ' translation, under the title of “Apollodori Atheniensis bibliothecse, sive de Diis, libri tres,” Imperfect as this abridgement is, it is very useful in illustrating fabulous history. It commences with Inachus, and comes down to Theseus, prince of Athens, consequently comprising the space of 622 years, from A. M. 2177 to A. M. 2799. But we owe a very superior edition to the labours of that eminent classical scholar and critic, Heyne, who published in 1782, “Apollodori Atheniensis Bibliothecae Libri tres. Ad codd. Mss. fidem recensiti,” Gottingen, 8vo, and the following year, “Ad Apollodori Atheniensis Bibliothecam Notae, cum commentatione de Apollodoro argumento et consilio operis et cum Apollodori fragmentis,” ibid. 2 vols. 8vo. Four years before the first of these publications, Mr. Heyne gave a course of lectures on Apollodorus, which became very popular and interesting to young scholars. At the commencement of this undertaking, he found that the editions of Apollodorus were very scarce, and Gale’s, although the best, yet very inaccurate. He determined therefore to publish one himself, in executing which he was assisted by three manuscripts, one formerly belonging to Dorville, a second prepared for the press by Gerard James Vanswinden, and a third in the king’s library at Paris. None of his works do Heyne more credit, and his notes are highly valuable and entertaining to students of mythology.

, a famous architect under Trajan and Adrian, was born at Damascus; and had the direction of that most magnificent bridge, which the former ordered to be built over the Danube, in the year 104, Adrian, who always valued himself highly upon his knowledge of arts and sciences, and hated every one of whose eminence in his profession he had reason to be jealous, conceived a very early disaffection to this artist, upon the following occasion: As Trajan was one day discoursing with Apollodorus upon the buildings he had raised at Rome, Adrian gave his judgment, but shewed himself ignorant: on which the artist, turning bluntly upon him, bid him “go paint citruls, for that he knew nothing of the subject they were talking of:” now Adrian was at that time engaged in. painting citruls (a yellow kind of cucumber), and even boasted of it. This was the first step towards the ruin of Apollodorus; which he was so far from attempting to retrieve, that he even added a new offence, and that too after Adrian was advanced to the empire. To shew Apollodorus that he had no absolute occasion for him, Adrian sent him the plan of a temple of Venus; and, though he asked his opinion, yet he did not mean to be directed by it, for the temple was actually built. Apollodorus wrote his opinion very freely, and found such essential faults with it, as the emperor could neither deny or remedy. He shewed, that it was neither high nor large enough; that the statues in it were disproportioned to its bulk; “for,” said he, “if the goddesses should have a mind to rise and go out, they could not do it.” This irritated Adrian, and prompted him to get rid of Apollodorus. He banished him at first, and at last had him put to death; without stating the true cause, of which he would have been ashamed, but under the pretext of several crimes, of which he procured him to be accused and convicted.

, a Greek writer, born in Alexandria, under the reign of Ptolemy Euergetes king of Egypt, was a scholar of Callimachus, whom he is accused of having treated with ingratitude; by which he drew upon himself the indignation of this poet, who gave him the name of Ibis, from a bird of Egypt, which used to purge itself with its bill. Apollonius wrote a poem upon the expedition of the Golden Fleece; the work is styled “Argonautica,” and consists of four books, Quintilian, in his “Institutiones Oratoriic,” says that this performance is written “aequali quadam mediocritate;” that the author observed an exact medium between the sublime and low style in writing. Longinns says also that Apollonius never sinks in his poem, but has kept it up in an uniform and equal manner: yet that be falls infinitely short of Homer, notwithstanding the faults of the latter; because the sublime, though subject to irregularities, is always preferable to every other kind of writing. Gyraldus, speaking of this poem, commends it as a work of great variety and labour: the passion of Medea is so finely described, that Virgil himself is supposed to have copied it almost entirely, and to have interwoven it with the story of Dido.

Apollonius, not meeting at first with that encouragement which he expected at Alexandria, removed to Rhodes, where he set up a school for rhetoric, and gave lectures for a considerable time; thence acquiring the name of Rhodius. Here it was that he corrected and put the finishing hand to his Argonautics, which being publicly recited, met with universal applause, and the author was complimented with the freedom of the city. He is said to have written a book “Concerning Archilochus,” a treatise “Of the origin of Alexandria,” “Cnidos,” and other works. He published his poem of the Argonautics at Alexandria, upon his return thither, when sent for by Ptolemy Euergetes, to succeed Eratosthenes as keeper of the" public library. It is supposed that he died in this office, and that he was buried in the same tomb with his master Callimachus. The ancient Scholia upon his Argonautics are still extant: they are thought to be written by Tarrhscus, Theon, and others.

Of late years his reputation has rather increased in this country. Mr. Hayley has bestowed great praise on him. “His poems,” says this excellent critic, “abound in animated description, and in passages of the most tender and pathetic beauty. How finely painted is the first setting forth of the Argo! and how beautifully is the wife of Chiron introduced, holding up the little Achilles in her arms, and shewing him to his father Peleus as he sailed along the shore! But the chief excellence in our poet, is the spirit and delicacy with which he has delineated the passion of love in his Medea. That Virgil thought very highly of his merit in this particular, is sufficiently evident from the minute exactness with which he has copied many tender touches of the Grecian poet.” The best editions of Apollonius are those printed at Oxford in 4to, by Dr. John Shaw, fellow of Magdalen college, 1777, and by the same in. 8vo, 1779, that of Brunck, Argeritora, 1780, 4to and 8vo; that of Flangini; Rome, 4to, 1794, and of Beck, Leipsic, 1797, 2 vols. 8vo. The princeps editio is a quarto, dated Florent. 1496, a copy of which sold at the Pinelli sale for seventeen guineas. Several English poets have contended for the honour of transfusing the heauties of Apollonius into our language. Dr. Broome published many years ago, the Loves of Jason and Medea, and the story of Talus. Mr. West also published some detached pieces. In 1771, Mr. Ekins translated the third Book of the Argonautics, and a part of the fourth, 4to, with very valuable preliminary matter. In 1780, two translations of the Argonautics appeared, the one, a posthumous work of Fawkes, the other by Edward Burnaby Green; and in 1803, another translation was published in 3 vols. 12mo, by Mr. Preston.

, of Perga, a city in Pamphilia, was a celebrated geometrician who flourished in the reign of Ptolemy Euergetes, about 240 years before Christ; being about 60 years after Euclid, and 30 years later than Archimedes. He studied a long time in Alexandria under the disciples of Euclid; and afterwards he composed several curious and ingenious geometrical works, of which only his books of Conic Sections are now extant, and even these not perfect. For it appears from the author’s dedicatory epistle to Eudemus, a geometrician in Pergamus, that this work consisted of eight books; only seven of which however have come down to us.

From the collections of Pappus, and the commentaries of Eutocius, it appears that Apollonius was the author of various pieces in geometry, on account of which he acquired the title of the Great Geometrician. His Conies was the principal of them. Some have thought that Apollonius appropriated the writings and discoveries of Archimedes; Heraclins, who wrote the life of Archimedes, affirms it; though Eutocius endeavours to refute him. Although it should be allowed a groundless supposition, that Archimedes was the first who wrote upon Conies, notwithstanding his treatise on Conies was greatly esteemed; yet it is highly probable that Apollonius would avail himself of the writings of that author, as well as others who had gone before him; and, upon the whole, he is allowed the honour of explaining a difficult subject better than had been done before; having made several improvements both in Archimedes’s problems, and in Euclid. His work upon Conies was doubtless the most perfect of the kind among the ancients, and in some respects among the moderns also. Before Apollonius, it had been customary, as we are informed by Eutocius, for the writers on Conies to require three different sorts of cones to cut the three different sections from, viz. the parabola from a right angled cone, the ellipse from an acute, and the hyperbola from an obtuse cone; because they always supposed the sections made by a plane cutting the cones to be perpendicular to the side of them: but Apollonius cut his sections all from any one cone, by only varying the inclination or position of the cutting plane; an improvement that has been followed by all other authors since his time. But that Aiv chimedes was acquainted with the same manner of cutting any cone, is sufficiently proved, against Eutocius, Pappus, and others, by Guido Ubaldus, in the beginning of his commentary on the second book of Archimedes’s Equiponderants, published at Pisa in 1588.

The first four books of Apollonius’s Conies only have come down to us in their original Greek language; but the next three, the fifth, sixth, and seventh, in an Arabic version; and the eighth not at all. These have been commented upon, translated, and published by various authors. Pappus, in his Mathematical Collections, has left some account of his various works, with notes and lemmas upon, them, and particularly on the Conies. And Eutocius wrote a regular elaborate commentary on the propositions of several of the books, of the Conies.

The first four books were badly translated by Joan. Baptista Memmius. But a better translation of these in Latin was made by Commandine, and published at Bononia in 1566. Vossius mentions an edition of the Conies in 1650; the fifth, sixth, and seventh books being recovered by Golius. Claude Richard, professor of mathematics in the imperial college of his order at Madrid, in the year 1632, explained, in his public lectures, the first four books of Apollonius, which were printed at Antwerp in 1655, in folio. And the grand duke Ferdinand the second, and his brother prince Leopold de Medicis, employed a professor of the Oriental languages at Rome to translate the fifth, sixth, and seventh books into Latin. These were published at Florence in 1661, by Borelli, with his own notes, who also maintains that these books are the genuine production of Apollonius, by many strong authorities, against Mydorgius and others, who suspected that these three books were not the real production of Apollonius.

As to the eighth book, some mention is made of it in a book of Golius’s, where he had written that it had not been translated into Arabic, because it was wanting in the Greek copies, from whence the Arabians translated the others. But the learned Mersenne, in the preface to Apollonius’s Conies, printed in his Synopsis of the mathematics, quotes the Arabic philosopher Aben Nedin for a work of his about the year 400 of Mahomet, in which is part of that eio-hth book, and who asserts that all the books of Apollonius are extant in his language, and even more than are enumerated by Pappus; and Vossius says he has read the same; De Scientiis Mathematicis, p. 55. A neat edition of the first four books in Latin was published by Dr. Barrow, at London 1675, in 4to. A magnificent edition of all the eight books, was published in folio, by Dr. Halley, at Oxford in 1710; together with the lemmas of Pappus, and the commentaries of Eutocius. The first four int Greek and Latin, but the latter four in Latin only, the eighth book being restored by himself.

The other writings of Apollonius, mentioned by Pappus, are, l.The Section of a Ratio, or Proportional Sections, two books. 2. The Section of a Space, in two books. 3. Determinate Section, in two books. 4. The Tangencies, in two books. 5. The Inclinations, in two books. 6. The Plane Loci, in two books. The contents of all these are mentioned by Pappus, and many lemmas are delivered relative to them; but none, or very little of these books themselves, have descended down to the moderns. From the account, however, that has been given of their contents, many restorations have been made of these works, by the modern mathematicians, as follow: viz. Vieta. Apollonius Gallus. The Tangencies, Paris, 1600, in 4to. Snellius, Apollonius Batavus. Determinate Section. Lugd. 1601, 4to. Snellius, Sectio Rationis & Spatii. 1607. Ghetaldus, Apollonius Redivivus. The Inclinations. Venice, 1607, 4to. Ghetaldus, Supplement to the Apollonius Redivivus. Tangencies, 1607. Ghetaldus, Apollonius Redivivus, lib. 2, 1613. Alex. Andersons Supplem. Apol, Redivivi. Inclin, Paris, 1612, 4to. Alex. Anderson, Pro Zetctico Apolloniani problematis a se jam pridem editio in Supplemento Apollonii Redivivi. Paris, 1615, 4to. Scbooten, Loca Plana restituta. Lug. Bat. 1656. Fermat, Loca Plana, 2 lib. Tolos. 1679, folio. Halley, Apol. de Sectione Itationis libri duo ex Arabico ms. Latine versi duo restituti. Oxon. 1706, 8vo. Simson, Loca Plana, libri duo. Glasg. 1749, 4 to. Simson, Sectio Detenninat. Glasg. 1776, 4to. Horsley, Apol. Inclinat. libri duo. Oxon. 1770, 4to. Lawson, The Tangencies, "in two books, Lond. 1771, 4to. Lawson, Determinate Section, two books. Lond. 1772, 4to. Wales, Determinate Section, two books. Lond. 1772, 4to. Burrow, The Inclinations. Lond. 1779, 4to.

, was a native of Alexandria, and flourished about the year 138 B.C. He passed his life at Bruchium, a quarter of the city where several men of learning were lodged and maintained at the expence of the kings of Kgypt, but some accounts say that he lived in great poverty. He was the first who reduced grammar to a system, and wrote many works on the subject, which are not now extant, but of which Priscian availed himself in writing his Latin grammar. We have, however, a treatise on “Syntax,” by Apollonius, which has been often printed. The best edition is that of Frederic Sylburgius, with the Latin translation and notes of Portus, Franc fort, 1590, 4to. Jn Ileitzius’s edition of Mattaire’s Greek Dialects, 1738, and in SturtrAus’s edition, 1807, are several extracts from Apollonius’s grammar, which Vossius copied from a ms. in the royal library of Paris, but this manu script is more full, and deserves printing at large. Another work, entirled “Historian Mirabiles,” Gr. and Lat. of which Meursius published the best edition, Leyden, 1620, 4to, is attributed to Apollonius, but upon doubtful authority. Apollonius was the father of Heroaian, the grammarian.

, a noted impostor, was a native of Tyana, in Cappadocia, and born some years before the Christian sera. He studied the philosophy of Pythagoras in his infancy, and professed it during his whole life. He practised every rigid precept of abstinence, gave his property to the poor, lived in the temples, quelled seditions, and instructed the people with persuasive force and suavity. He affected a preciseness and mystery when he spoke, which made a wonderful impression on the vulgar; all the world, we are told, followed him: artizans quitted their employments; cities sent deputations to him, and even the oracles chaunted his praises. He made disciples even-where: he conversed with the brachmans of India, the magi of Persia, and the gymnosophists of Egypt, compelling all to admire him. At Nineveh, at Ephesus, at Smyrna, at Athens, at Corinth, and other cities of Greece, he preached his doctrines, condemning amusements, visiting the temples, correcting the public morals, and recommending the reformation of all abuses. At Rome, wfcere he said he came to see what sort of an animal a tyrant was, he inveighed against the bagnios with great severity. Having accidentally met the funeral of a young lady of consular family, he approached the bier, and after speaking some words in a low voice, the dead arose and went back to her father’s house. Her parents offered him a large sum, which he refused. Here also he pretended to utter prophecies. The emperor Vespasian was so much his dupe, as to ask his advice, which he gave in his usual imposing manner. This he had done at. other courts, and most absurd stones are told of his wisdom, and prophetic gifts. Domitian, however, confined him for some time in prison, and after his release he died, about the end of the first century. Statues were erected, and divine honours paid to him. One Datnis, the partner in his impositions, wrote his life, but it was more fully written by Philostratus, who lived 200 years after. It is among Philostratns’s works, with some letters attributed to Apollonius. The heathens were fond of opposing the pretended miracles of this man to those of our Saviour: and by a treatise which Eusebius wrote against one Hierocles, we find that the drift of the latter, in the treatise which Eusebius refutes, had been to draw a parallel betwixt Jesus Christ and Apollonius, in which he gives the preference to this philosopher.

Mr. Du Pin has written a confutation of “Pbilostratus’s Life of Apollonius,” in which he proves, 1. That the history of this philosopher is destitute of such proofs as can be credited. 2. That Philostratus has not written a history, but a romance. 3. That the miracles ascribed tier Apollonius carry strong marks of falsehood; and that there is not one which may not be imputed to chance or artifice. 4. That the doctrine of this philosopher is in many particulars opposite to right sense and reason.

Apollonius is said to have written four books on judicial astrology, and a treatise upon sacrifices, which are now lost. His general character seems to have been that he added the arts of an impostor to the learning of a philosopher. Those who are curious, however, in his history, may meet with copious information in his Life by Philostratus, in Bayle, Brucker, Lardner, and Du Pin. A new edition of his life was recently published by the rev. Dr Edward Berwick of Ireland, 1810, 8vo.

, a physician and astrologer, was born in 1250, at the village of Abano near Padua, of which the Latin name is Aponus, and hence he is frequently called Petrus de Apono, or Aponensis. He is also sometimes called Petrus de Padua. When young, he went, with a view to study Greek, to Constantinople, or according to others, to some of the islands belonging to the Venetian republic. Having afterwards a desire to study medicine and mathematics, he returned, and spent some years at Padua, and at Paris, where he was admitted to the degree of doctor of philosophy and medicine. He was, however, recalled to Padua, and a professorship of medicine founded for him. He attained great reputation as a physician, and is said to have been very exorbitant in his fees. We are not told what his demands were in the place of his residence, but it is affirmed that he would not attend the sick in any other place under 150 florins a day; and when he was sent for by pope Honorius IV. he demanded 400 ducats for each day’s attendance. But these reports are thought to have been exaggerated, as perhaps are many other particulars handed down to us, such as his abhorrence of milk, which was so great, that he fainted if he saw any person drink it.

His works shew that he had read every thing which appeared before his time, on the subject of medicine, but unfortunately he mixes, with a great deal of real knowledge, all the reveries of judicial astrology, and caused the dome of the public school at Padua to be painted with above four hundred astrological figures, and when destroyed by a fire in 1420, they were replaced by the celebrated Giotto. His attachment to astrological pursuits, and a superior acquaintance with natural philosophy and mathematics, procured him the character of a magician, and he was accused of heresy. This accusation, of which he had cleared himself at Paris, was twice renewed at Padua, by the faculty and others who were jealous of his reputation, and it was said he owed his extraordinary skill to seven familiar spirits whom he kept inclosed in a bottle. By means of some powerful friends, he escaped the inquisition on one occasion, and was about to have been tried a second time, but died before the process was finished, in 1316. In spite of the profession, which he made before witnesses, when dying, of his adherence to the catholic faith, and which he likewise solemnly expressed in his will, the inquisition found him guilty of heresy, and ordered the magistrates of Padua to take his body up, and burn it. A female servant, however, on hearing this order, contrived, in the night, to have the body removed to another church. The inquisitors would have proceeded against the persons concerned in this affair, but were at length satisfied with burning the deceased in effigy. A century afterwards, his fellow-citizens placed a bust to his memory in the public palace. His principal works were, 1. “Conciliator dirTerentiarum philosophorum etpnecipue niedicorum,” Venice, 14-71, a work often reprinted, and which procured him the title of Conciliator. He often quotes Averroes, and was the first Italian who studied his works. 2. “De Venenis, eorumque remediis,” also often reprinted, but now very scarce. 3. “Expositio problematum Aristotelis,” Mantua, 1475, 4to, of which there have been many editions. 4. “La Fisionomie du conciliator Pierre de Apono,” Padua, 1474, 8vo, and in Latin, “Decisiones physionomicae,” 1548, 8vo. In the imperial library of Paris, is a manuscript on the same subject, which he wrote during his residence in that city. 5. “Hippocratis de rnedicorum astrologia libellus,” from the Greek into Latin, Venice, 1485, 4to. G. “Qucestiones de febribus,” Padua, 1482, a manuscript in the imperial library. 7. “Textus Mesues noviter emendatus, &c.” Venice, 1505, 8vo. 8, “Astrolabium plenum in tabulis ascendeus, continens qualibet hora atque minuta aequationes domorum cceli,” Venice, 1502, 4to. 9. “Geomantia,” Venice, 1549, 8vo. 10. “Dionocides digestus alphabetico ordine,” Lyons, 1512, 4to. 11. “Galeni tractatus varii a Petro Paduano latinitate donati,” a manuscript in the library of St. Mark, Venice. 12. A Latin translation of seven astrological treatises written by the celebrated Spanish rabbi A ben-Ezra, and usually printed with his treatise on critical days.

, a learned Greek, a native of Constantinople, came into Italy about the middle of the fifteenth century, but being unfavourably treated by cardinal Bessarion whom he visited, he returned to the island of Crete, and wrote some books; one of them entitled “Iowa, or the Violet-bed,” a collection of apophthegms, has not been published, but of his collection of proverbs, an epitome was published at Basil, 1538, in 8vo, and afterwards the whole in Gr. and Lat. by Pontinus, Leyden, 16.19, 4to, and at tho same place, by P. Paulinus, 1653, 4to. The epitome published at Basil is a very rare book, but a copy is in the British Museum.

, an eminent historian, who wrote the Roman history in the Greek language, flourished under the reigns of Trajan and Adrian about the year 123 A. D. and speaks of the destruction of Jerusalem, as of an event that happened in his time. He was born of a good family in Alexandria, from whence he went to Rome, and there distinguished himself so much at the bar, that he was chosen one of the procurators of the emperor, and the government of a province was committed to him. He wrote the Roman history in a very peculiar method; not compiling it in a continued series, after the manner of Livy, but giving distinct histories of all the nations that had been conquered by the Romans, and placing every thing relative to those nations in one connected and uninterrupted narrative. It was divided into three volumes, which contained twenty-four books, or twenty-two according to Charles Stephens, Volaterranus, and Sigonius. Photius tells us, there were nine books concerning the civil wars, though there are but five now extant. This performance has been charged with many errors and imperfections; but Photius is of opinion, he wrote with the utmost regard to truth, and has shewn greater knowledge of military affairs than any of the historians, and depicts battles and other great events with the skill of an artist. But his chief talent (continues that author) is displayed in his orations, in which he produces a strong effect on the passions, either in animating the resolution of the slow, or repressing the impetuosity of the precipitate. In the preface he gives a general description of the Roman empire.

He tells usj this empire was bounded on the east by the river Euphrates, mount Caucasus, the Greater Armenia, and Colchis, and on the north by the Danube; beyond which, however, the Romans possessed Dacia, as well as several other nations beyond the Rhine. They were masters of above half of Britain; but neglected the rest, as he informs us, because it was of no use to them, and they received but little advantage from what they possessed. There were several other countries, which cost more than they gained by them, but they thought it dishonourable to abandon them. This occasioned them to neglect the opportunities of making themselves masters of many other nations, and to satisfy themselves with giving them kings, as they did to the Greater Armenia. He assures us likewise, that he saw at Rome, ambassadors from several countries of the barbarians, who desired to submit to the Roman empire, but were rejected by the emperor because they were poor, and no advantages could be expected from them.

Of all this voluminous work there remains only what treats of the Punic, Syrian, Parthian, Mithridatic, and Spanish wars, with those against Hannibal, the civil wars, and the wars in Illyricum, and some fragments of the Celtic or Gallic wars. Appian was published by Henry Stephens with a Latin version, at Geneva, 1592, in folio; but the best editions are those of Tollius, Gr. and Lat. 2 vols. 8vo, Amst. 1670, and of Schweigheuser, Lips. 1784, 3 vols. 8vo, of which last the editor of the Bibliographical Dictionary has given a very particular account.

, an English writer of the sixteenth century, descended from an ancient and honourable family in Wales. He was educated at Oxford, but in what hall or college is uncertain: probablyin the ancient hotel, now Pembroke college, in which several of his name were educated about the same period. In 1534, he was admitted bachelor of civil law. Patronised by William earl of Pembroke, he pursued his studies with alacrity, and became eminently learned, particularly in the history and antiquities of his own country. Wood says, that in 1046-7 he was knighted, with many others, by Edward, lord protector of England, and that he died in the reign of queen Mary. Pitts gives him the character of a learned and elegant writer. He wrote, 1. “Fides historiae Britannia, contra Polyd. Virgilium,” a manuscript in the Cotton library. 2. “Defensio regis Arthuri.” 3. “Historic Brifanniae defensio,” 1,573. 4. “Cambria? descriptio,” corrected and augmented by Humph. Lhuyd, and translated into English by David Powel, Oxon. 1663, 4to. 5. De Variis antiquitatibus Tractatum de Eucharistia of the restitution of the Coin, written in 1553, all in manuscript in New College library.

, born at Ventimiglia, in the republic 01 Genoa, 1607, was a man of great reputation in the learned world, and wrote several books. At fifteen years of age he entered into the order of the Augustins, where he became so much esteemed, that he was appointed vicar-general of the congregation of our Lady of Consolation at Genoa. As soon as he had finished his studies, he taught philosophy, which he continued to do for five years; after which he travelled into several parts of Italy, and settled at Venice in 1639, in the convent of St. Stephen. What rendered him most famous was the library of the Augustins at Ventimiglia, which being chiefly collected by him, was a proof of his ardour for learning, and his excellent taste. He published a book concerning this Jibrary, which is much sought after by the curious. Alorhof mentions this work in several places of his Polyhistor, published in 1688 (p. 38, 39), and always as if he thought it had not been yet published; nevertheless Mr. Bayle discovered that the “Bibliotheca Aprosiana” was printed at Bologna in 1673; and that Martin Fogelius, or Vogelius, professor at Hamburgh, had a copy of it. He used to disguise himself under fictitious names in the title-pages of iiis books; which conduct might, perhaps, be owing to the subjects he wrote upon, they not being always strited to a religious life; such, for instance, as the Adonis of the cavalier Marino, &c. And if we consult the authors who have given us a catalogue of the writers of Liguria, we find that he assumed sometimes the name of Masoto Galistoni, sometimes that bf Carlo Galistoni, Scipio Glareano, Sapricio Saprici, Oldauro Scioppio, &c. The cavalier Stigiiani having published the book of “l'Oehiale,” or the Spectacles, which is a severe censure on the “Adonis,” he was attacked on all sides; but amongst all the advocates for cavalier Marino, nobody shewed more zeal for the Adonis than Aprosio: the pieces he wrote in defence of it came abroad with the following tides: “Ochiali stritolato di Scipio Glareano per risposta al Signer Cavaiiere Fra Toinaso Stigiiani;” The Spectacles broken, by Scipio Glariano, being an Answer to signor cavalier Fra Tomaso Stigiiani. “La Sferva poetica di Sapricio Saprici, lo scantonata accademico heteroclito per risposta alia prima censura dell' Adone del cavalier Marino, fatta del cavalier Tomaso Stigliani;” The poetical scourge of Sapricio Saprici, being an Answer to the first Censure of the cavalier Marino’s Adonis, by cavalier Tomaso Stigiiani. “Del veratro, apologia di Sapricio Saprici per risposta alia seconda censura dell' Adone dell caval.er Marino, fatta del cavalier Tomaso Stigiiani;” Hellebore, or an Apology of Sapricio Saprici, being an answer to the second Censure of cavalier Marino’s Adonis, by cavalier Tomaso Stigiiani. This treatise consisted of two p-ms, one of which was printed in 1645, and the other in 1647.

Aprosio’s life is written in the book above mentioned, La Bibliotheca Aprosiana. Several authors have bestowed upon him very great encomiums, some of whom have been perhaps rather too extravagant. He was admitted as a member into various academies, particularly that of Gli Incogniti of Venice, as appears by the book entitled “Le glorie cle gli Incogniti, overo gli Hnomini Iliustri della academia de' i signori Incogniti di Venetia,” 1647, 4to, where there is a very high eulogium on him. The Bibliotheca Aprosiana is a very scarce book, and contains, besides many particulars of the author’s life, a list of persons who presented him with books, and the titles and some curious notices respecting those books, in an alphabetical order, which however reaches no farther than letter C. There is a posthumous work of his, full of anecdotes of the pseudonymous writers of his time, which is not less rare. it is entitled “La Visiera aizata he*, atoste di scrittori.” Aprosio died in 1681.

, a Platonic philosopher, who lived in the second century, under the Antonines, was born at Madaura, a Roman colony in Africa. With ability he united indefatigable industry, whence he became acquainted with almost the whole circle of sciences and literature. His own account of himself is, that he not only tasted of the cup of literature under grammarians and rhetoricians at Carthage, but at Athens drank freely of the sacred fountain of poesy, the clear stream of geometry, the sweet waters of music, the rough current of dialectics, and the nectarious but unfathomable deep of philosophy; and in short, that, with more good will indeed than genius, he paid equal homage to every muse. He was certainly a man of a curious and inquisitive disposition, especially in religious matters, which prompted him to take several journies, and to enter into several societies of religion. |ie had a strong desire to be acquainted with their pretended mysteries, and for this reason got himself initiated into them. He spent almost his whole fortune, in travelling; so that, at his return to Rome, when he was about to dedicate himself to the service of Osiris, he had not money enough to defray the expence attending the ceremonies of his reception, and was obliged to pawn his clothes to raise the necessary sum. He supported himself afterwards by pleading causes, and, as he was both eloquent and acute, many considerable causes were trusted to him. But he benefited himself more by a good marriage, than by his pleadings: a widow, named Pudentilla, who was neither young nor handsome, but very rich, accepted his hand. This marriage drew upon him a troublesome law-suit; the relations of the lady pretended he made use of sorcery to gain her heart and money, and accordingly accused him of being a magician, before Claudius Maximus, proconsul of Africa. Apuleius was under no great difficulty in making his defence; for as Pudentilla was determined, from considerations of health, to enter upon a second marriage, even before she had seen this pretended magician, the youth, d portment, pleasing conversation, vivacity, and othrr agreeable qualities of Apuleius, were charms sufficient to engage her heart. He had the most favourable opportunities too of gaining her friendship, for he lodged some time at her house, and was greatly beloved by Pudentilla’s eldest son, who was very desirous of the match, and solicited him in favour of his mother. Apuleius also offered to prove, by his marriage-contract, that he would gain but a moderate sum by it. His apology is siill extant; it is reckoned a performance of considerable merit, and contains examples of the shameless artifices which the falshood of an impudent calumniator is capable of practising. There were many persons who took for a true history all that he relates in his famous work, the “Golden Ass.” St. Augustin was even doubtful upon this head, nor did he certainly know that Apuleius had only given this book as a romance. Some of the ancients have spoken of this performance with great contempt. In the letter which the emperor Severus wrote to the senate, wherein he complains of the honours that had been paid to Claudius Albinus, amongst which they had given him the title of Learned, he expresses great indignation, that it should be bestowed on a man, who had only stuffed his head with idle tales and rhapsodies taken from Apuleius. Macrobius has allotted the “Golden Ass,” and all such romances, to the perusal of nurses. Bishop Warburton, in the second edition of his “Divine Legation,” supposes that the “Golden Ass” is an allegory, intended not only as a satire upon the vices of the times, but as a laboured attempt to recommend the mysteries of the Pagan religion, in opposition to Christianity, to which he represents him as an inveterate enemy. In confirmation of this opinion, he points out the resemblance between the several parts of the story and the rites of initiation, both in the greater and lesser mysteries; and explains the allegory of Cupid and Psyche, which makes a long episode in Apuleius, upon the same principles. This opinion, however, has been contested by Dr. Lardner (Works, vol. VII. p. 462.)

Apuleius was extremely indefatigable in his studies, and composed several books, some in verse, and others in prose; but most of them are lost. He took pleasure in declaiming, and was heard generally with great applause; when he declaimed at Occa, the audience cried out with one voice, that they ought to confer upon him the honour of citizen. The citizens of Carthage heard him with much satisfaction, and erected a statue to him; and several other cities did him the same honour. The time of his death is not known, but after his Apology took effect, he is said to have passed his clays qu etly in study.

His printed works have gone through forty-three editions, nine of which appeared in the fifteenth century. The first, which is very rare, and was not mutilated by the Inquisition, was printed at Rome by order of cardinal Bes sarion, and Andrea, bishop of Aleria, was editor, 1469, fol. This volume consisted of, J. The “Golden Ass,” on which his reputation chiefly rests, and of which there have been many separate editions and translations into French, Italian, Spanish, German, English (by William Adlington, 1571, &c.) Of the episode of Psyche, there have been an equal number of separate editions and translations, and some French ones superbly ornamented with engravings. 2. His Apology, entitled “Oratio de Magia,” Heidelberg, 1594, 4to, &c. 3. “Florida,” or fragments of his speeches, some on history and mythology, Strasburgh, 1516. 4. “Three books on philosophy, entitled” De habitudine doctrinarum et nativitute Platonis.“5.” De Deo Socratis,“which St. Augustine refuted, Paris, 1624, 16mo. 6.” De Mundo,“which has been considered as an exact translation of what Aristotle wrote on the same subject, Memmingon, 1494, fol. and Ley a' en, 1591, 8vo, with that of Aristotle in Greek. Another list of works has been attributed to him on douhtful authority, as a Latin translation of Asclepius” De Natura. Deorum;“a book” De nominibus, virtutibus, seu medicaminis herbarum;“another,” De notis adspiratioms, et de diphthongis;“” De ponderibus, mensuris, ac signis cujusque;“” Aneehomenos,“a heroic poem, and” Ratio Spheres Pvthagoricae." Besides these a great number of his writings, on almost every subject, are said to have been lost. Daniel William Moller published an essay on his life and works, Altdorf, 1691, 8vo.

, Duke of Atri in the kingdom of Naples, and son of Julius Aqua viva, count of Converse no, added to the splendour of his birth a great share of learning, which rendered him very illustrious towards the end of the fifteenth, and beginning of the sixteenth century. He was at first addicted to the military art, and distinguished himself by his bravery, although he was unfortunate, and in the last battle in which he fought, was wounded and taken prisoner. When released he appears to have devoted his time to study and the conversation of men of letters, by whom he was highly esteemed. Alexander ab Alexandro dedicated to him his “Dies Geniales” and “Pontanus,” two of his works. He died in 1528, aged seventy-two years. His works were, an “Encylopædia,” left very imperfect; and Bayle says he composed a book “De re Equestri.” His best known work is “Disputationes de Virtute morali,” Helenop. 1609, 4to, which it seems doubtful whether Bayle ever saw. His brother Belisarius also became an author, and published a treatise “De Venatione,” and others “De Aucupio,” “De Principum liberis educandis,” and “De Certamine Singulari.” These were first printed at Naples, 1519, fol. and reprinted at Basil, 1578, 8vo, by Leunclavius, with Manuel Palæologus on the Education of Kings.

, son to John Jerome, duke of Atri, was born at Naples in 1542, and in 1581 was elected general of the Jesuits, in which station he conducted himself with great mildness and prudence, and died Jan. 31, 1615. He left several religious works: among others, “Industrie ad curandos animae morhos,” Paris, 1603, 8vo, and Rome, 1606, 8vo. A French translation of this was published at Paris in 1776, 12mo, under the title of “Manuel des Superieurs.” He wrote also Meditations in Latin, on the forty-fourth and ninety-tnird Psalms. His most celebrated work drawn up for the use of his order, entitled “Ratio Studiorum,” and published at Rome in 1586, 8vo, was suppressed by the Inquisition, and much displeased the Jesuits and Dominicans, by containing more liberal sentiments than were consistent with their interest. It was republished in 1591, but in a mutilated state. Another work of his, less known, was “Epistoiae Prtepositorum Generalium, ad Patres et Frutres societatis Jesu. Instructio ad augendum spiritum in societaie,” Rome, 4 615, 8vo.

, of Sinope in Pontus, lived in the time of the emperor Adrian in the second century, by whom he is said to have been sent to assist in the rebuilding of Jerusalem, where he embraced Christianity; but, his attacument to judicial astrology having subjected him to censure among the Christians, he became a Jew, and was advanced to the rank of Rabbi. He now employed himself in acquiring a perfect knowledge of the Hebrew language, and translated the Old Testament into Greek. But although he made this apparently a literal translation, he is said to have given some passages respecting Jesus Christ a trim more favourable to the Jewish prejudices than the Septuagint translation. Fragments only of this translation of Aquila’s have descended to us. Some particulars of him may be found in Cave, and in the ecclesiastical historians of his period.

, so called from Aquila, a city of Abruzzo in the kingdom of Naples, was born there in 1466, and gained considerable fame by his Italian poems, but more by his talents as an Improvisator!, which were in high esteem with the princes and patrons of literature in his country. He was the contemporary and rival of Tebaldeo di Ferrara, and together they contributed not a little to the refinement of Italian poetry, but their reputation sunk before that of Sannazarius and Bembo. Aquilano died at Rome, Aug. 10, 1500. His poems, consisting of sonnets, eclogues, epistles, &c. were printed at Rome in 1503, 8vo, but the best edition is that of the Giunti, 1516.

, or Sebastian D'Aquila, his true name being unknown, an Italian physician, born at Aquila, a town of Abruzzo in the kingdom of Naples, professed his art in the university of Padua. He was in reputation at the time of Louis de Gonzaga, bishop of Mantua, to whom fie inscribed a book. He died in 1543. We have of his a treatise “De Morbo Gallico,” Lyons, 1506, 4to, with the works of other physicians, Boulogne, 1517, 8vo; and “De Febre Sanguinea,” in the “Practica de Gattinaria,” Basle, 1537, in 8vo; and Lyons, 1538, 4to. Aquilanus was one of the most zealous defenders of Galen, and is said to have been one of the first who employed mercury in the cure of the venereal disease, which, however, he administered in very small doses.

, commonly called the Angelical Doctor, of the ancient family of the counts of Aquino, descended from the kings of Sicily and Arragon, was born in the castle of Aquino, in the Terra di Lavoro, in Italy, about the year 1224. At five years of age he was committed to the care of the monks of Mount Cassino, with whom he remained till he was sent to the university of Naples. In the year 1241 he entered into the order of the preaching friars at Naples, without the knowledge of his parents. His mother, being informed of this, used her utmost efforts to induce him to leave this society; to prevent which, the Dominicans removed him toTerracina, and from thence to Anagna, md at last to Rome. His mother followed him thither, and when she could not obtain leave of the monks to see him, by the assistance of her two elder sons, she seized the youth in his journey to Paris, to which he was sent by the monks of his order, and caused him to be shut up in her castle; whence, after a confinement of two jears, he made his escape, and fled first to Naples, and then to Rome. In 1244 he went to Paris with John, the master of the Teutonic order, and from thence removed to Cologne, to hear the lectures of Albertus Magnus. Here he remained till he was invited again to Pans, to read lectures upon the “Book of Sentences,” which he did with great applause, before a very large audience. In the year 1255 he was created D. D. at Paris. He returned to Italy about the year 1263, and was appointed definitor of his order, for the province of Rome; and having taught school divinity in most of the universities of Italy, he re-settled at last at Naples, where he received a pension from king Charles. Here he spent his time in study, in reading of lectures, and exercises of piety; and was so far from any views of ambition or profit, that he refused the archbishopric of that city when it was offered him by Clement IV. In 1274 he was sent for to the second council of Lyons, by pope Gregory X. that he might read before them the book he had written against the Greeks, at the command of Urban IV.; but he fell sick on his journey, at the monastery of Fossanova, near Terracina, where he died on the 7th of March, aged fifty years.

The whole Western world, after his decease, began to load the memory of Thomas Aquinas with honours. The Dominican fraternity removed his body to Thoulouse; pope John XXII. canonized him; Pius V. gave him the title of the Fifth Doctor of the Church; the learned world honoured him with the appellation of The Universal and the Angelic Doctor; and Sixtus Senensis tells us, that he approached so nearly to St. Augustin in the knowledge of true divinity, and penetrated so deeply into the most abstruse meanings of that father, that, agreeably to the Pythagorean metempsychosis, it was a com non expression among all men of learning, that St. Augustin’s soul had transmigrated into St. Thomas Aquinas. Rapin speaks also of him with high honour, and represents him as one of the great improvers of school-divinity. Lord Herbert of Cherbury, in his Life and Reign of Henry VIII. tells us, that one of the principal reasons, which induced this king to write against Martin Luther, was, that the latter had spoken contemptuously of Aquinas. The authority of Aquinas indeed has been always very great in the schools of the Roman Catholics. But notwithstanding all the extravagant praises and honours which have been heaped upon this saint, it is certain that his learning was almost wholly confined to scholastic theology, and that he was so little conversant with elegant and liberal studies, that he was not even able to read the Greek language. For all his knowledge of the Peripatetic philosophy, which he so liberally mixed with theology, he was indebted to the defective translations of Aristotle which were supplied by the Arabians, till he obtained, from some unknown hand, a more, accurate version of his philosophical writings. Adopting the general ideas of the age, that theology is best defended by the weapons of logic and metaphysics, he mixed the subtleties of Aristotle with the language of scripture and the Christian fathers; and, after the manner of the Arabians, framed abstruse questions, without end, upon various topics of speculative theology. He excelled, therefore, only in that subtile and abstruse kind of learning which was better calculated to strike the imagination, than to improve the understanding. He maintained what is commonly called the doctrine of free-will, though he largely quoted Augustin, and retailed many of his pious and devotional sentiments. His Aristotelian subtleties enabled him to give a specious colour to the absurd doctrine of transubstantiation, which in him found a vehement defender. He held many other erroneous opinions, but it must be acknowledged, there are in his writings, and particularly in the account of his discourses during his last sickness, traces of great devotion, and a strain of piety very similar to that of St. Augustin. Aquinas left a vast number of works, which were printed in seventeen volumes in folio, at Venice in 1490; at Nuremberg in 1496; Rome 1570; Venice 1594; and Cologne 1612; and many times after.

The five first volumes contain his Commentaries upon the works of Aristotle. The sixth and seventh a Coramentary upon the four Books of Sentences. The eighth consists of Questions in Divinity. The ninth volume contains the Sum of the Catholic Faith, against the Gentiles; divided into four books. The tenth, eleventh, and twelfth, the Sum of Divinity, with the Commentaries of cardinal Cajetauus. The thirteenth consists of several Commentaries upon the Old Testament, particularly a Commentary upon the Book of Job, a literal and analogical Exposition upon the first fifty Psalms, an Exposition upon the Canticles, which he dictated upon his death-bed, to the monks of Fossanova; Commentaries upon the Prophecies of Isaiah and Jeremiah, and upon the Lamentations. The fourteenth contains the Commentaries upon the gospels of St. Matthew and St. John; the former is said to have been written by Peter Scaliger, a dominican friar and bishop of Verona. The fifteenth volume contains the Catena upon the four Gospels, extracted from the fathers, and dedicated to pope Urban IV. The sixteenth consists of the Commentary upon St. Paul’s Epistles, and the Sermons of Aquinas preached on Sundays and the festivals of saints. The seventeenth contains divers tracts in Divinity.

Of all these, in Brucker’s opinion, the most celebrated are, his “Summa Theologiæ,” Heads of Theology—of which the second section, which treats of morals, may be read with advantage; his commentaries upon the analytics, metaphysics, and ethics of Aristotle, and upon his book “De Interpretatione.”

, a miscellaneous writer of considerable fame, was born at Naples in 1654, and died at Rome in 1740. He was of the order of Jesuits, and a celebrated teacher of rhetoric. His works, which discover much learning and taste, ere written in Latin. The principal are, “Poemata,” Rome, 1702, 3 vols.; “Orationes,” 1704, 2 vols. 8vo;“” Lexicon Militare,“in 2 vols. folio, 1724. This contains, under some of the articles, very learned dissertations on the military art. Another lexicon, entitled” Nomenclator Agriculture,“1736, 4to, is not held in the same esteem. He published also,” Historical Miscellanies,“1725, and an interesting” History of the war in Hungary,“1726, 12mo, under the title of” Fragmenta historica de bello Hungarise."

, a celebrated French musician, was born at Paris, July 4, 1694, where he died June 15, 1772. He was so remarkable for early genius, that at the age of six he performed on the harpsichord before Louis XIV; at eight years old the celebrated Bernier declared he could teach him nothing more; and at twelve he was made organist at the church of Petit St. Antoine. Sometime after, he obtained a triumph highly flattering to a person of his profession, by successfully contending for the place of organist at the church of St. Paul, against Rameau, who at that time wished to be established in Paris. Wonders are told of the powers of execution and taste which Aquino displayed, and it is said that Handel visited France on purpose to hear him. He is celebrated also for his simple and amiable manners, and his attachment to religion. Two only of his works have been engraved, the one a collection of pieces for the harpsichord, and the other some carrols with variations; but he left to his son a considerable number of manuscript performances.

, son of the preceding, and a bachelor of medicine, was a miscellaneous writer at Paris, where he died about the year 1797, without leaving a reputation equal to that of his father. Yet some of his publications were useful. In the list we find, J. “Contes mis en vers par un petit cousin de Rabelais,” 1775, 8vo. 2. “Lettres sur les homines cel bres dans les sciences,” 1752, 2 vols. re-published in 1753, under the title of “Siecle litteraire de Louis XV.” 3. “Semaine Litteraire,” 1759, 4 vols. 12mo. 4. “Almunach litteraire, ou Etrennes d Apollon,” 1777 93, 17 vols. a collection of miscellanies in prose and verse. He published some other works with less success, and it used to be said, in allusion to his father’s profession,

, a learned rabbi of Carpentras, whose proper name was Mardocai, or Mardocheus, was expelled from the synagogue of Avignon, in 16 10, on account of attachment to Christianity. On this he went to the kingdom of Naples, and was baptised at Aquino, from which he took his name; but when he came to France he gave it the French termination, Aquin. At Paris he devoted himself principally to teaching Hebrew, and Louis XIII. appointed him professor in the lioyal college, and Hebrew interpreter, which honourable station he held until his death in 1650, at which time he was preparing a new version of the New Testament, with notes on St. Paul’s epistles. Le Jay also employed him in correcting the Hebrew and Chaldee parts of his Polyglot. His principal printed works are, 1. “Dictionarium Hebrao-ChalclaoTalmudico-RabbinicunV' Paris, 1629, fol. 2.” Racines de la langue sainte,“Paris, 1620, fol. 3.” Explication des treize moyens dont se servaient les rabbins pour entendre le Pentateuque, recueillis du Talmud.“4.” An Italian translation of the Apophthegms of the ancient Jewish doctors.“5.” Lacrimae in obitum illust. cardinal de Berulle,“his patron. 6.” Examen mundL“7.” Discours du Tabernacle et du Camp des Israelites,“Paris, 1623, 4to. 8.” Voces primitiae seu radices Gnecac," Paris, 1620, 16mo, and others. Louis D‘Aquin, his son, who became as great an adept as his father in the Oriental tongues, left behind him several rabbinical works. Antoine D’Aquin, first physician to Louis XIV. who died in 1696, at Vichi, was son of the last-mentioned Louis.

, commonly called the lady Arabella, was so often talked of for a queen, that custom seems to have given her a right to an article in this manner under her Christian name, as that by which our historians distinguish her. She was the daughter of Charles Stuart, earl oY Lenox, who was younger brother to Henry lord Darnley, father to king James VI. of Scotland, and First of England, by Elizabeth, daughter of sir William Cavendisu, km. She was born, as near as can be computed, in 1577, and educated at London, under the eye of the eld countess of Lenox, her grand-mother. She was far from being either beautiful in her person, or from being distinguished by any extraordinary qualities of mind; and yet she met with many admirers, on account of her royal descent and near relation to the crown of England. Her father dviug in 1579, and leaving her thereby sole heiress, as some understood, of the house of Lenox, several matches were projected for her at home and abroad. Her cousin, king James, inclined to have married her to lord Esme Stuart, whom he had created duke of Lenox, and whom before his marriage he considered as his heir; but this match was prevented by queen Elizabeth, though it was certainly a very fit one in all respects. As the English succession was at this time very problematical, the great powers on the Continent speculated on many husbands for the lady Arabella, such as the duke of Savoy, a prince of the house of Farnese, and others. In the mean time, this lady had some thoughts of marrying herself at home, as Thuanus relates, to a son of the earl of Northumberland, but it is not credible that this took effect, though he says it did privately. The very attempt procured her queen Elizabeth’s displeasure, who confined her for it. In the mean time her title to the crown, such as it was, became the subject, amongst many others, of father Persons’ s famous book, wherein are all the arguments for and against her, and which served to divulge her name and descent all over Europe; and yet this book was not very favourable to her interest. On the death of the queen, some malcontents framed an odd design of disturbing the public peace, and amongst other branches of their dark scheme, one was to seize the lady Arabella, and to cover their proceedings by the sanction of her title, intending also to have married her to some English nobleman, the more to increase their interest, and the better to please the people. But this conspiracy was fatal to none but its authors, and those who conversed with them; being speedily defeated, many taken, and some executed. As for the lady Arabella, it does not appear that she had any knowledge of this engagement in her behalf, whatever it was; for domestic writers are perplexed, and foreign historians ruu into absurdities, when they endeadeavour to explain it. She continued at liberty, and in apparent favour at court, though her circumstances were narrow till the latter end of the year 1608, when by some means she drew upon her king James’s displeasure. However, at Christmas, when mirth and good-humour prevailed at court, she was again taken into favour, had a service of plate presented to her of the value of two hundred pounds, a thousand marks given her to pay her debts, and some addition made to her annual income. This seems to have been done, in order to have gained her to the interest of the court, and to put the notions of marriage she had entertained out of her head; all which, however, proved ineffectual; for in the beginning of the month of February 1609, she was detected in an intrigue with Mr. William Seymour, son to the lord Beauchamp, and grandson to the earl of Hertford, to whom, notwithstanding, she was. privately married some time afterwards. Upon this discovery, they were both carried before the council, and severely reprimanded, and then dismissed. In the summer of 1610, the marriage broke out, on which the lady was sent into close custody, at the house of sir Thomas Parry, in Lambeth; and Mr. Seymour was committed to the Tower for his contempt, in marrying a lady of the royal family without the king’s leave. It does not appear that this confinement was attended with any great severity to either; for the lady was allowed the use of sir Thomas Parry’s house and gardensj and the like gentleness, in regard to his high quality, was shewn to Mr. Seymour. Some intercourse they had by letters, which after a time was discovered, and a resolution taken thereupon to send the lady to Durham, a resolution which threw her into deep affliction. Upon this, by the interposition of friends, she and her husband concerted a scheme for their escape, which was successfully executed in the beginning, though it ended unluckily. The lady, under the care of sir James Crofts, was at the house of Mr. Conyers, at Highgate, from whence she was to have gone the next day to Durham, on which she put a fair countenance now, notwithstanding the trouble she had before shewn. This made her keepers the more easy, and gave her an opportunity of disguising herself, which she did on Monday the 3d of June, 1611, by drawing over her petticoats a pair of large French-fashioned hose, putting on a man’s doublet, a peruke which covered her hair, a hat, black cloak, russet boots with red tops, and a rapier by her side. Thus equipped, she walked out between three and four with Mr. Markham. They went a mile and half to a little inn, where a person attended with their horses. The lady, by that time she came thither, was so weak and faint, that the hostler, who held the stirrup when she mounted, said that gentleman would hardly hold out to London. Riding, however, so raised her spirits, that by the time she came to Blackwall, she was pretty well recovered. There they found waiting for them two men, a gentlewoman, and a chambermaid, with one boat full of Mr. Seymour’s and her trunks, and another boat for their persons, in which they hasted from thence towards Woolwich. Being come so far, they bade the watermen row on to Gravesend. There the poor fellows were desirous to land, but for a double freight were contented to go on to Lee, yet being almost tired by the way, they were forced to lie still at Tilbury, whilst the rowers went on shore to refresh themselves; then they proceeded to Lee, and by that time the day appeared, and they discovered a ship at anchor a mile beyond them, which was the French bark that waited for them. Here the lady would have lain at anchor, expecting Mr. Seymour, but through the importunity of her followers, they forthwith hoisted sail and put to sea. In the mean time Mr. Seymour, with a peruke and beard of black hair, and in a tawny cloth suit, walked alone without suspicion, from his lodging out at the great west door of the Tower, following a cart that had brought him billets. From thence he walked along by the Towerwharf, by the warders of the south gate, and so to the iron gate, where one Rodney was ready with a pair of oars to receive him. When they came to Lee, and found that the French ship was gone, the billows rising high, they hired a fisherman for twenty shillings, to put them on board a certain ship that they saw under sail. That ship they found not to be it they looked for, so they made forwards to the next under sail, which was a ship from Newcastle. This with much ado they hired for forty pounds, to carry them to Calais, and the master performed his bargain, by which means Mr. Seymour escaped, and continued in Flanders. On Tuesday in the afternoon, my lord treasurer being advertised that the lady Arabella had made an escape, sent immediately to the lieutenant of the Tower to set strict guard over Mr. Seymour, which he promised, after his yxrt manner, “he would thoroughly do, that he would;” but, coming to the prisoner’s lodgings-, he found, to his great amazement, that he was gone from thence one whole day before. A pink being dispatched from the Downs into Calais road, seized the French bark, and brought back the lady and those with her; but, before this was known, the proclamation issued for apprehending them. As soon as she was brought to town, she was, after examination, committed to the Tower, declaring that she was not so sorry for her own restraint, as she should be glad if Mr. Seymour escaped, for whose welfare, she affirmed, she was more concerned than for her own. Her aunt, the countess of Shrewsbury, was likewise committed, on suspicion of having prompted the lady Arabella, not only to her escape, but to other things, it being known that she had amassed upwards of twenty thousand pounds in ready money. The earl of Shrewsbury was confined to his house, and the old earl of Hertford sent for from his seat. By degrees things grew cooler, and though it was known that Mr. Seymour continued in the Netherlands, yet the court made no farther applications to the archduke about him. In the beginning of 1612, a new storm began to break out; for the lady Arabella, either pressed at an examination, or of her own free will, made some extraordinary discoveries, upon which some quick steps would have been taken, had it not shortly after appeared, that her misfortunes had turned her head, and that, consequently, no use could be made of her evidence. However, the countess of Shrewsbury, who before had leave to attend her husband in his sickness, was, very closely shut up, and the court was amused with abundance of strange stories, which wore out by degrees, and the poor lady Arabella languished in her confinement till the 27th of September, 1615, when her life and sorrows ended together. Even in her grave this poor lady was not at peace, a report being spread that she was poisoned, because she happened to die within two years of sir Thomas Overbury. Sir Bull. Whitlocke has put this circumstance in much too strong a light; for it was a suspicion at most, and never had the support of the least colour of proof. As for her husband, sir William Seymour, he soon after her decease, procured leave to return, distinguished himself by loyally adhering to the king during the civil wars, and, surviving to the time of the Restoration, was restored to his great-grandfather’s title of duke of Somerset, by an act of parliament, which entirely cancelled his attainder and on the giving his royal assent to this act, king Charles II. was pleased to say in full parliament, what perhaps was as honourable for the family as the title to which they are restored, flis words were these: “As this is an act of an extraordinary nature, so it is in favour of a person of no ordinary merit: he has deserved of my father, and of myself, as much as any subject possibly could do; and I hope this will stir no man’s envy, because in doing it I do no more than' what a good master should do for such a servant.” By his lady Arabella, this noble person had no issue: but that he still preserved a warm affection for her memory, appears from hence, that he called one of his daughters by his second wife, Frances, daughter and coheiress of Robert Devereux, earl of Essex, Arabella Seymour.

Mr. Ballard has given a place, to the lady Arabella, in his Memoirs of British Ladies, who have been celebrated for their writings or skill in the learned languages, arts, and sciences. His reasons for so doing are, that Mr. Evelyn, in hisNumismata, has put her in his list of learned women, and Mr. Philips, in his Theatrum Poetarum, has introduced her among his modern poetesses. Though no works of this lady have appeared, which can serve to shew on what foundation her literary reputation is built, yet it is not probable that Mr. Evelyn and Mr. Philips should, without cause, have assigned her the rank they have done. Three letters of her’s are transcribed, by Mr. Ballard, from a ms yolume in Mr. Ashmole’s study, which prove her to have been a woman of good understanding. It also appears, from Mr. Oldys’s manuscripts, that she had, at least when young, a far greater share of beauty than is above represented. From a picture of her, which was drawn at full length in white in 1589, when she was thirteen years and a half old, it appears that she was, at that time, very beautiful in her person. Her complexion was fair as alabaster; she had sweet large grey eyes and long flaxen hair, flowing almost to her waist, and finely curled at top. Mr. Oldys says that she was born in 1575.

, an Arabian historian of the fifteenth century, is principally known as the author of a life of Timour, or Tamerlane, entitled “The wonderful effects of the divine decrees in the affairs of Timour,” a work in which there is a considerable display of eastern fancy, but many obscurities of style. It was published by Golius, at Leyden, 1636, and by Manger, with a Latin translation, 1767, and 1772, 2 vols. 4to. The imperial library at Paris contains two excellent manuscripts of this work. The author died in 1450.

, a celebrated poetess of Italy, in the sixteenth century, was the natural daughter of Peter Tagliava d'Aragon, archbishop of Palermo, and a cardinal, himself an illegitimate descendant of the royal house of Aragon. Her father made a settlement on this daughter sufficient to enable her to live genteelly. She was beautiful in her person, and highly accomplished by taste and education. She spoke and wrote in Latin and Italian with the ability of the most eminent scholars, and enjoyed during life great reputation for the elegance of her manners and writings. The most distinguished scholars of the time celebrated her praises, and were proud to be ranked among her admirers. She resided mostly at Ferrara and Rome, and when advanced in age, went to Florence under the protection of the duchess Leonora of Toledo, an.d at that place she died very old, but the time is not mentioned. Her works, which have not preserved the high character bestowed by her admirers, are, 1. “Rime,” Venice, 1547, 8vo, and often reprinted. 2. “Dialogo deli‘ infinita d’Amore,” Venice, 1547. 3. “II Meschino, o il Guerino, poema,” in the ottava rima, Venice, 1560, 4to.

, memorable for his erudition, and for superior abilities disgraced by an enormous crime, was born at Ramsgill, in Netherdale, Yorkshire, and received but a mean education, as it appears that all his mental acquirements, which were prodigious, were the result of indefatigable diligence and application, assisted by uncommon talents. His father was a gardener at Newby, whom he attended in that occupation, and where his propensity to Jiterature first discovered itself. Mathematics now engaged his attention, and he soon understood quadratic equations, and their geometrical constructions. Prompted by an irresistible thirst of knowledge, he determined to make himself master of the learned languages. He got and repeated all Lilly’s grammar by heart. He next undertook Camden’s Greek grammar, which he also repeated in the same manner. Thus instructed, he entered upon the Latin classics, and at first pored over five lines for a whole day; never, in all the painful course of his reading, leaving any passage till he thought he perfectly comprehended it, Having accurately perused all the Latin classics, both historians and poets, he went through the Greek Testament, and then applied to Hesiod, Homer, Theocritus, Herodotus, Thucydides, and all the Greek tragedians. In the midst of these literary pursuits, he went, in 1734, on the invitation of William Norton, esq. to Knaresborough, where he became much esteemed; and here, with indefatigable Diligence, he acquired the knowledge of the Hebrew.tongue. In April 1744 he came again to London, and taught both Latin and writing, at Mr. Painblanc’s, in Piccadilly, above two years. He next went, in the capacity of writingmaster, to a boarding-school at Hayes, in Middlesex, kept by the Rev. Anthony Hinton. He at length succeeded to several other places in the south of England, making use of every opportunity for improvement. He was afterwards employed in transcribing the acts of parliament to be registered in Chancery, and about the beginning of December 1757, went down to the free-school at Lynn. From his leaving Knaresborough to this period, which was a long interval, he had attained the knowledge of history and antiquities, and also of heraldry and botany. Few plants", either domestic or exotic, were unknown to him. Amidst all this, he ventured upon the Chaldee and Arabic, but had not time to obtain any great knowledge of the latter. He found the Chaldee easy enough, on account of its connection with the Hebrew. He then investigated the Celtic, as far as possible, in all its dialects; began collections, and made comparisons between that, the English, the Latin, the Greek, and even the Hebrew. He had made notes, and compared above three thousand words together, and found such a surprising affinity, that he was determined to proceed through the whole of all these languages, and form a comparative lexicon. He was also far from being a contemptible poet.

With this immense stock of learning, acquired without the assistance of a master, and the most extraordinary talents, which might have made him shine in any station of life, it is to be lamented that he was guilty of an action inconsistent with every principle of humanity; for, in 1758, he was taken up at Lynn, in Norfolk, for the murder of Daniel Clark, a shoe-maker of Knaresborough, who hau been missing upwards of 13 years, and removed to York castle, where being brought to his trial, on the third of August 1759, he read a most admirable defence, in which he displayed equal modesty, good sense, and learning; but was found guilty, and the next morning confessed the justness of his sentence, acknowledging to a clergyman, that his motive for committing the murder was his suspecting Clark of having unlawful commerce with his Wife. When he was called from bed to have his irons taken off, he refused to rise, alleging that he was very weak. On examination it was found that he had attempted to take away his own life, by cutting his arm in two places with a razor. Though weak, he was conducted to the gallows of York, and there executed, and hung in chains in Knaresborough forest.

, a celebrated Italian anatomist, was born at Bologna, about the year 1530. He studied under Vesalius and his uncle Bartholomew Maggius, took his doctor’s degree at Bologna, and was soon after appointed professor of surgery and anatomy, which office he held for thirty-two years, and until his death, April 7, 1589. He studied with most attention the anatomy of the muscles, and arrived at some knowledge of the doctrine of the circulation of the blood. He wrote, 1. “De humano foetu liber,” Venice, 1571, 8vo, Basil, 1579, and Leyden, 1664. In this work he explains at great length the structure of the uterus, the placenta, &c. The Venice editions of 1587 and 1595, 4to, have the addition of some anatomical observations, and an essay on tumours by Arantius. 2. “In Hippocratis librum de vulneribus capitis commentarius brevis, ex ejus lectionibus collectus,” Lyons, 1580, Leyden, 1639, 1641, 12mo.

, the secretary and intendant of finances to Athaiaric, and afterwards subdeacon of the Romish church, flourished in the sixth century, and, according to some accounts, was born in the year 490, but the place of his birth has been contested. He certainly was of Liguria, but in his time Liguria comprehended a great part of Lombardy, and Milan was the chief city. He was educated under Laurentius, archbishop of Milan, who died in the year 504. Arator is said to have died in the year 356. At first he employed his poetical talents on profane subjects, but afterwards on those which were of a more serious kind. In the year 544, he presented Pope Vigilius with the Acts of the Apostles in Latin verse, with which the pontiff was so much pleased that he ordered the work to be read in the church of St. Peter ad Vincula, and it met with universal approbation. We find in it many of the allegories which the venerable Bede introduced in his commentary on the Acts. It was printed with other poetry of the same description, at Venice, 1502, 4to, Strasburgh, 1507, 8vo, Leipsic, 1515, 4to, and in the Bibliotheca Patrum, Paris, 1575, 1589, &c. Father Sirmond published at the end of his edition of Ennodius, a letter in elegiac verse, which Arator wrote to Parthenius.

, a Greek poet, celebrated for his poem entitled the Phenomena, flourished about the 127th olympiad, or near 300 years before Christ, while Ptolemy Philadelphus reigned in Egypt. Being educated under Dionysius Heracleotes, a Stoic philosopher, he espoused the principles of that sect, and became physician to Antigonus Gonatus, the son of Demetrius Poliorcetes, king of Macedon. The Phenomena of Aratus gives him a title to the character of an astronomer, as well as a poet. In this work he describes the nature and motion of the stars, and shews their various dispositions and relations; he describes the figures of the constellations, their situations in the sphere, the origin of the names which they bear in Greece and in Egypt, the fables which have given rise to them, the rising and setting of the stars, and he indicates the manner of knowing the constellations by their respective situations.

The poem of Aratus was commented upon and translated by many authors: of whom, among the ancients, were Cicero, Germanicus Cocsar, and Festus Avienus, who made Latin translations of it; a part of the former of which is still extant. Aratus must have been much esteemed by the ancients, since we find so great a number of scholiasts and commentators upon him; among whom are Aristarchus of Samos, the Arystylli the geometricians, Apollonius, the Evaneti, -Crates, Numenius the grammarian, Pyrrhus of Magnesia, Thales, Zeno, and many others, as may be seen in Vossius, p. 156. Suidas ascribes several other works to Aratus. Virgil, in his Georgics, has translated or imitated many passages from this author: Ovid speaks of him with admiration, as well as many others of the poets: And St. Paul has quoted a passage from him; which is in hisspeech to the Athenians (Acts xvii. 23.) whore he tells them that some of their own poets have said, “For we are also his offspring,” these words being the beginning of the 5th line of the Phenomena of Aratus.

His modern editors are Henry Stephens, who published his poem at Paris in 1566, in his collection of the poets, in folio, and Grotius, who published an edition of the Phenomena at Leyden in 4to, 1600, in Greek and Latin, with the fragments of Cicero’s version, and the translations of Germanicus and Avienus; all which the editor has illustrated with curious notes. The edition of Aratus published at Oxford by Fell, 1672, 8vo, with the scholia, is much esteemed; but the best is that recently published by J. Th. Buhle, at Leipsic, 1793 1801, 2 vols. 8vo, which is enriched by additions from manuscripts.

, Sieur de Porcheres, one of the first members of the French academy in the seventeenth century, was born in Provence, and was descended from the ancient family of Porcheres. He was the scholar and follower of Malherbe, and imitated him in the turn of his verse, and was also tutor to the son of Mr. de Chenoise, and afterwards to the son of the count Saint-Herau. The abbtj Bois-Robert, who was particularly eminent for the generous use which he made of his interest with cardinal Richelieu, procured him a pension of six hundred livres from that great man. On March 10, 1636, he spoke an oration in the French academy upon the “Love of the Sciences.” He retired at last into Burgundy, where he married, and died in 1640. He wrote a great number of verses, which were never printed. But there are others, which were published, as particularly his “Paraphrase upon the Psalms” of Degrees,“to which are added his” Poems upon divers subjects," Paris, 1633, 8vo. He had a brother, John, who had likewise a talent for poetry, and translated several of the Psalms into French verse, two editions of which have been published, the former at Grenoble in 1651, and the latter more complete at Marseilles in 1654.

, was born in Glasgow, 1700, and educated in the university of that city, where he took his degrees, and afterwards kept an academy in the north of Ireland. He wrote several poems, which have been published in one vol. 12mo and undertook a translation of Virgil, but did not live to finish it. He was a person of fine taste, and much esteemed by the learned in general. He died 1734, aged 34.

, principal of the university of Aberdeen, was the son of the baron of Arbuthnot, and was born in the year 1538. He studied philosophy and the classics in the university of Aberdeen, and civil law in France, where he was five years under the care of the famous Cujacius. Having taken the degree of licentiate, he returned home in 1563, and appeared very warmly in support of the reformed religion. At this time queen Mary was resident in her kingdom; but the earl of Murray having the supreme direction of all things, the reformed church of Scotland was in a very flourishing condition. The friends of Mr. Arbuthnot prevailed upon him to take orders, but whether he received them from a bishop or from presbyters is uncertain. In 1568, he assisted as a member of the general assembly, which was held in the month of July at Edinburgh. By this assembly he was intrusted with the care of revising a book which had given offence, entitled “The Fail of the Roman Church,” printed by one Thomas Bassenden, in Edinburgh. The exception taken to it was, that the king had the style of the supreme head of the church: at the s,ame time there was another complaint against this Bassenden, for printing a lewd song at the end of the Psalm book. On these matters an order was made, forbidding the printer to vend any more of his books till the offensive title was altered, and the lewd song omitted. The assembly also made an order, that no book should be published for the future, till licensed by commissioners of their appointment.

A little after, he was appointed minister of Arbuthnot and Logy-Buchan. The year following, viz. 1569, on a visitation of the King’s College at Aberdeen, Mr. Alexander Anderson, principal, Mr. Andrew Galloway, sub-principal, and three regents, were deprived. Their sentence was published on the third of July, and immediately Mr. Arbuthnot was made principal of that college. He was a member also of the general assembly which sat at St. Andrew’s in 1572, when a certain scheme of church-government was proposed and called the Book of Policy, an invention of some statesmen, to restore the old titles in the church, but with a purpose to retain all the temporalities formerly annexed to them, amongst themselves. The assemhly, being apprized of this, appointed the archbishop of St. Andrew’s, and nineteen other commissioners, of whom Mr. Arbuthnot was one, to confer with the regent in his council; but these conferences either came to nothing, or, which is more probable, were never held. In the general assembly which met at Edinburgh the sixth of August 1573, Mr. Alexander Arbuthnot was chosen moderator. In the next assembly, which met at Edinburgh the sixth of March 1574, he was named one of the commissioners for settling the jurisdiction of the church, which seems to be no more than had been before done about the book of policy. This business required much time and pains, but at last some progress was made therein, and a plan of jurisdiction proposed. In the general assembly, which met at Edinburgh the first of April 1577, he was again chosen moderator. At this time the assembly were persuaded, upon some specious pretences, to appoint a certain number of their members to confer in the morning with their moderator, in order to prepare business. This committee had the name of the Congregation, and in a short time all matters of importance came to be treancd there, and the assembly had little to do but to approve their resolutions. At the close of this assembly, Mr. Arbuthnot, with other commissioners, was appointed to confer with the regent, on the plan of church policy before mentioned. In the general assembly held at Edinburgh the twenty-fifth of October 1578, he was again appointed of the committee for the same purpose, and in the latter end of the year, actually conferred with several noblemen, and other laycommissioners, on that important business. In 1582, Mr. Arbuthnot published Buchanan’s History of Scotland, in which, though he acted only as an editor, yet it procured him a great deal of ill-will, and in all probability gave his majesty king James VI. a bad impression of him. The practice of managing things in congregation still subsisting, the king forbad Mr. Arbuthnot to leave his college at Aberdeen, that he might not be present in the assembly, or direct, as he was used to do, those congregations which directed that great body. This offended the ministers very much, and they did not fail to remonstrate upon it to the king, who, however, remained firm. What impression this might make upon Mr. Arbuthnot’s mind, a very meek and humble man, assisting others at their request, and not through any ambition of his own, is uncertain; but a little after he began to decline in his health, and on the 20th of October 1583, departed this life in the forty -fifth year of his age, and was buried in the college church of Aberdeen. His private character was very amiable: he was learned without pedantry, and a great encourager of learning in youth, easy and pleasant in conversation, had a good taste in poetry, was well versed in philosophy and the mathematics, eminent as a lawyer, no less eminent as a divine; neither wanted he considerable skill in physic. In his public character he was equally remarkable for his moderation and abilities, which gained him such a reputation, as drew upon him many calls for advice, which made kim at last very uneasy. As principal of the college of Aberdeen, he did great service to the church in particular, and to his country in general, by bringing over many to the former, and reviving that spirit of literature which was much decayed in the latter. These employments took up so much of his time, that we have nothing of his writing, except a single book printed at Edinburgh, in 4to, 1572, under this title, “Orationes de origine et dignitate Juris;” “Orations on the origin and dignity of the Law.” It was esteemed a very learned and elegant performance, as appears by a fine copy of Latin yerses on its publication, by Mr. Thomas Maitland, who was equally admired as a poet and a critic. Arbuthnot’s countryman and contemporary, Andrew Melvil, wrote an elegant epitaph on him, (Delit. Poet. Scot. vol. II. p. 120.) which alone would have been sufficient to preserve his memory, and gives a very just idea of his character.

, a celebrated wit and physician in queen Anne’s reign, was the son of an episcopal clergyman of Scotland, nearly allied to the noble family of that name. He had his education in the university of Aberdeen, where he took the degree of doctor of physic. The revolution deprived the father of his church preferment; and though he was possessed of a small paternal estate, vet necessity obliged the son to seek his fortune abroad. He came to London, and at first, as it is said, for his support taught the mathematics. About this time, viz. 1695, Dr. Woodward’s “Essay towards a natural history of the Earth” was published, which contained such an account of the universal deluge, as our author thought inconsistent with truth: he therefore drew up a work, entitled “An examination of Dr. Woodward’s account of the Deluge, &c. with a comparison between Steno’s philosophy and the doctor’s, in the case of marine bodies dug up out of the earth, &c.” 1695, 8vo, which gave him no small share of literary fame. His extensive learning, and facetious and agreeable conversation, introduced him by degrees into practice, and he became eminent in his profession. Being at Epsom when prince George of Denmark was suddenly taken ill, he was called in to his assistance. His advice was successful, and his highness recovering, employed him always afterwards as his physician. In consequence of this, upon the indisposition of Dr. Hannes, he was appointed physician in ordinary to queen Anne, 1709, and admitted a fellow of the college, as he had been some years of the Royal Society.

His gentle manners, polite learning, and excellent talents, entitled him to an intimate correspondence and friendship with the celebrated wits of his time, Pope, Swift, Gay, and Parnell, whom he met as a member of the Scriberus club. In 1714 he engaged with Pope and Swift in a design to write a satire on the abuse of human learning in. svery branch, which was to have been executed in the humorous manner of Cervantes, the original author of this species of satire, under the history of feigned adventures. But this project was put a stop to by the queen’s death, when they had only drawn out an imperfect essay towards it, under the title of the first book of the “Memoirs of Martinus Scriblerus .” “These Memoirs,” says Dr. Johnson, “extend only to the first part of a work, projected in concert by Pope, Swift, and Arbuthnot. Their purpose was to censure the abuses of learning by a fictitious life of an infatuated scholar. They were dispersed; the design was never completed; and Warburton laments its miscarriage, as an event very disastrous to polite letters. If the whole may be estimated by this specimen, which seems to be the prooduction of Arbuthnot, with a few touches perhaps by Pope, the want of more will not be much lamented; for the follies which the writer ridicules are so little practised, that they are not known; nor can the satire be understood but by the learned; he raises phantoms of absurdity, and then drives them away. He cures diseases that were never felt For this reason, this joint production of three great writers has never attained any notice from, mankind.”

The queen’s death, and the disasters which fell upon his friends on that occasion, deeply affected our author’s spirits; and to divert his melancholy, he paid a visit to his brother, a banker at Paris. His stay there, however, was but very short; he returned to London, and having lost his former residence at St. James’s, took a house in Dover-street. In 1727, he published “Tables of ancient Coins, Weights, and Measures,” 4to. He continued to practise physic with good reputation, and diverted his leisure hours in writing papers of wit and humour. He contributed in 1732 towards detecting and punishing the scandalous frauds and abuses that had been carried on under the specious name of the “The Charitable Corporation.” The same year he published his “Essay concerning the nature of Aliments, the choice of them, &c.” which was followed the year alter by the “Effects of Air on Human Bodies.” He was apparently led to the subjects of these treatises by the consideration of his own case; an asthma, which gradually increasing with his years, became shortly after desperate and incurable. In 1734 he retired to Hampstead, in hopes of finding some small relief for this affliction, but died at his house in Cork-street, Burlington-gardens, Feb. 27, 1734-5. He was married, and had children, particularly George and Anne; the former enjoyed a place of considerable profit in the exchequer-office, and was one of the executors to Pope’s will, and the other a legatee.

Pope, in a letter to Digby, dated Sept. 1, 1722, tells him, that the first time he saw the doctor, Swift observed to him, that he was a man who could do every thing but walk. He appears to have been in all respects a most accomplished and amiable person. He has shewn himself equal to any of his contemporaries, in humour, vivacity, and learning; and he was superior to most men in the moral duties of life, in acts of humanity and benevolence. “Arbuthnot,” says Dr. Johnson in his life of Pope, “was a man of great comprehension, skilful in his profession, versed in the sciences, acquainted with ancient literature, and able to animate his mass of knowledge by a bright and active imagination; a scholar with great brilliance of wit; a wit, who, in the crowd of life, retained and discovered a noble ardour of religious zeal.” Dr. Warton also is very copious in his praise, and says, that he had infinitely more learning than Pope or Swift, and as much wit and humour as either. His letter to Pope, written as it were upon his death-bed, and which no one can read without the tenderest emotion, discovers considerable fortitude of mind at the approach of his dissolution. In 1751, came out, in two vols. 8vo. printed at Glasgow, “The miscellaneous works of the late Dr. Arbuthnot,” which are said to comprehend, with what is inserted in Swift’s Miscellanies, all his pieces of wit and humour: but the genuineness of many pieces in that collection is more than apocryphal; and a collection of his works, as well as a life of the author, are still desiderata. Several of the pieces in the above miscellany were written by Fielding, Henry Carey, and other authors, who are known; and some of them were written after Dr. Arbuthnot’s death, or when he was too ill to compose such trifles.

, priest of the oratory, born at Marseilles, in 1693, died Feb. 7, 1782, at an advanced age, is less known by his having borne away the prizes for poetry, at Toulouse, at Marseilles,' and at Pau, than by his “History of the town of Rochelle, and the country of Aunis,” 1756, 2 vols. 4to, and in 6 vols. 12mo. This work had been long expected, and evidently cost the author much attention and labour. It is a full and complete history of one of the smallest provinces of France (according to the ancient division), by one who had spent many years in collecting and digesting his materials. The natural and civil history are treated with great ability and; precision. He may, however, he blamed, in common with many topographers, for a certain Degree of prolixity which general readers seldom can relish. His other works are “'Eloge de P. Jaillot,” 1750, 4to; “Journal Historique de la tentative* de la flotte Angloisc sur la cote d'Aunisj” 1757, 4to. This alludes to a well-known expedition, which few Englishmen have much pleasure in remembering. “Memoire sur la necessite de diminuer le nombre des fetes,” 1763, 12mo; “De Fetat de l‘agriculture chez les Romains depuis le commencement de la Republique jusqu’au siecle de Jules Caesar relativement au gouvernment, aux mceurs, et au commerce,” 1777, 8vo. This work, which discovers much research, and profound reflexion, was an answer to the prize questions on the subjects handled, proposed by the Academy of Inscriptions and Belles Lettres, and obtained the acccssit of that learned body. To his learning, M. Arcere is said to have joined great probity, and suavity of manners.

, a celebrated Greek philosopher, about 300 years before the Christian sera, was born at Pitane, in Eolis. He founded what in the history of ancient philosophy is denominated the Second Academy. He was a man of great learning, and versed in the writings of the ancients, remarkable for the severity of his criticisms; but, in his private character, no enemy to the utmost licentiousness of his age. He had, however, a great number of disciples. His doctrines were different in many respects from what his predecessors had taught; but, instead of reforming their errors, he plunged into as great and perhaps more pernicious absurdities. It was the opinion of his school that we could know nothing, nor even assure ourselves of the certainty of this position: thence they inferred that we should affirm nothing, but always suspend our judgment. They advanced, however, that a philosopher was able to dispute upon every subject, and force conviction whichever side of the question he chose to adopt; and that there were always reasons of equal force, both in the affirmative and negative of every argument. Neither our senses nor our reason were to have any credit. Stanley and Brucker, in their Histories of Philosophy, may be consulted for a detail of the reveries of Arcesilaus; and Bayle has an elaborate article on the same subject, Arcesilaus is said to have died of excess, in his 75th year, in the fourth year of the 134th olympiad. He appears to have been a man of good taste, as he studied Homer with a relish approaching to reverence.

, a Greek philosopher, the disciple of Anaxagoras, flourished ahout 440 years before the Christian icra. He read lectures at Athens, not dissimilar from, those of his master. He taught that there was a double principle of all things, namely, the expansion and condensation of the air, which he regarded as infinite. Heat, according to him, was in continual motion; but cold was ever at rest. The earth, which was placed in the midst of the universe, had no motion. It originally resembled a wet marsh, but was afterwards dried up; and its figure, he said, resembled that of an egg. Animals, including man, were produced from the heat of the earth; he held also, that all animals have a soul, which was born with them; -but the capacities of which vary according to the structure of the organs of the body in which it resides. His principles of morals were very pernicious, but gave way to the purer opinions of Socrates, who was the most illustrious of his disciples, and his successor.

, a Greek poet of Antioch ia Asia, is more known from the eloquent orations pronounced by Cicero in his favour, than by the few fragments of his that are come down to us. He was denied the title of Roman citizen, which Cicero caused to be confirmed to him, by maintaining that he had it; and that even if he had it not, his probity and his talents ought to have procured it for him. He lived about 60 years before the common sera. Archias composed several pieces; among others, a poem on the War of the Cimbri, and had begun another on the Consulate of Cicero, but none of his works have reached our times, except some epigrams in the Greek Anthology, and in Brunck’s “Analecta veterum poetarum Grsecorum,” vol. II. p. 92. They were also lately published, with notes and a Latin translation by Ilgen, 1800, who has subjoined a critical inquiry into the life and genius of Archias. It is not from these, however, that we can estimate the value of Cicero’s high praise of this author. Except two or three, these epigrams scarcely rise above mediocrity.

, a Greek poet, born in the isle of Paros, was the son of Telesicles; and, according to Mr. Bavle, flourished in the 29th olympiad, or about 660 years before Christ. His poetry abounded with the most poignant satire, and his satirical vein had such an effect on Lycambes, that he is said to have hanged himself. The indignation of Archilochus against Lycambes arose from the latter’s not keeping his word with regard to his daughter, whom he first promised and afterwards refused to Archilochus. It is not unlikely that he attacked the whole family of Lycambes in his lampoon, for it is said by Horace, that the daughter followed the example of her father; and there are some who affirm, that three of Lycambes’s daughters died of vexation at the same time. In this piece of Archilochus, many adventures are mentioned, full of defamation, and out of the knowledge of the public. There were likewise many indecent passages in the poem; and it is supposed to have been on account of this satire that the Lacedaemonians laid a prohibition on his verses. “The Lacedaemonians,” says Valerius Maximus, “commanded the books of Archilochus to be carried out of their city, because they thought the reading of them not to be very modest or chaste: for they were unwilling the minds of their children should be tinctured with them, lest they should do more harm to their manners than service to their genius. And so they banished the verses of the greatest, or at least the next to the greatest poet, because he had attacked a family which he hated, with indecent abuse.” It has been affirmed by some, that he himself was banished from Lacedsemon; and the maxim inserted in one of his pieces is assigned for the reason thereof, “That it was better to fling down one’s arms, than to lose one’s life:” he had written this in vindication of himself.

Archilochus was so much addicted to raillery and abuse, that he did not even spare himself. He excelled chiefly in iambic verses, and was the inventor of them, as appears from a passage in Horace: Epist. xix. lib. i. ver. 23. He is one of the three poets whom Aristarchus approved in this kind of poetry. Quintilian puts him, in some respects, below the other two. Aristophanes the grammanan thought, that the longer his iambic poems were, the finer they were, as Cicero thus informs us: “The longest of your epistles,” says he to Atticus, “seem to me the best, as the iambics of Archilochus did to Aristophanes.” The hymn which he wrote to Hercules and lolaus was so much esteemed, that it used to be sung three times to the honour of those who had gained the victory at the Olympic games. There are few of his works extant; and this, says Mr. Bayle, is rather a gain than a loss, with regard to morality. Heraclides composed a dialogue upon the life of this poet; which, if it had remained, would in all probability have furnished us with many particulars concerning Archilochus.

, one of the most celebrated mathematicians among the ancients, flourished about 250 years before Christ, being about 50 years later than Euclid. He was born at Syracuse in Sicily, and was related to Hiero, who was then king of that city. The mathematical genius of Archimedes placed him with such distinguished excellence in the view of the world, as rendered him both the honour of his own age, and the admiration of posterity. He was indeed the prince of the ancient mathematicians, being to them what Newton is to the moderns, to whom in his genius and character he bears a very near resemblance. He was frequently lost in a kind of reverie, so as to appear hardly sensible; he would study for days and nights together, neglecting his food; and Plutarch tells us that he used to be carried to the baths by force. Many particulars of his lire, and works, mathematical and mechanical, are recorded by several of the ancients, as Polybius, Livy, Plutarch, Pappus, &c. He was equally skilled in all the sciences, astronomy, geometry, mechanics, hydrostatics, optics, &c. in all of which he excelled, and made many and great inventions. Among others, he made a sphere of glass, of a most surprizing contrivance and workmanship, exhibiting the motions of the heavenly bodies. Claudian wrote an epigram on this invention.

Many wonderful stories are told of his various discoveries and machines; and when Hiero was once admiring them, Archimedes replied, “These effects are nothing. Give me some other place to fix a machine upon, and I shall move the earth.”

He fell upon a curious method of discovering the deceit, which had been practised by a workman, employed by king Hiero to make him a golden crown. Hiero, having a mind to make an oilering to the gods of a golden crown, agreed for one of great value, and weighed out the gold to the maker, who brought one home the full weight; but it was afterwards discovered, that a quantity of the gold was embezzled, and supplied with a like weight of silver. Hiero, being angry at this imposition, desired Archimedes to take it into consideration, by what method such a fraud might be discovered for the future. Whilst he was engaged in the solution of this difficulty, he happened to go into the bath; where observing, that a quantity of water overflowed, equal to the bulk of his body, it immediately occurred to him, that Hiero’s question might be answered by a like method, on which he leaped out, and ran homeward, crying, εὕρηκα! εὕρηκα! He then made two masses, each of equal weight with the crown, one of gold and the other of silver: when he had done this, he filled a large vessel to the brim with water, and put the silver mass into it, upon which a quantity of water overflowed equal to the bulk of the mass; then taking the mass out, he filled up the vessel again, measuring the water exactly, which he put in: this shewed him what measure of water answered to a certain quantity of silver. Then he tried the gold in like manner, and found that it caused a less quantity of water to overflow, the gold being less in bulk than the silver, though of the same weight. Then he filled the vessel a third time, and putting in the crown itself, he found that it caused more water to overflow than the golden mass of the same weight; whence he computed the mixture of silver with the gold, and so manifestly discovered the fraud.

But he became most famous for his curious contrivances, by which the city of Syracuse was so long defended, when besieged by Marcellus. “The vigorous efforts made to carry the place had certainly succeeded sooner,” says Livy, “had they not been frustrated by one man this was Archimedes, famous for his skill in astronomy, but more so for his surprising invention of warlike machines, with which in an instant he destroyed what had cost the enemy vast labour to erect. Against the vessels, which came up close to the walls, he contrived a kind of crow, projected above the wall, with an iron grapple fastened to a strong chain. This was let down upon the prow of a ship, and by means of the weight of a heavy counterpoise of lead, raised up the prow, and set the vessel upright iipon her poop: then dropping it all of a sudden, as if it had taUen from the walls, it sunk so far into the sea, that it let in a great deal of water, even when it fell directly on its keel.” However, notwithstanding all his art, Syracuse was at length taken by Marcellus, who commanded his soldiers to have a particular regard to the safety of Archimedes; but this ingenious man was unfortunatejy slain by a soldier, who did not know him. “What gave Marcellus the greatest concern,” says Plutarch, “was the unhappy fate of Archimedes, who was at that time in his museum and his mind, as well as eyes, so fiyed and intent upon some geometrical figures, that he neither heard the noise and hurry of the Romans, nor perceived the city to be taken. In this depth of study and contemplation, a soldier came suddenly upon him, and commanded him to follow him to Marcellus; which he refusing to do, till he had finished his problem, the soldier, in a rage, drew his sword, and ran him through.” Others write, tb.at Archimedes, seeing a soldier coming with a drawn sword to kill him, entreated him to hold his hand one moment, that be might notdie with the regret of having left his problem unfinished; but that the soldier, without paying any regard, killed him immediately. Others again write, that as Archimedes was carrying some mathematical instruments in a box to Marcellus, as sun-dials, spheres, and angles, with which the eye might measure the magnitude of the sun’s body, some soldiers met him, and believing there was gold in it, slew him. Livy says he was slain by a soldier, who did not know who he was, whilst he was drawing schemes in the dust: that Marcellus was grieved at his death, and took care of his funeral; making frs name at the same time a protection and honour to those who could claim a relationship to him. Archimedes is said to have been killed in the 143d olympiad, the 546th year of Homer, and about 208 years before the birth of Christ. When Cicero was quaestor for Sicily, he discovered the tomb of Archimedes, all over-grown with bushes and brambles: there was an inscription upon it, but the latter part of the verses was quite worn out, as he himself informs us. Many of the works of this great man are still extant, though the greatest part of them is lost. His pieces which remain are, 1. Two books of the sphere and cylinder. 2. The dimension of a circle. 3. Of centres of gravity or aequiponderants. 4. Of spheroids and conoids. 5. Of spiral lines. 6. The quadrature of a parabola. 7. Of the commensuration of sand. 8. Of bodies that float on fluids. 9. Lemmata.

Among the works of Archimedes which are lost, we may reckon the descriptions of the following inventions, which may be gathered from himself and other ancient authors.

1. His account of the method which he used to discover the mixture of gold and silver in the crown. 2. H^s description of the Cochlion, an engine to draw water out of places where it is stagnated. Athenaeus, speaking of the prodigious ship built by the order of Hiero, tells us, that Archimedes invented the cochlion, by means of which the hold, notwithstanding its depth, could be drained by one man. Diodorus Siculus informs us (lib. v.) that he contrived this machine to drain Egypt, and that by a wonderful mechanism it would empty the water from any depth. 3. The Helix, by means of which (according to Athenaeus) he launched Hiero’s great ship. 4. The Trispaston, of the power of which Tzetzes gives a relation. 5. The machines he used in the defence of Syracuse against Marcellus. Of these we have an account in Polybius, Livy, and Plutarch. 6. His burning-glasses, with which he is said to have set fire to the Roman gallies. 7. His pneumatic and hydraulic engines, concerning which he wrote books, according to Tzetzes. 8. His sphere, which exhibited the celestial motions, and probably many others.

A whole volume might be written upon the curious methods and inventions of Archimedes, that appear in his mathematical writings now extant only. He was the first who squared a curvilineal space; unless Hypocrates must be excepted on account of his lunes. In his time the conic sections were admitted into geometry, and he applied himself closely to the measuring of them as well as other figures. Accordingly he determined the relations of spheres, spheroids, and conoids, to cylinders and cones; and the relations of parabolas to rectilineal planes, whose quadratures had long before been determined by Euclid. He has also left us his attempts upon the circle; he proved that a circle is equal to a right-angled triangle, whose base is equal. to the circumference, and its altitude equal to the radius; and consequently, that its area is equal to the rectangle of half the diameter and half the circumference; thus reducing the quadrature of the circle to the determination of the ratio between the diameter and circumference; which determination, however, has not yet been, done. But we must refer to Dr. Hutton for the farther improvements of this wonderful man.

There have been various editions of the existing writings of Archimedes. The whole of these works, together with the commentary of Eutocius, were found in their original Greek language, on the taking of Constantinople, from whence they were brought into Italy; and here they were foundry that excellent mathematician John Muller, otherwise called Regiomontanus, who brought them into Germany; where they were, with that commentary, published long after, viz. in 1544, at Basil, most beautifully printed in folio, Gr. & Lat. by Hervagius, under the care of Thomas Gechauff Venatorius. A Latin translation was published at Paris, 1557, by Pascalius Hamellius. Another edition of the whole, in Greek and Latin, was published at Paris, 1615, fol. by David Rivaltus, illustrated with new demonstrations and commentaries; a life of the author is prefixed: and at the end of the volume is added some account, by way of restoration, of the author’s other works, which have been lost. In 1675, Dr. Isaac Barrow published a neat edition of the works, in Latin, at London, 4to; illustrated, and succinctly demonstrated in a new method. But the most complete of any, is the magnificent edition, in folio, printed at the Clarendon press, in Oxford, in 1792. This edition was prepared ready for the press by the learned Joseph Torelli, of Verona, who was discouraged by the prospect of the expence that was likely to attend the publication. He had finished it some time before his death; and, while he was demurring in regard to the mode of publishing it, he was induced by the advice and recommendation of the late earl Stanhope, whose zeal in the cause of science reflects distinguished honour on his name and memory, to commence a treaty with the curators of the Clarendon press at Oxford. Torelli, unwilling to give up the charge of superintending the publication, still hesitated, and died before the transaction was completed. The treaty was again renewed by Alberto Albertini, the executor of the learned editor’s will, who entrusted the work to the university of Oxford. Ah th papers which Torelli had prepared with a view to. this edition, Alhertini presented to the university, and transmitted, at the original cost, all the engravings of figures that were necessary for the completion of it. John Strange, esq. the British resident at Venice, was very active in conducting and terminating the business. The arrangement of the papers, the correction of the press, and the whole superintewdance of the edition, were committed by the university to Mr. (now Dr.) Abraham Robertson, of Christ church, a gentleman in every respect qualified for the trust reposed in him. The Latin translation of this edition is a new one. Torelli also wrote a preface, a commentary on some of the pieces, and notes on the whole. An account of the life and writings of Torelli is prefixed by Clement Sibiliati; of this a sketch will be given in its proper place. At the end a large appendix is added, in two parts: the first being a commentary on Archimedes’s paper upon “Bodies that flow on fluids,” by Dr. Robertson; and the latter is a large collection of various readings in the ms works of Archimedes, found in the library of the last king of France, and of another at Florence, as collated with the Basil edition above mentioned.

There are also extant other editions of certain parts of the works of Archimedes. Commandine published the two books “On bodies that float upon fluids,” with a commentary, 4to, Bologna, 1565. Borelli published, in fol. 1661, Florence, Archimedes “Liber Assumptorum,” translated into Latin from an Arabic manuscript copy. This is accompanied with the like translation, from the Arabic, of the 5th, 6th, and 7th books of Apollonius’s Conies. Mr. G. Anderson published an English translation of the Arenarins. (See George Anderson).

, a Milanese count, the son of Horace Archinto and Leonora Tousa, was born about the end of the sixteenth century. He was employed in several political offices, and received from Philip III. king of Spain, the title of count de Barata. He died June 15, 1656. Much of his time had been devoted to the study of the antiquities of his country, and he formed a large collection of antiques, of which he published descriptions. His principal works are, 1. “Epilogati racconti delle aniichita, c nobilta dell a famiglia Archinti, &c. Aggiunlavi una breve expositione degli antichi marmi, che ne' palagi di questa famiglia si leggono,” Milan, 1648, fol. 2. “Collectanea antiquitatum in ejus domo,” fol. without date or place, and so rare as to be unknown to Argellati, who takes no notice of it in his library of Milanese writers; but it is frequently mentioned by Muratori.

, the son of the senator Philip Archinto, was born at Milan, July 30, 1669, and after studying at Brera and Ingoldstadt, travelled in. France, Germany, Holland; and then resided so long at Home, that he did not return to Milan until the year 1700. Two years after he instituted an academy for the sciences and mechanics. This he enriched with an extensive and curious library, and a collection of the finest mathematical instruments that could be procured in Italy, France, and England. It is to him the public owe the Palatine society (see Argellati), whose valuable editions began with Muratori' s vast collection of the Italian historians. He received very high honours in his country, being appointed by the emperor Leopold, a gentleman of the bed-chamber; and by Charles II. and Philip V. of Spain, a knight of the golden fleece, and a grandee of Spain. There is nothing of his in print, except some notes on Arnulphus’ history in the “Scrip. Rer. Ital.” and a work published at Venice after his death, entitled “Tabulae, pracipua scientiarum et artium capita digesta per ordinem, &c.” But he left a great many manuscripts on scientific subjects, written some in Latin and some in Italian, and a collection of Latin poems.

, chaplain to Louis XIV. was born at Riom in Auvergne in 1645, the son of a lawyer. As his father managed the affairs of the cardinal de Bouillon, he obtained, by the interest of that prelate, a place of one of the king’s chaplains, and that of keeper of the ornaments, which was created purposely for him. In 1678, he was appointed to the abbey of St. Gilbert neuf-fontaines, in the diocese of Clermont, where he died in 1717. He wrote the “History of the Chapel of the kings of France,” Paris, 1711, 2 vols. 4to. containing a variety of curious matter, not only on the chapel, but on the great almoners, first almoners, confessors, &c. He was licentiate in theology of the faculty of Paris.

, of Tarentum, a celebrated mathematician, cosmographer, and Pythagorean philosopher, flourished about 400 years before Christ, and was the master of Plato, Eudoxus, and Philolaus. He gave a method of finding two mean proportionals between two given lines; and thence the duplication of the cube, by means of the conic sections. His skill in mechanics was such, that he was said to be the inventor of the crane and the screw: and he made a wooden pigeon that could fly about, when it was once set off, but it could not rise again of itself, after it rested. He wrote several works, though few are now extant. It is said'he invented the ten categories. He acquired great reputation both in his legislative and military capacity, having commanded an army seven times without ever being defeated. He was at last shipwrecked, and drowned in the Adriatic sea. His philosophy as well as his moral character was more pure than that of many of the ancient philosophers. The sum of his moral doctrine was, that virtue is to be pursued for its own sake in every condition of life; that all excess is inconsistent with virtue; that the mind is more injured by prosperity than by adversity, and that there is no pestilence so destructive to human happiness as pleasure. Brucker thinks that Aristotle was indebted to Archytas for many of his moral ideas, particularly for the notion which runs through his ethical pieces, that virtue consists in avoiding extremes. With respect to his personal character, it is said of him that he never chastised a servant, or punished an inferior, in wrath. To one of his dependants who had offended him, he said, “It is well for you that I am angry; otherwise, I know not what you might expect.” We have only a metaphysic work by Archytas, “On the nature of the Universe,” published in Greek by Camerarius, Leipsic, 1564, 8vo; Venice, 1571, 4to. Gr. and Lat. and sundry fragments on “Wisdom,” and “Of the good and happy man,” preserved by Stobseus, and edited from him by Gale.

, a Swedish historian, was born at Helsingfors, Feb. 9, 1695, and died July 14, 1777. He published various political works, principally relating to the history of his own country, none of which have been very highly esteemed. He was, however, indefatigable in his researches for the materials of history and biography; and about the time of his death, a “History of Gustavus Adolphus, king of Sweden,” was published at Breslaw in 2 vols. 8vo. originally written by Mauvillon, a Frenchman; but now much improved from the Mss. of M. Arckenholz. He published in his life-time, “Memoirs concerning Christina, queen of Sweden,” 4 vols. 4to, Amst. 1751—1760, a work which may be consulted with advantage, although it has few of the charms of elegance or conciseness. A long account of this writer may be seen in Adelung’s continuation of Jocher’s Lexicon.

, a good Latin poet of the sixteenth century, the second son of count Oderic, privy counsellor to the emperor Maximilian, was born Dec. 3, 1479, at Arco, a small town of the Tyrol, in the diocese of Trente, and an ancient fief of his family. He was at first page to the emperor Frederic III. the father of Maximilian; but devoting himself much to study, acquired a critical knowledge of the ancient languages, and spoke all the modern ones as easily as his own. He afterwards served in the army; but the death of his brother having enabled him to succeed to his paternal estates, he obtained leave to retire, and was afterwards in several public employments. Still the love of literature predominated, and induced him to form an intimacy with Paul Jovius, Annibal Caro, Flaminio, Fracastorius, and other eminent men of his time. He is thought to have died about the end of 1546. His poems were first published, at Mantua, in 1546, 4to, under the title of “Nicolai Archii comitis Numeri,” a very rare edition, but reprinted by Comino, with the poems of Fumano and Fracastorius, Padua, 1759, 2 vols. 4to. He wrote other works, which are yet in manuscript. One of his descendants, count Gumbattista D'Arco, imperial intendant at Mantua, and a member of the royal academy of that city, was also author of some works in great estimation, particularly a learned essay on the famous troubadour Sordello, and an eloge on count de Firmian (1783). He was a liberal patron of the arts, and Mantua is indebted to him for the fine original bust of Virgil.

, a Greek ecclesiastic of the isle of Corfou, went to study at Rome, but Clement VIII. sent him to Russia to settle some disputes about religion. On his return, he was so fortunate as to attach himself to cardinal Bovghese, a nephew of the pope, who found him worthy of his patronage and esteem. Of his writings we find: 1. “De concordia ecclesiee occidentals et orientalis, in septem sacrauientorum adminjstratione,” printed at Paris, in 1672, 4to. 2. “Utrum detur purgatorium?” Home, 1632, 4to. 3. “De purgatorio igne,” ibid. 1637, 4to. 4. “Opuscula de processione spiritds sancti,” ibid. 1630, 4to. He is extremely violent against all innovators, whose name he abominates, and under which name he includes the authors of the reformation. Eusebius Renaudot even charges him with want of veracity, and of common honesty, and asserts that he was employed to cry down the Greek church. Arcudio died at Rome, at the college of the Greeks, about the year 1635, in consequence of an accident.

was descended of a most ancient and honourable family, seated at Parkhall, in Warwickshire. He was born' in 1532, and his father dying when he was an infant of two years old, he became, before he inherited the estate of the family, the ward of sir George Throkmorton, of Coughton, whose daughter Mary he afterwards married. In all probability, it was his engagement with this family, and being bred in it, that made him so firm a papist as he was. However, succeeding his grandfather, Thomas Arden, esq. in 1562, in the familyestate, he married Mary (Throkmorton), and settled in the country, his religion impeding his preferment, and his temper inclining him to a retired life. His being a near neighbour to the great earl of Leicester, occasioned his having some altercations with him, who affected to rule all things in that county, and some persons, though of good families, and possessed of considerable estates, thought it no discredit to wear that nobleman’s livery, which Mr. Arden disdained. In the course of this fatal quarrel, excessive insolence on one side produced some warm expressions on the other; insomuch that Mr. Arden npenly taxed the earl with his conversing criminally with the countess of Essex in that earl’s lite-time; and also inveighed against his pride, as a thing more inexcusable in a nobleman newly created. These taunts having exasperated that minister, he projected, or at least forwarded, his destruction. Mr. Arden had married one of his daughters to John Somerville, esq. a young gentleman of an old family and good fortune, in the same county, but who was a man of a hot rash temper, and by many thought a little insane. He was drawn in a strange manner to plot (if it may be so called) against the queen’s life; and thus the treason is alleged to have been transacted. In the Whitsun-holidays, 1583, he with his wife was at Mr. Arden’s, where Hugh Hall, his father-in-law’s priest, persuaded him that queen Elizabeth being an incorrigible heretic, and growing daily from bad to worse, it would be doing God and his country good service to take her life away. When the holidays were over, he returned to his own house with his wife, where he grew melancholy and irresolute. Upon this his wife wrote to Hall, her father’s priest, to come and strengthen his purpose. Hall excused his coming, but wrote at large, to encourage Somerville to prosecute what he had undertaken. This letter induced Somerville to set out for London, but he proceeded no farther than Warwick, where, drawing his sword and wounding some protestaats, he was instantly seized. While he was going to Warwick, his wife went over to her father’s, and shewed him and her mother Hall’s treasonable letter, which her father threw into the fire; so that only the hearsay of this letter could be alleged against him and his wife, by Hall who wrote it, who was tried and condemned with them. On Somerville’s apprehension, he said somewhat of his father and mother-in-law, and immediately orders were sent into Warwickshire for their being seized and imprisoned. October 30, 1583, Mr. Somerville was committed to the Tower for high-treason. November 4, Hall, the priest, was committed also; and on the seventh of the same month, Mr. Arden. On the sixteenth, Mary the wife of Mr. Arden, Margaret their daughter, wife to Mr. Somerville, and Elizabeth, the sister of Mr. Somerville, were committed. On the twenty-third Mr. Arden was racked in the Tower, and the next day Hugh Hall the priest was tortured likewise. By these methods some kind of evidence being brought out, on the sixteenth of December Edward Arden, esq. and Mary his wife, John Somerville, esq. and Hugh Hall the priest, were tried and convicted of high-treason at Guildhall, London; chiefly on Hall’s confession, who yet received sentence with the rest. On the nineteenth of December, Mr. Arden and his son-in-law, Somerville, were removed from the Tower to Newgate, for a night’s time only. In this space Somerville was strangled by his own hands, as it was given out; but, as the world believed, by such as desired to remove him silently. The next day, being December 20, 1583, Edward Arden was executed at Smithfield with the general pity of all spectators. He died with the same high spirit he had shewn throughout his life. After professing his innocence, he owned himself a papist, and one who died for his religion, and want of flexibility, though under colour of conspiring against the state. He strenuously insisted, that Somerville was murdered, to prevent his shaming his prosecutors; and having thus extenuated things to such as heard him, he patiently submitted to an ignominious death. His execution was according to the rigour of the law, his head being set (as Somerville’s also was) upon London-bridge, and his quarters upon the city gates; but the body of his son-in-law was interred in Moornelds. Mrs. Arden was pardoned; but the queen gave the estate which fell to her, by her and her husband’s attainder, to Mr. Darcy. Hugh Hall, the priest, likewise was pardoned; but Leicester, doubting his secrecy, would have engaged chancellor Hatton to send him abroad; which he refusing, new rumours, little to that proud earl’s honour, flew about. Holinshed, Stowe, and other writers, treat Mr. Arden as a traitor fairly convicted; but Camden. was too honest to write thus, and it may be probable, that he died for being a firm Englishman, rather than a bad subject. His son and heir Robert Arden, esq. being bred in one of the inns of court, proved a very wise and fortunate person: insomuch that by various suits he wrung from Edward Darcy, esq. the grantee, most of his father’s estates, and by marrying Elizabeth, daughter of Reginald Corbet, esq. one of the justices of the king’s bench, he restored the credit and splendour of this ancient family, and was so happy as to see Henry Arden, esq. his eldest son, knighted by king James, and married to Dorothy the daughter of Basil Fielding of Kewnham, esq. whose son became earl of Denbigh. On this account, the last editor of the Biographia Britannica remarks, that the conduct of lord Burleigh in Mr. Arden’s fate is somewhat equivocal. If that great man. was convinced of Mr. Arden’s innocence, it was totally unworthy of his character to charge him with having been a traitor. It is more 'honourable, therefore, to lord Burleigh’s reputation, and more agreeable to probability, to suppose that he believed Mr. Arden to be guilty, at least in a certain degree, of evil designs against the queen. Indeed, Arden was so bigoted a papist, that it is not unlikely but that by some imprudent words, if not by actions, he might furnish a pretence for the accusations brought against him. We can scarcely otherwise imagine how it would have been possible for the government to have proceeded to such extremities. We do not mean, by these remarks, to vindicate the severity with which this unfortunate gentleman was treated; and are sensible that, during queen Elizabeth’s reign, there was solid foundation for the jealousy and dread which were entertained of the Roman catholics.

, a French poetical and miscellaneous writer, was born at Marseilles, where his father was a commissioner of the gallies, March 3, 1684, and studied first at Nancy, and afterwards at home under the eye of his parents. His first verses were engraven on the trees, and his long residence in the country inspired him to write in the pastoral style. His parents in vain solicited him to engage in some profession, but he shelved an invincible repugnance, and was afterwards enabled to pursue his inclinations. He married in 1711, and some time after came to Paris, where he connected himself with Du Bos, Danchet, and Fontenelle; and during his essence here, he wrote his fables. In 1724, he returned to Provence, and was a competitor for some academical prizes, and in 1727, published his performances. He died at Marseilles, March 27, 1748. His principal works are, 1. “Recueil de Fables nouvelles en vers,” 1747, 12mo. 2. “Œuvres posthumes,” Marseilles, 1764, 4 vols. 12mo, consisting of a volume of new fables, a comedy, the Novelist, in three acts, odes, epigrams, epistles in prose and verse, and an academical discourse. His preliminary Essay on Fable, in the first volume, is considered as an ingenious performance.

, brother of the preceding, and a priest of the Oratory, was born at Marseilles in 1689, gained several academical prizes for his poetical essays, and became superior of the college of his congregation. The delicacy of his health rendering retirement necessary, he went to the chateau d'Ardenne, near Sisteron, where he passed the remainder of his days in study, and rendered himself dear to the poor of the neighbourhood by many acts of charity. He died Dec. 5, 1769. Botany was his favourite pursuit in this retirement, where he formed a garden that was eagerly visited by persons curious in rare plants and flowers; and the result of his studies appeared in the following publications, 1. “Traite de Renoncules,” Paris, 1746, 8vo. 2. “Traite des Tulipes,” 1760, 12mo. 3. “Traite des Oeillets,” 1762, 12mo. 4. “Traite des lacinthes,” 12mo. 5. “Traite de l‘Oreille d’ours,” 8vo. 6. “Lettres interessantes pour les medicins de profession, utiles aux ecclesiastiques,” Avignon, 1759, 2 vols. 12mo. 7. “Annee champetre,” Florence (really Lyons), 1769, 3 vols. 12mo. He was also editor of his brother’s posthumous works.

, an early medical writer of the English nation, whose works come within the notice of Dr. Freind. It appears that he was a surgeon of great experience, and the first who is recorded as having become eminent in that branch in this nation. He was many years settled in the town of Newark, from 1348 to 1370, when he removed to London; but the exact time of his death is not known. Although much empiricism and superstition appear in his practice, yet many useful observations are to be found in his writings, and he may be classed among those who have really improved their profession. A treatise of his on the “Fistula in Ano” was translated and published by John Read in 1588, and he left a manuscript which is in the Sloanean library, entitled “De re Herbaria, Physica, et Chirurgica.”

, an English divine, dean of Chester, was a native of Cheshire, and descended from an ancient family of the same name in that county. He was educated in Christ’s college, Cambridge, and in 1673, he became a fellow-commoner of Brazen-nose college, Oxford, partly for the sake of the public library, and partly to enjoy the conversation of the divines of this university. He held the living of St. Botolph Aldgate in London from 1666 to 1682, when king Charles Ij. to whom he was chaplain in ordinary, bestowed on him the deanery of Chester. He attached himself afterwards to the cause of James II. and suffered much in his popularity at Chester, where he died Sept. 18, 1691, and was buried in the cathedral church. By will he bequeathed his books and the principal part of his estate to provide and maintain a public library in the said cathedral of Chester for the use of the city and clergy. His writings were, “Directions concerning the matter and style of Sermons,” 1671, 12mo; “Conjectura circa Enw/tw D. dementis Itomani, cui subjiciuntur castigationes in Epiphanium et Petavium de Eucharistia, de Ccelibatu Ciericorum, et de orationibus pro vita functis,” Lond. 1683, 4to. In the title of this book he latinizes his name into Jacobus de Ardenna. He printed also some single sermons on occasional topics.

, a lawyer and macaronic poet in the sixteenth century, was born at Solliers, in the diocese of Toulon, of a family known from the thirteenth century by the name of La Sable. After studying under Alciatus at Avignon, he began his literary career by writing some wretched books on jurisprudence, and comforted himself for the little demand that was made for them by the fame of his macaronic verses. This species of poetry, which Merlin Coccaio brought into great vogue in Italy, consisted in a confused string of words partly Latin, partly French, partly Provencal, made into a medley of barbarous composition. The principal performance of this kind by our provengal poet is his “Description of the war carried on by Charles V. in Provence,” printed at Avignon, and very scarce of that edition, in 1537; reprinted in 1717 in 8vo, at Paris, under the name of Avignon, and at Lyons, 1760. There are other pieces of macaronic poetry by the same author, “De bragardissima villa de Soleriis, &c.” 1670, in 12mo. He died in 1544, being judge at St. Remi near to Aries.

, a learned civilian and writer, was born in the thirteenth century, according to some at Parma, or, as others report, in Flanders, and he has been sometimes confounded with James of Ravenna, but there is less doubt respecting his productions. He wrote commentaries on the Code and the Digest, which are yet consulted with advantage, and few works of the kind are in higher esteem than what he wrote on the duties of executors, entitled “De Commissariis,” Venice, 1584, folio. His treatise also, “De excussione bonarum,” Cologne, 1591, 8vo, is much valued, and that “De Bannitis” has a distinguished place in the collection of writers on criminal law, published at Francforr, 1587, fol. We have no dates of his birth and death, but he is said to have been law professor both at Padua and Bologna.

, of Milan, but born at Cremona about the year 1574, when his father came thereto be appointed podestat, or governor, was then called Caesar, and did not assume the name of Paul until he entered in his sixteenth year among the regular clerks or theatins, after his father’s death. He made such proficiency in his studies that his theological tutor was obliged to prepare himself with more than common care to answer the objections and doubts of his acute pupil, and he became a very celebrated preacher, although neither his voice nor manner were in his favour. He afterwards taught theology, philosophy, and rhetoric, at Rome and Naples. Isabella of Savoy, afterwards duchess of Modena, chose him for her confessor, and appointed him bishop of Tortona. Here he principally resided, and passed his days in an exemplary manner, and employed his leisure in many works, which have been; published, and for a long period uere highly popular. He died June 13, 1644. His principal Latin works were, 1. “In libros Aristotelis de Generation e et Corruptione,” Milan, 1617, 4to. 2. “De Aquæ transmutatione in sacrificio Missæ,” Tortona, 1622, 8vo. 3. “De Cantici Canticorum sensu, velitatio bina,” Milan, 1640, 4to. 4. “Velitationes sex in Apocalypsim,” Milan, 1647, fol. published by P. Sfondrati, with the life of the author. In Italian he wrote, 5. “Arte di predicar bene,” Venice, 1611, 4to, often reprinted. 6. “Impresse sacre con triplicati discorsi illustrate ed arrichite,” Verona, 1613, 4to, and reprinted and augmented by the author, in 7 vols. 4to, 1621—1635, to which he added an eighth, in 1640, under the title of “La Ritroguardia, &c.” 7. “Delia Tribolazione e suoi rimedii,” Tortona, 1624, 2 vols. 4to, and often reprinted. 8. “Panegirici fatti in diversi occasioni,” Milan, 8vo, no date, but the dedication is dated 1644. There was another edition in 1659, 4to. His Latin sermons, which some authors mention, never existed, nor was it usual in the seventeenth century to preach in Italy in any language but Italian.

, was a physician of Cappadocia, but in what time he flourished authors are not agreed; some placing him under Augustus Caesar, others under Trajan or Adrian. Saxius places him about the year 94. However his works are very valuable. The best editions were published by Dr. Wigan and Dr. Boerhaave. Dr. Wigan’s was elegantly and correctly printed in folio, at Oxford, 1723: in his preface he gives an account of all the preceding editions. To this are subjoined, dissertations on the age of Aretaeus, his sect, his skill in anatomy, and his method of cure. At the end is a large collection of various readings with notes on them; a treatise on the author’s Ionic dialect, and a Greek index by the learned Maittaire, who in 1726 published in 4to Peter Petit’s Commentary upon the first three books of Aretaeus, which had been discovered among the papers of Grsevius. Boerhaave’s edition was published at Leyden, 1731, and another by Haller in 1771, which some think inferior to Boerhaave’s. In 1786, Dr. Moffat published “Aretoeus, consisting of eight books, on the causes, symptoms, and cure of acute and chronic diseases; translated from the original Greek,” 8vo, London. Aretseus is an author yet much admired by every physician who has attentively read his writings. His style is equally remarkable for conciseness and perspicuity, and he particularly excels in describing symptoms, and in the therapeutic part has rarely been equalled. There is nothing known of his personal history.

was of Arezzo in Tuscany, and has been enumerated among the learned men of the fifteenth century. He is praised by Poggius, which Bayle chooses to suspect was done merely because Aretino was an enemy of Philelphus, whom Poggius hated. Philelphus, on the other hand, represents Aretino in a very unfavourable light. He is allowed, however, to have been a good Greek and Latin scholar, and to have given some translations from the former. He was also a pretty good poet, and wrote prose comedies, of which Albert de Eyb has inserted some fragments in his “Margarita Poetica.” But what Bayle considers as the most evident proof of his talents, is, that on the death of Leonard Aretin, in 1443, he was chosen to succeed him in the office of secretary of the republic of Florence. The year of his death is not known.

, celebrated for his musical skill, lived in the eleventh century. He was a native of Arezzo, a city of Tuscany; and having been taught the practice of music in his youth, and probably retained as a chorister in the service of the Benedictine monastery founded in that city, he became a monk professed, and a brother of the order of St. Benedict.

In this retirement he seems to have devoted himself to the study of music, particularly the system of the ancients, and above all to reform their method of notation. The difficulties that attended the instruction of youth in the church offices were so great, that, as he himself says, ten years were generally consumed barely in acquiring the knowledge of the plain-song; and this consideration induced him to labour after some amendment, some method that might facilitate instruction, and enable those employed in the choral service to perform the duties of it in a correct and decent manner. According to the legendary accounts extant in old monkish manuscripts, he would appear to have been inspired, and he seems to lean to this opinion; but graver historians say, that being at vespers in the chapel of his monastery, it happened that one of the offices appointed for that day was the hymn of St. John,

During the performance of the hymn, he remarked the iteration of the words, and the frequent returns of Ut, Mi, Fa, Sol, La; be observed likewise a dissimilarity between the closeness of the syllable Mi and the broad open sound of Fa, which he thought could not fail to impress upon the mind a lasting idea of their congruity; and immediately conceived a thought of applying these six syllables to perfect an improvement either then actually made by him, or under consideration, viz. that of converting the ancient tetrachords into hexachords.

Struck with the discovery, he retired to his study; and having perfected his system, began to introduce it into practice: the persons to whom he communicated it were brethren of his own monastery, from whom it met with but a cold reception, which, in the epistle to his friend, he ascribes probably to its true cause, envy: however, his interest with the abbot, and his employment in the chapel, gave him an opportunity of trying the efficacy of his method on the boys who were in training for the choral service, and it exceeded the most sanguine expectations. “To the admiration of all,” says cardinal Baronius, “a boy learnt thereby, in a few months, what no man, though of great ingenuity, could before that attain in several years.”

The fame of Guido’s invention soon spread abroad, and among other honours bestowed upon him, the pope John XX. or XIX. for this is not agreed on, sent three messengers to invite him to Rome; he complied, and being presented, was received by his holiness with great kindness. The pope had several conversations with him, in all which he interrogated him as to his knowledge in music: and upon the sight of an antiphonary which Guido had brought with him, marked with the syllables agreeable to his new invention, the pope looked on it as a kind of prodigy, and ruminating on the doctrines delivered by Guido, would not stir from his seat till he had learned perfectly to sing a verse; upon which he declared, that he could not have believed the efficacy of the method, if he had not been convinced by the experiment he himself had made of it. The pope would have detained him at Rome; but labouring under a bodily disorder, and fearing an injury to his health from the air of the place, and the heat of the summer, which was then approaching, Guido left that city with a promise to revisit it, and explain to his holiness the principles of his new system. On his return homeward, he made a visit to the abbot of Pomposa, a town in the duchy of Ferrara, who was very earnest to have Guido settle in the monastery of that place: to which invitation it seems he yielded, being, as he says, desirous of rendering so great a monastery still more famous by his studies there.

Here it was that he composed a tract on music, entitled “Micrologus,” or “A short Discourse,” which he dedicated to Theodald bishop of Arezzo, and finished, as he himself at the end of it tells us, under the pontificate of John XX. and in the 34th year of his age. Vossius speaks also of another musical treatise written by him, and dedicated to the same person. Most of the authors who have taken occasion to mention Guido, speak of the “Micrologus,” as containing the sum of his doctrine: but it is in a small tract, entitled “Argumentum novi Cantus inveniendi,” that his declaration of his use of the syllables, with their several mutations, and in short his whole doctrine of solmisation, is to be found. This tract makes part of an epistle to a very dear and intimate friend of Guido, whom he addresses thus, “Beatissimo atque dulcissimo fratri Michaeli;” at whose request the tract itself seems to have been composed.

Whether Guido was the author of any other tracts, is not easy to determine. It nowhere appears that any of his works were ever printed, except that Baronius, in his “Annales Ecclesiastici,” torn. XI. p. 73, has given at length the epistle from him to his friend Michael of Pomposa, and that to Theodald bishop of Arezzo, prefixed to the Micrologus; and yet the writers on music speak of the “Micrologus” as a book in the hands of every one. Martini cites several manuscripts of Guido, namely, two in the Ambrosian library at Milan, the one written about the twelfth century, the other less ancient; another among the archives of the chapter of Pistoja, a city in Tuscany; and a third in the Mediceo-Laurenziano library at Florence, of the fifteenth century: these are said to be the “Micrologus.” Of the epistle to Michael of Pomposa, together with the “Argumentum novi Cantus inveniendi,” he mentions only one, which he says is somewhere at Ratisbon. Of the several tracts above mentioned, the last excepted, a manuscript is extant in Baliol college, Oxford. Several fragments of the two first, in one volume, are among the Harleian Mss. in the British Museum, but very much mutilated.

, an author who once raised considerable fame by invective and indecency, was born in 1492, at Arezzo in Tuscany, the natural son of Lewis Bacci by a woman whose name was Tita. In his early years he was employed to bind books, and from looking occasionally into their contents acquired some little learning. He was driven from his native city, for what was perhaps the most harmless of his works, a satire on indulgences, and went to Perugia, where he gave the first specimen of his abominable taste, by altering a picture on a sacred subject. He then walked to Rome, with no effects but his apparel, and there he lost his first situation, in the service of a merchant, by being detected in a theft. He next became a domestic of the cardinal Giovanni, on whose death he obtained an employment in the Vatican under Julius II. and by his orders he was soon after expelled the court, but he contrived to return to Rome and ingratiate himself with Leo X. who bestowed presents on him, and he likewise enjoyed the favour of Clement VII. the successor of Adrian VI. Six infamous sonnets which were written on as many indecent paintings by Julio Romano, and engraved by M. A. Raimondi, occasioned his being again sent out of Rome, It is painful to connect the names of these eminent artists with the productions of Aretino, but there is less cause to wonder at this insult to public decency, when we find that notwithstanding Aretino’s expulsion and character, John de Medici patronised him, and invited him to Milan, where he rendered himself agreeable to Francis I.; and the credit which he had acquired by the friendship of John Medici recommended him to the notice of many of the most celebrated men of the times. From this period he fixed his residence at Venice, and resolved not to attach himself to any patron, but to enjoy his freedom, and to procure his own subsistence by the labours of his pen.

Of his works, it has been justly said by Mr, Roscoe, that whether in prose or verse, sacred or profane, epic or dramatic, panegyrical or satirical, and notwithstanding their great number and variety, not one piece exists which in point of literary merit is entitled to approbation; yet the jcommendations which Aretino received from his contemporaries are beyond example. These would not be worth recording as praise bestowed on such a character, but they are striking and useful features in the character of an age on which some writers have bestowed great commendations on account of its learning and patronage of learned men. Aretino seems to have been born to sport with the passions of the great, and to exalt and perpetuate the vices of the vulgar. As a proof how well he knew how to manage the former, we may state from his latest biographer the following examples of misapplied patronage. Francis I. not only presented him with a chain of gold, and afforded him other marks of his liberality, but requested that the pope would allow him the gratification of his society. Henry VIII. of England sent him at one time three hundred gold crowns, and Charles V. not only allowed him a considerable pension, but on one occasion placed him on his right hand, and rode with him in intimate conversation. Julius III. gave him a thousand crowns, accompanied with a papal bull, nominating him a knight of St. Peter, to which dignity was also annexed an annual income. These favours and distinctions, which were imitated by the inferior sovereigns and chief nobility of Europe, excited the vanity of Aretino to such a degree, that he expected to be created a cardinal, and actually boasted that he had refused that honour. He assumed, however, the titles of “II Divino,” the “Divine,” and “the Scourge of princes.” Medals were struck in honour of him, representing him decorated with a chain of gold, and on the reverse the princes of Europe bringing to him their tribute. On the other hand, however, he was frequently in danger of his life from the persons he had lampooned, and his literary adversaries frequently employed their pens in exposing his vanity and infamous character.

His death is said to have been hastened by a violent burst of laughter on hearing of an indecent story, respecting his two sisters, who were prostitutes at Venice. This happened in 1557. In his latter days he composed some works of the pious kind, but never appears to have quitted his vices. His pious works were, a paraphrase on the penitential psalms, and another on Genesis, the life of the Virgin Mary, that of St. Catharine of Sienna, and of St. Thomas Aquinas.

, an eminent Swiss divine and botanist, was born at Berne, in the beginning of the sixteenth century, and rose to great distinction as a teacher of theology at Marpurg, and as a preacher of the reformed religion. His lectures were extremely crowded, and his religious writings very popular. His “Examen Theologicum,” a voluminous work, was printed twelve times within three years. He died at Berne, much lamented, April 22, 1574. His principal theological works are, the “Examen Theologicum,” already noticed: Commentaries on the whole of the New Testament, printed at different times: a Life of Gentilis, with a refutation of his principles, &c. But few of these are now so well known as his reputation for botanical knowledge. On this subject he frequently corresponded with Conrad Gessner, the Pliny of Germany, and with the other eminent botanists of his time. His attention was chiefly directed to the plants growing on the Alps, of which he discovered and described forty of great rarity. Some of them he introduced in gardens, and gave directions for the cultivation of them. He also published a description of two mountains, the Niesen and the Stokhorn, in the canton of Berne, remarkable for their height and the curious plants which grow upon them. It is a small work in the form of a letter, addressed to his friend and countryman Piperinus, and was printed with the works of Valerius Cordus, under the title “Stockhornii et Nessi Helvetia? montium, et nascentium in eis stirpiuni descriptio, impr. in operibus Val. Cordi,” Strasburgh, 1561. Conrad Gessner bestows a high character on Aretius in his “Hortus Germanicus,” and gave the name Aretia to a plant in honour of him, which Haller and Linnaeus have preserved, with equally honourable notice of his skill and useful researches in botany.

, a Spanish monk of the order of St. Benedict, who lived in the seventeenth century, belongs to the class of literary impostors. In 1667, he published at Madrid an ecclesiastical history of Spain, which he pretended to have compiled from the writings of St. Gregory, bishop of Grenada, and from the Chronicle of Haubert. The title was “Poblacion ecclesiastica de Espana, y noticia de sus primeras honras, hallada en los ecritos de S. Gregorio, obispo de Grenada, y en el cronicon de Hauberto,” c. 2 vol. tbl. In order to obtain the more credit, he had the impudence to dedicate this work to the Supreme Being, but the imposture was soon detected by Garcia de Molina, who proved that Argaiz had forged the pretended manuscripts of St. Gregory and Haubert.

, an English writer, was the third son of Thomas Argall by Margaret his wife, daughter of John Talkarne of the county of Cornwall. He was born in London, and entered a student in Christ-church in Oxford towards the latter end of queen Mary’s reign. He took the degree of master of arts in 1565, and was senior of the act celebrated the eighteenth of February the same year. Afterwards he applied himself to the study of divinity, and, having taken holy orders, obtained the living of Halesvvorth in Suffolk. Being at a feast at Cheston, a mile distant from that town, he died suddenly at the table, and was buried at Halesworth, Octobers, 1606. During his stay at the university, he was a noted disputant, and a great actor of plays at Christ-church, particularly when the queen was entertained there in 1566. He was esteemed a very good scholar, and was so much devoted to his studies that he lived and died like a philosopher, with a thorough contempt for the things of this world. He wrote “De veva Pctnitentia,” Lond. 1604, 8vo, and “Introductio ad artem Dialecticam,” ibid. 1605, 8vo. In this book, which Mr. Wood calls “very facete and pleasant,” the author says of himself, that “whereas God had raised many of his companions and contemporaries to high dignities in the church, as Dr. Thomas Bilson to the see of Winchester, Dr. Martin Heton to that of Ely, Dr. Henry Robinson to that of Carlisle, Dr. Tobias Mathews to that of Durham, &c. yet he, an unworthy and poor old man, was still detained in the chains of poverty for his great and innumerable sins, that he might repent with the prodigal son, and at length by God’s favour obtain salvation.”

, a poet in the reign of king James I. of whose life we have no particulars. He was patronized by Dr. John King; bishop of London: and wrote and published, 1. “The Song of Songs, which was Solomon”, metaphrased in English heroics, by way of dialogue,“Lond. 1621, 4to, dedicated to Henry King, archdeacon of Colchester, son to the bishop of London. 2.” The Bride’s Ornaments: poetical essays upon divine subjects,“London, 1621, 4to, the first dedicated to John Argall, esq. the other to Philip, brother to Henry King. 3.” Funeral Elegy, consecrated to the memory of his ever honoured lord, John King, late bishop of London,“same year. He wrote also a book of” Meditations of Knowledge, Zeal, Temperance, Bounty, and Joy,“and another containing” Meditations of Prudence, Obedience, &c." The author intended these two books for the press at the same time with his poetical works, but the death of his patron deferred the publication of them, and it is uncertain whether they were afterwards published.

, an Italian printer, and one of the most learned and laborious editors of his time, was born at Bologna about the end of the year 1685. His family, then one of the most ancient in that city, was originally of Florence. After having begun his studies at Bologna, he went to Florence, and became acquainted with many of the literati of that city, particularly the celebrated Magliabechi. From Florence he went to Lucca, and then to Leghorn, where he meant to embark for France, but the death of one of his uncles rendered it necessary for him to return to his own country. He first projected an edition of the works, already in print, or in manuscript, of Ulysses Aldrovandi, with additions, notes, and corrections, and engaged several learned persons to assist him, but death having removed the greater part of them in a few years, he was obliged to give up the undertaking. He then published a collection of the poems of Carlantonio Bedori, a Bolognese gentleman, at Bologna, 1715, 4to. Two years after, having been elected one of the magistrates of that city, known by the title of the tribunes of the people, when he came to resign his office, he made an eloquent address on the duties of the office, which his successors ordered to be registered among their acts. His next and most important undertaking was an edition of that immense historical collection, entitled “Scriptores Rerum Italicarum.” The learned Muratori having imparted to him the design he had conceived of collecting and publishing the ancient Italian historians, acknowledged at the same time that he had been obliged to abandon the plan from the impossibility of finding a press adequate to such an extensive undertaking, the art of printing, once so highly cultivated in Italy, having now greatly degenerated. Argellati being of opinion that Milan was the only place where a trial might be made with effect, to revive useful printing, immediately went thither, and communicated Muratori’s plan to count Charles Archinto, the patron of letters, and his own particular patron. Archinto formed a society of noblemen of Milan, called the Palatine Society, who undertook to defray the expence of the edition, sixteen of the members subscribing four thousand crowns each. Argellati then took every necessary step to establish a printing-office suited to this liberal patronage, and the “Scriptores Rerum Italicarum” was the first work printed, in which Argellati bore a considerable part, collecting and furnishing Muratori with most of the manuscripts, notices, and dedications of the first volumes. He superintended at the same time, the printing of other works, particularly an edition of Sigonius, 1738/6 vols. fol. The emperor Charles VI. to whom it was dedicated, and who had repaid him for the dedication of the first volume of the Italian historians, by the title of imperial secretary, and a pension of three hundred crowns, now doubled this pension. Argellati continued to publish, with incredible labour and dispatch, various editions of works of importance, as “Opere inedite di Ludovico Castelvetro,” 1727, 4to. “Grazioli, De antiquis Mediolani aedificiis,” 1736, fol. “Thesaurus novus veterum Inscriptionum,” by Muratori, 1739, fol. But we are more particularly indebted to him for, 1. “Bibliotheca scriptorum Mediolanensium,” Milan, 1745, 2 vols. fol. 2. “Biblioteca de' Volgarizzatori Italiani,” Milan, 5 vols. 4to, 1767, besides which he contributed a great number of essays and letters to various collections. He died at Milan Jan. 5, 1755, after having had the misfortune to lose his son, the subject of the following article.

, son of the preceding, was born at Bologna, May 8, 1712. He studied philosophy and law, and took his doctor’s degree in the latter faculty at Padua in 1736, but having afterwards applied himself to mathematics, he was, in 1740, appointed royal engineer, To all this he added a taste for the classics and Italian literature, which he cultivated in his father’s house, where he principally resided, either at Milan or Bologna, at which last he died in 1754. He published, 1. “Practica del fora Veneto,” Venice, 1737, 4to. 2. An Italian translation of Huet, on the situation of Paradise,“1737., 8vo. 3.” Saggio d'una nuova filosofia,“Venice, 1740, 8vo. 4.” Storia della nascita delle scienze e belle lettere,“&c. Florence, 1743, 8vo. This was to have extended to twelve volumes, but one only appeared. 5.” De praeclaris Jurisconsultis Bononiensibus Oratio,“&c. 1749, 4to, to which is added a letter by his father, dated Milan, where probably this work was published. 6,” II Decamerone,“Bologna, 1751, 2 vols. 8vo, an imitation of Boccaccio, the subjects taken from some curious facts in the English Philosophical Transactions, accounts of travellers, &c. and other remarkable events, and adventures, but more pure in point of morality than the work of his predecessor. 7.” Novissima sisteina di filosofia, &c." Modena, 1753, 8vo. He left also in manuscript, a life of John Gaston, grand duke of Tuscany, and of a female saint of the order of St. Francis.

, one of those writers who contributed to the general desolation of government, religion, and morals, which was afterwards completed by the French encyclopedists, was born June 24, 1704, at Aix in Provence, where his father was procurator-general to the parliament of that city. His father intended him for the magistracy, but he embraced the profession of arms in his fifteenth year, and appears to have led a wandering and profligate life, until, on his return from Constantinople, he was induced by his father to study law, He entered, however, again into the army in 1733, and was at the siege of Kell, where he was slightly wounded, in 1734. After the siege of Philipsbourg, he met with an accident by a fall from his horse, which disabled him for the military service. Being disinherited by his father, he went to Holland, and maintained himself by his pen, and when Frederick, king of Prussia, came to the throne, he made d'Argens his chamberlain. After passing twenty-five years in Berlin, where he married, he returned to his native country, Aix, where, in the late French cant, he lived a philosophic life, and died at the castle of the baroness de Garde, his sister, near Toulon, Jan. 11, 1771. It is said that in his last illness, he requested the sacrament might be administered to him; read often in the Gospel, and procured admission into a fraternity of penitents. His conversation has been praised for the candour and goodnature of his manner, as well as for its wit and pleasantry. He had a tendency towards melancholy, but was a good husband, friend and master. With respect to his writings, he confesses that he travelled into other countries where he might take liberties which would not be permitted at home. He professed that Bayle was his model, but he is far behind that author in genius and learning. He had, however, a thirst for knowledge, and besides his acquaintance with several languages, he studied chemistry and anatomy, and had some talent for painting.

His principal works were the “Lettres Juives;” “Lettres Chinoises;” and “Lettres Cabalistiques,” which were joined to “La Philosophic du bons sens,” and published in 1768, in 24 vols. 12mo, under the title of the “Works of marquis d'Argens.” In all these, religion is treated with contempt, under the pretence of attacking its ministers, a progress which has been uniformly observed in the writings of infidels. Besides these, he published a great many novels, or romances, of very inferior merit, and which never have been favourites with the public; he also published his own memoirs, which at least show that he had got the better of shame. In 1762, he published “Ocellus Lucanus, en Grec et en François, avec des dissertations sur les principales questions de la Metaphysique, de la Physique, et de la Morale des anciens: qui peuvent servir de suite a la Philosophic du Bons Sens,” Utrecht, 8vo. And afterwards he translated “Timæus Locrus,” the other eminent follower of Pythagoras, both writers who had been neglected by universal consent, but whom d'Argens hoped to have revived. He has, however, rather displayed his reading than his taste or judgment in this performance. He published also, “Memoires secrets de la Republique des Lettres,” 4 vols. 12mo, and “Discour de Julien sur la Christianisme,” Gen. 8vo, an infamous attack on religion. Both these are deservedly forgotten.

, the name of two Spanish poets, brothers, and natives of Balbastro in Aragon, who descended from a family originally of Ravenna. Their poems were published under the title of “Rimas de Lupercio, i del doctor Bartolome Leonardo de Argensola,” Saragossa, 1634, 4to. Antonio, the Spanish biographer, speaks in high terms of this volume, and after him Baillet and Feutry declare that these brothers were the Horaces of Spain. Lupercio, or Lobergo-Leonardo d‘Argensola, the eldest, born about the year 1565, was gentleman of the chamber to cardinal Albert of Austria, secretary to the empress Maria of Austria, and secretary of state and of war under count de Lemes, the viceroy of Naples, where he went to reside in 1611, and where he died in 1613. He wrote three tragedies, Isabella, Phillis, and Alexander. Bartholomew Leonard d’ Argensola, the brother, born in 1566, was successively canon of the metropolitan church of Saragossa, chaplain to the empress Maria, and rector of Villa Hermosa. He accompanied his brother to Naples, and after his death, became historiographer of Aragon, and died at Saragossa, Feb. 26, 1631. Besides the poems printed with those of his brother, he wrote, 1. “Conquista delas islas Molucas,” Madrid, 1609, fol. 2. “Primera parte de los analesde Aragon que prosigue los de Zurita,” Saragossa, 1630, fol. and some other works enumerated by Antonio.

, born at Quiers, in Piedmont, in 1513, made considerable progress in the study of medicine, and arrived at great distinction in the theory of his art, He died at Turin in 1572, at the age of 58. His works were collected after his death in 2 vols. in folio, at Venice, 1592, 1606, and at Hanover in 1610, which is the most complete edition. This physician, however, was of lifetle service to the world out of his library. When he was called to reduce his observation to practice, he discovered that he had neither experience nor knowledge of the living subject; but, devoted to study and theory, he censured the writings of Galen with much acrimony, which procured him the title of Censor Medicorum.

, bishop of Tulles, was born May 16, 1673, in the parish of Argentre, in the diocese of Rennes. He distinguished himself as a licentiate, became doctor of the Sorbonne in 1700, almoner to the king in 1709, and the only one upon whom that office was conferred gratuitously; and in 1723 was appointed bishop of Tulles. His favourite study was theology, on which he employed all the time he could spare from the duties of his bishopric, which he discharged with fidelity. He published, 1. “Latin notes on Holden’s `Analysis of Faith,' Paris, 1698.” 2. “Apologie del'amourqui nous fait desirer de posseder Dieu seul, &c. avec des remarques sur les maximes et les principes de M. de Fenelon,” Amst. 1698, 8vo. 3. “Traite de PEglise,” Lyons, 1698, 2 vols. 12mo. 4. “Elementa Theologiae,” Paris, 1702, 4to, with an appendix in 1705, and an apology for some of his sentiments that had been censured. 5. “Lexicon philosophicum,” Hague, 1706, 4to. 6. “De propria ratione qua res supernaturales a rebus naturalibus differunt,” Paris, 1707, 4to. 7. “Martini Grandini opera,” Paris, 1710, 6 vols. 8vo. 8. “Collectio judiciorum de novis erroribus, 1725, 1733, 1736, 3 vols. fol. In this he has collected all the judgments passed upon the errors of heretics by the church, the words condemned, the censures of the universities of Paris, Oxford, Louvaine, Doway, &c. upon false doctrines, and the controversies on theological topics. The work is therefore curious, and contains many papers of importance to ecclesiastical writers; but under the title heresies, the reader must expect to find the principal doctrines of the reformation. 9.” Remarques sur la traduction de l'Ecriture Sainte de Sacy,“4to. 10.” Instruction pastorale,“1731, 4to. 11.” Dissertation pour expliquer en quel sens on peut dire qu‘un jugement de l’Eglise, qui condamneplusieurs propositions de quelque ecrit dogmatique, est une regie de fois,“Tulles, 1733, 12 mo. This curious disquisition was suppressed by order of the council. 12. Several devotional tracts. He was also about to have published” Theologia de divinis litteris expressa," when he died in his diocese, Oct. 27, 1740.

, a Bolognese physician, was for many years professor of logic, astronomy, and medicine, and died at Bologna in 1423. He appears to have been one of those who contributed to the advancement of the chirurgical art in Italy. His Works are replete with sensible observations, and a candour which induces him to acknowledge such errors in his practice or opinions as experience had discovered. His observations on the use of the suture, the cure of the spina ventosa, and on muscular motion, ai'e particularly valuable. His works, “Chirurgiae libri sex,” went through four editions in less than twenty years, Venice, 1480, 1492, 1497, 1499, fol. Haller mentions also an edition, 1520.

, an Italian mathematician, was born at Tagliacozzo in the kingdom of Naples, in 1570; Being involved in his own country in some difficulties, occasioned by his attachment to astrological reveries, ha thought proper to retire to Venice, where the senate, perceiving the extent of his merit, appointed him professor of mathematics in the university of Padua; at the same time conferring on him the title of chevalier of St. Mark in 1636. He died in 1653. His writings are, 1. “De diebus criticis,” 1652, 4to. 2. “Ephemerides,” from 1620, 4 vols. 4to, and 3. Observations on the Comet of 1653, in Latin, printed the same year. His Ephemerides were reprinted at Padua and Lyons, and continued to the year 1700.

, son of the former, was born in 1609, with a decided turn for poetry. Before the age of fifteen, he published an idyllium on the silk-worm, “Bambace e seta, idillio,” Rome, 1624, 12mo. Shortly afterwards, inspired with an ardent emulation by the applauses that were lavished on Marini, the author of the poem of Adonis, he undertook to compose one of the same kind. Having shut himself up in a room, where none were admitted but to bring him his victuals, he finished, in seven months, at the age of seventeen, a poem in twelve cantos, entitled “Endymion,” 1626, 4to. This performance was so much admired, that, though published with his name, the critics could scarcely be persuaded that it was not the work of his father. He is the author of several other pieces of poetry, both Latin and Italian, but the greater part have never been printed. His taste for the belles-lettres did not prevent him from applying to the study of jurisprudence, philology, and antiquities; in the latter he was a contributor to various collections. The precise year of his death is not known: but it is thought to have happened in 1660.

, was born at Paris in 1634, and died a Carthusian monk, at Gaillon near Rouen, Jan. 23, 1704, at the age of seventy. He did not entirely quit the world on becoming monk. His talents and learning had procured him illustrious friends, with whom he carried on a literary correspondence. We have by him, 1. “Traite de la lecture des Peres de l'Eglise.” The best edition is of 1697, 12mo. 2. “Melanges d'histoire et de literature,” published under the name of “Vigneul Marvilliana,” reprinted in 1725, in 3 vols. 12mo, of which the abbé Banier compiled almost the whole of the last: this edition is preferable to the others. It is a curious and interesting collection of literary anecdotes, of critical reflections, and satirical strokes. There appear occasionally some violations of truth and justice in both the one and the other; and the public never forgave his censures on la Brnyere. But these miscellanies, says Dr. Warton, have more learning than the “Menagiana,” or indeed than any of the numerous “Anas,” so much at present in vogue. Bayle was fond of them, and frequently quotes them in his Dictionary, and in his Letters, 1699, where he was the first who informs us of the real name of the author. He published also under the assumed name of Moncade, “L'Education, maximeset reflexions,” 1691, 12mo.

, a learned Portuguese theatine monk, was born at Collares in Estremadura, in 1676, and died at Lisbon in 1749. He was one of the iirat members of the Portuguese academy of history, and contributed various historical papers to their Memoirs; but the works on which his reputation chiefly rests, are, 1. i: De Antiquitatibus conventus Bracarugustani, libri IV.“1728, 4to. and 1738, an improved edition. This work evinces the research of a profound antiquary. 2.” Memoires pour servir a Phistoire del'eglise primatiale de Brague,“Lisbon, 1732 44, o vols. 4to. 3.” Regras de lingoa Portugueza." Lisbon, 1725, 8vo. His other works were Sermons, and Lives of the saints.

, a geometrician of the seventeenth century, was born at Lyons in 1597, and died there in 1661. He was the friend of Descartes; this friendship was of service to them both Descartes instructed hisfriend, and Des Argues defended his master against Fermat and Bourdin. He wrote, 1. “Un Traite de Perspective,” fol. 2. “Traite des Sections Coniques, 8vo. 3.” La Pratique du Trait,“8vo. 4.” Traite de la coupe des Pierres,“8vo, an excellent work on stone-cutting. 5.” Maniere de poser l'essieu aux cadrans solaires.“6.” Maniere de graver en taille douce, et a l'eau forte." All these treatises are said to be written with precision, and in a better style than might have been expected from his time.

was one of the first of those learned persons who fled into Italy upon the taking of Constantinople by Mahomet II. in 1453, and contributed to the revival of Greek learning in the west. Cosmo de Medicis, duke of Tuscany, made him professor of Greek at Florence, and appointed him preceptor to his son Peter, and to his grandson Lorenzo. He had several illustrious pupils at Florence, to whom he read lectures in the Greek language and philosophy; and amongst the rest Angelas Politianus^ Acciaioli, and Reuchlinus. In 1456, he went into France, to ask the assistance of Charles VII. in behalf of some friends and relations, whom he wanted to redeem from Turkish slavery. He continued many years in his professorship at Florence; but, the plague at length obliging him to quit it, he went to Rome, where he publicly read lectures upon the Greek text of Aristotle. He died of an autumnal fever, which was brought on by an intemperate eating of melons, in the 70th year of his age, and (as is believed) soon after his settlement in Rome; but the time of his death is uncertain, yet it must have been after 1478, because he survived Theodorus Gaza, who died in that year. He was allowed to be very learned, but learning does not seem to have civilized or softened his manners, for he is represented as having been very capricious and very morose. He affirmed, that Cicero understood neither the Greek language nor philosophy, and is supposed to have conceived this peculiar prejudice against Cicero for saying, that the Greek was a language veibonim inops t poor and scanty in words. He was also a notorious epicure, and spent all his salaries, though very considerable, in the luxuries of the table. He was not so serious about his latter end, but that he bequeathed his debts in form to his richer friends, almost in the very act of dying. He translated several pieces of Aristotle into Latin, which language he also understood very well.

, a celebrated musical performer and composer in the end of the seventeenth and beginning of the eighteenth century, was a native of Bologna, and was diverted from the concerns of the church, to which his parents had intended to educate him, by an early passion for music. He became an opera-composer at Bologna and Venice, and, passing into Germany, was made maestro di capella to the electoral princess of Brandenburgh, for whom he had composed the opera of “Attis.” Both there and in Italy he continued in high estimation as a composer, and as a performer on the violincello, and particularly on the viol d'amore, which he either invented, or brought into notice. In 1716 he visited England, and performed on this instrument, which was a novelty in this country, but went again abroad until 1720, when, at the establishment of the Hoyai Academy of Music, he was invited to return, and was employed to compose several operas. Handel and Bononcini were his contemporaries. After some stay in this country, during which he probably dissipated what he got, he was obliged to publish a book of cantatas by subscription, and then he left England, The place and date of his death are not known.

, one of the most eminent Italian poets, was born Sept. 8, 1474. His father, while he was in the government of Rheggio, in Lombardy, espoused Daria de Malaguzzi, a lady of wealth and family, descended from one of the first houses in llneggio, and by her had five aons, Ludovico, Gabriele, Carlo, Galasso, and Alessandro; and the same number of daughters. These sons were all well accomplished, and, for their many excellent qualities, patronised by several princes. Gabriele gave himself up to literary pursuits, and is, said to have arrived at great excellence in Latin poetry, but to have been too close an imitator of Statius: he died at Ferrara. Carlo, who was of a disposition more inclined to dissipation and gaiety, led the life of a courtier, and. died at the court of Naples. Galasso embraced the profession of the church, was employed in several important offices, and, at last, ended his days, ambassador from the duke of fc'crrara, at the court of Charles V. Alessandro, who was of an inquisitive and enterprising genius, having spent great part of his time in visiting foreign countries, at last finished his life in Ferrara.

Ludovico was the first-born of his father’s children, and is reported to have surpassed the rest in the endowments of the mind; giving, from his tender years, uncommon presage of a future genius. Being yet in hn rudiments, he composed a kind of tragedv from the story of Pyramus and Thisbe, which he caused to be represented by his brothers and sisters. He applied himself very early to the study of the Latin, in which he made greater progress than almost any one of his age; and, in the very beginning of his studies, he composed and recited an elegfuit Latin oration, which gave the highest expectations of him. Tito Strozza, a man of great learning and consummate knowledge, took particular delight to hear him, and to propose, difticult questions for his solution; often encouraging a dispute, on literary subjects, between him and Hercules his son, a youth whose age and studies agreed with Ariosto. But his father Niculo, having little taste for literature, was desirous, that, as his eldest-born, he should pursue some lucrative profession, and sent him to Padua, to study the civil law, under Angelo Castrinse and 11 Ma'mo; in which employment he spent five years, highly disagreeable to one of his disposition; which circumstance he laments in one of his satires addressed to Bembo. But although Ariosto durst not openly di’sobey his father, he could not so far conquer his inclinations as to desist from perusing trench and Spanish romances, with which languages h6 was well acquainted, having translated two or three of these authors himself into his native tongue; and availed himself, in his future works, of every beauty that occurred in these wild productions of imagination. Nicolo, atlnst, perceiving the aversion his son had to the profession of the law, and the little progress he made therein, permitted him to obey the strong propensity of genius, and is said to have been, in a great degree, influenced by Pandolfo Ariosto, a youth of excellent endowments, and a near kinsman to Ludovico.

Ludovico, being now left at liberty, put himself, at the age of twenty, under the tuition of Gregorio de Spqleti, a person of admirable taste, and well versed in the Latin and Greek tongues, who then resided in the family of Rinaldo of Este, at Ferrara. Gregorio, observing the avidity with which Ariosto applied himself to study, took every possible care to cultivate his genius; and, by his instructions, his pupil soon made himself master of the most excellent Latin authors, particularly the poets, among whom Horace appears to have been his favourite. He explained many difficult and obscure parts in that author, which were never before understood. His intention was, to have also gone through a course of Greek literature; but he suddenly lost his preceptor Gregorio, who was constrained to take a journey into France, where he soon after died, to the inexpressible grief of Ariosto. About the same time died Nicolo Ariosto, the father of Ludovico, leaving behind him a numerous offspring. Ariosto, then only twenty-four years of age, found himself at once involved in the cares of a family, and obliged to take upon himself the management of domestic concerns, to introduce his brothers into the world, provide fortunes for his sisters, and, in every respect, supply to them the place of a father, who had left them but a very slender patrimony.

These multiplied cares obliged him not only to give over his intended prosecution of the Greek language, but almost to abandon the Latin, which he had but lately recovered, had not Pandolfo Ariosto so far stimulated him, that he still continued, in some degree, his studies, till death deprived him of so pleasing a companion. Yet all these disappointments did not much damp the vigour of his poetical genius. In his twenty-ninth year, he acquired an uncommon reputation for his Latin verses, and numerous poems and sonnets full of spirit and imagination. His conversation was coveted by men of the greatest learning and abilities; and cardinal Hippolito of Este, whose court was a receptacle for the most admired personages of the, age, received him into his service, where he continued fifteen years; during which time he formed a design of writing a poem of the romance kind; in which no one had yet written with the dignity of which the subject was capable. The happy versatility of his genius was such, that he could equally adapt himself to every species of poetry; and an Italian writer of his life observes, that whatever he wrote, seemed, at the time, to be his particular study.

At about thirty years of age he began his Orlando; and cardinal Bembo, to whom he communicated his design, would have dissuaded him from writing in Italian, advising him to cultivate the Latin; to which Ariosto answered, that he would rather he the first among the Tuscan writers, than scarcely the second among the Latin. At the same time, it fortunately happened, that he had already written seme stanzas of his Orlando, in which he met with such encouragement, that he determined vigorously to prosecute his design. He chose the subject of Boyardo, which was very popular; and by adopting the fictions of Boyardo, Ariosto had not only an opportunity of bringing the romance of the count to a conclusion, but of celebrating, under the person of Rogero, the family of his patron.

Ariosto had proposed to write a poem in tevza rima (like Dante), in praise of the house of Este, different from the Furioso; but not being satisfied with the work, he laid it aside, and pursued the design of his Furioso, in ottavarima. In order to pursue his studies with less interruption, he chose the situation of llheggio, retiring to a pleasant villa, belonging to Sigismundo Mataguzzi, his kinsman, where he spent his leisure in the prosecution of his principal design.

While he was busied in these literary pursuits, Alphonso duke of Ferrara, having occasion to send ambassadors to Rome, in order to appease the anger of pope Julius II. who prepared to make war against him, was, by his brother the cardinal, recommended to Ariosto, as a proper person to be entrusted with such a negotiation, and he acquitted himself so well in his commission, that he returned with an answer much more favourable than was expected. However, the pope, still continuing at enmity with the duke, made a league with the Venetians, and collected a powerful army against Ferrara: but was defeated at the battle of Ravenna. Part of a Meet was sent up the Po, against Ferrara, and met with a repulse from the duke’s party. In this engagement, Ariosto, who was present, behaved with great courage, and took one of the largest of the enemy’s vessels, filled with stores and ammunition. The papal army being dispersed, Alphonso thought it advisable to send an ambassador again to Rome, and dispatched Ludovico a second time, who found his holiness so incensed against the duke, that his indignation was very near showing itself to the ambassador; and it was not without difficulty that Ariosto escaped with life to Ferrara. The duke’s affairs being established, Ariosto returned to his studies; but was employed in various public occupations, that often broke in upon his retirement, and obliged him to defer the completion of his Orlando. However, he found means to bring it to a conclusion; and though it was far from that perfection which he desired, yet, in order to avail himself of the opinion of the public, he caused it to be first printed in 1515.

Some time after, the cardinal having a design to go into Hungary, was desirous of being accompanied by the ingenious men who lived under his patronage; but Ariosto openly declared his inclination to be left behind; for, being now afflicted with a catarrh, he was fearful of the consequences from the fatigues and inconveniences of so long a journey. Besides, the service of the cardinal began to grow very irksome to him; those who were about him being frequently obliged to watch the greatest part of the night. It appears, likewise, that Ariosto was in his nature averse to travelling, and had visited few countries.

The refusal of Ariosto to accompany the cardinal so exasperated him, that he partly withdrew his protection from him; which circumstance gave our poet great uneasiness, though it is thought that Hippolito might have taken him again into favour, but for the ill offices of some malicious persons, who had the address to keep them at a distance from each other. On this difference between the cardinal and him, Ariosto strongly Dwells in his satires. The only consolation Luclovico had, was the leading a retired life, which suited his disposition far more than the bustle of a court, and he now applied himself, without interruption, to give every improvement to his Orlando; and in 1521 published another edition of it, with corrections.

In the meantime, cardinal Hippolito died; and Ariosto, who for fifteen years lived in a state of uneasy dependence, and had now reached the forty-fourth year of his age, was determined never more to be connected with a coart; but being persuaded by his intimate friend Buonaveritura Pistofolo, secretary to Alphonso, he engaged in the service of that prince, from whom he met with a most gracious and affectionate reception. Not long after, when Adrian II. succeeded to the papal chair, Grafagnana, a province on the Appennine, being torn to pieces by factions, it was necessary to appoint a person, whose prudence and authority might reduce them to a due subjection, and Ariosto was chosen, who, though very averse to the journey, would not again hazard incurring the displeasure of his patron. Here he continued three years, and not only brought the people to a proper sense of their duty to their sovereign, but entirely gained their affections to himself, and was highly applauded by the duke for his good services. An extraordinary instance of the veneration paid to his character by all ranks and degrees of men, is thus given by Baretti.

“Ariosto, while governor, took his residence in a fortified castle, from which it was imprudent to step out without guards, as the whole neighbourhood was swarming with outlaws, smugglers, and banditti, who, after committing the most enormous excesses all around, retired, for shelter against justice, amidst the rocks and cliffs. Ariosto, one morning, happened to take a walk without the castle, in his night-gown, and, in a fit of thought, forgot himself so much, that, step after step, he found himself very far from his habitation, and surrounded, on a sudden, by a troop of these desperadoes, who certainly would have ill-used, and perhaps murdered him, had not his face been known by one of the gang, who informing his comrades that this was signor Ariosto, the chief of the banditti addressed him with intrepid gallantry, and told him, that since he was the author of the Orlando Furioso, he might be sure none of the company would injure him, but would see him, on the contrary, safe back to the castle; and so they did, entertaining him all along the way with the various excellencies they had discovered in his poem, and bestowing upon it the most rapturous praises. A very rare proof of the irresistible powers of poetry, and a noble comment on the fables of Orpheus and Amphion, who drew wild beasts, and raised walls, with the enchanting sound of their lyres.”

The term of his government being expired, he returned to court, where, finding the duke took great delight in theatrical representations, he applied himself to the drama; and, besides the “Cassaria” and “Suppositi,” he composed “La Lena,” and “II Negromante,” in prose and verse, and the “Scolastica” in verse; though the last was Jeft imperfect by his death, and the fifth act added by his brother Gabriele. Of these comedies, four were first printed in prose, and afterwards turned into verse. They were performed with universal applause, before many faniilies of rank, the actors being generally persons of condition; insomuch, that when the Lena was first acted, in 1528, signer Don Francisco of Este, afterwards marquis of Massa, spoke the prologue himself.

Ariosto now appeared to lead a life of tranquillity; which was the more agreeable to him, as he was not so deeply engaged by the duke, but that he had sufficient leisure to pursue his studies; the service of Alphonso being far more easy than that of Hippolito. About this time he published his Satires, besides those he had formerly written; in the whole, to the number of seven, till, being again involved in family difficulties, and harassed with law-suits, he was obliged, for some time, to lay aside his compositions. At last, having brought his affairs to a happy crisis, he purchased a piece of ground opposite the church of St. Benedict, where he built a commodious dwelling; which, some say, he was enabled to do by the liberality of the duke. He had a garden adjoining to this house, the usual scene of his poetical meditations. Here he passed the remainder of his life, as much as possible secluded from all public employments. Having attained the 59th year of his age, he was seized, on the last day 'but one of the year 1532, with a lingering illness, though some say his illness first came upon him in October or November, about which time the ducal palace took fire, which accident consumed the superb theatre that had been built for the exhibition of his comedies; in the sameyear he had sent his Furioso to the press with his last improvements, corrected and enlarged as we now have it. Some physicians attributed the cause of his malady to the custom he had of eating fast, and chewing his victuals little, that occasioned an indigestion; the means they made use of to remove this co nplaint brought on a consumption, which, in spite of all the assistance of medicine, at last put a period to his life, at Ferrara, on the 6th of June, or, as others say, on the 8th of July, 1533.

Ludovico Arios-to was a man of uncommon eminence, whether we consider him as a member of the republic of society, or of the more extensive world of literature: as the first, he acquired the affection and esteem of persons of the highest consideration; he contracted the closest intimacy with the family of Medicis, and was beloved by Leo X. the Augustus of that age; as the second, he was one of the few great poets who see that reputation attend their works, during their life-time, which continues to be transmitted down to posterity; and perhaps few books have been so often printed as the Orlando, which has passed through upwards of eighty editions, and not only been rendered into all the European languages, but is said to have found its way into every part of the world. The uncommon popularity of this author may be further gathered from the numbers that have drawn their subjects from his original.

II Doni, an Italian writer, in a register of the manuscript works of several poets, has attributed two pieces to Ariosto, one called “Rinaldo Ardito;” and the other, “Il Termine del Desiderio;” neither of which appears to have been printed. Besides the forty-six books of his Orlando Furioso, he left behind him five books on the same story, which were first printed in addition to the original poem in 1545, twelve years after Ariosto’s death.

Several writers have affirmed, that he was solemnly crowned with laurel by the victorious Charles Y. in the city of Mantua, in 1532, for his Orlando Furioso; and this circumstance has been as positively denied by others. Mazzuchelii, in his life of Ariosto, has considered the arguments on both sides; and observes, that the silence of those authors on the subject, who certainly would not have passed over such an event, may justly render the whole suspected; that, among others, surely little attention can be paid to the authority of one writer, who relates that Ariosto had scarcely received the laurel crown, when, transported with joy, and inspired as it were with a poetical phrensy, he ran. through the city apparently as mad as his own Orlando. P'ornari speaks of the coronation; but Pigna and Garafolo make no mention of it. II siu;nore Dottore Barotti thus examines the supposed fact: “Many have doubted of the coronation by Charles, and writers, who speak of it, do not agree upon the time or place: some say that the ceremony was performed at Mantua, and others at Bologna; some, that it happened in 1530, and others, in 1532; but, surely it could not be in 1530, as the complete edition of the poem, with the praises of the emperor, was not published till 1532. In a manuscript book, delivered down for the hand-writing of his son Virginio, are these words: ‘E una baia che fosse coronato.’ But, in a public instrument between his son Virginio and his brother, in October 1542, we read as follows: ‘ Cum annis decursis animam egerit magnificus et Laureatus D. Ludovicus Areostus, &c.’ both which, the manuscript book and instrument, are in my possession. In a letter of Galasso Ariosto it is said, that Ariosto had scarce published the last edition of his work when he fell ill, and died after eight months. The publication was in October 1532, and it is difficult to suppose that he could be crowned in November, the time mentioned. Yet the epitaph, caused to be engraved by his nephew’s son Ludovico, sets forth the coronation. If Pigna and Garafolo affirm that he fell ill in December, it may be understood that he then took to his bed; and as to the medal of Ariosto crowned, nothing can be proved front that.” To this Mazzuchelli adds, that We may refer to the declaration of Franco, who asserts that he was not crowned; and concludes the argument, by opposing to all these, the authority of the exact Apostolo Zeno, who observes, that Franco petulantly denies that Ariosto was crowned poet, though, besides other testimonies, we have the exclusive privilege granted him by Charles V. The fact upon the whole appears doubtful.

The name of this poet is still held in that kind of veneration by his countrymen with which the English consider their Shakspeare. Antonio Zatta, in his edition of Ariosto' s works of 1772, relates, that a chair and ink-standish, which, according to tradition, belonged to Ariosto, were then in the possession of II signor Dottore Giovanni Andrea Barotti, at Ferrara, and that a specimen of his hand -writing was preserved in the public library of that city. The republic of Venice did him the honour to cause his picture to be painted, and hung up with the senators and other illustrious men in the great council hall, which was afterwards destroyed by fire. It appears, however, that Ariosto did not finally receive from his professed patrons those rewards, or obtain that establishment, to which he thought his merits had entitled him. Probably the government of Grafagnana added more to his reputation than his fortune; and, from what he says in several parts of his Satires, he was by no means satisfied with his patrons of Ferrara. Nothing particular is recorded of the benefactions of the cardinal to him, before he incurred the displeasure of that prelate. The duke, indeed, gave him two assignments on certain gabels or taxes, the first of which ceased with the abolition of the tax; and the second, which produced him only twenty-five crowns every fourth month, collected, as he says himself, with great trouble, was contested and withheld from him during the wars of Lombardy; and some say, that the cardinal, upon withdrawing his patronage, deprived him of this slender advantage^ Such were the great advantages which he derived from those in whose service he had engaged, and whose names he had immortalized by his Muse.

Two medals are said to have been struek, both bearing his effigies, but the devices different: on the first was figured a serpent, over which was suspended a hand, with a pair of shears ready to cut off the head or sting; and the other representing a bee-hive, where the bees are driven from their habitation with fire and smoke, that the countryman may possess himself of their honey. The motto of both these medals was “Pro bono malum.” Some affirm that these devices were of Ariosto’s invention; the first to express the nature of his detractors; and the second, to show that, instead of honours and rewards for his labours, he met only with scoff and derision, alluding to the reception given his Orlando by the cardinal, who, having perused it, asked him, with the most tasteless indifference, where he had collected so many fooleries. Dolce relates, that he caused the device of the serpent to be prefixed to the second edition of his poem; but that in the third he changed it into the bee-hive. In an edition of the Orlando, printed at Bologna in 1540, is a device in the titlepage of two serpents, with a band and shears; the tongue of one of these serpents is cut out, with this motto round them: “Dilexisti malitiam super benignitatem.”

With respect to pope Leo X. the acknowledged patron of literature and arts, whom Fornari calls particularly liberal to poets, and by whom he relates that Ariosto was highly esteemed, he is said to have made him a present of some hundred crowns for the prosecution of his work, though Ariosto himself is sile'nt upon that head; and yet in the verses published by Gabriele Simeoni, in his satire upon Avarice, it is said in a note, that “Leo X. gave Ariosto several hundred crowns to complete his work.” Upon the exaltation of this pontiff to the papal chair, be paid a visit to him, with great expectations of advantage. The pope gave him a very gracious reception, and a bull or licence entitling him to the profits of his poem; and he left Home dissatisfied in his expectation, but bore testimony to the pope’s honourable reception of him.

But it seems that Ariosto had raised his thoughts to some great ecclesiastical preferment; on which occasion signor Rolli observes, that one reason why he was not preferred was, that he was devoted to Alphonso of Ferrara, whom the pope hated, and therefore could not give our author a cardinal’s hat. Leo died in 1521, six years after the finst publication, and the year in which Ariosto published the third edition of his poem. Perhaps had he lived longer, the poet might have experienced further marks of his generosity.

His Italian biographers inform us, that in his conversation he was modest and affable to every body, demeaning himself in such a manner, as if altogether unconscious of that great superiority which Nature had given him; he was close in argument and ready in repartees, but was seldom observed to laugh more than became the dignity of a philosopher; yet, though his temper was rather inclined to melancholy, he was very remote from a rigid disposition; being particularly open and sprightly in his conversation with women, by whom his company was much coveted. He was an avowed enemy to ceremony, though always ready to pay due respect to place and rank. He abhorred all those dignities that could only be acquired by servility; he was a sincere lover of his country, loyal to his prince, and steady in his friendships. In his diet he was abstemious, making only one meal a day, 'and that generally towards the evening, and was neither curious for variety or luxuries, being indeed a contemner of luxury in general. While he was composing his Orlando, he would frequently rise in the middle of the night, and cause his servant Gianni to bring him pen, ink, and paper, when he wrote down what had immediately occurred to his imagination, which in the day he communicated to his friends. His integrity was incorruptible, as appears by what he says to his brother Galasso of the old man, who, being possessed of great wealth, was fearful of being poisoned by his relations, and therefore would trust himself in no hands but Ariosto. He took great delight in building, but was an economist in his expences that way: a friend once expressing an astonishment, that he, who had described such magnificent edifices in his poem, should be contented with so poor a dwelling, Ariosto answered very aptly, that “words were much easier put together than bricks;” and leading him to the door of his house, pointed to this distich which he had caused to be engraved on the portico:

Notwithstanding what has been mentioned of his personal bravery in the engagement between the pope’s vessels and the duke’s, he is reported to have been naturally of a timid disposition: when on horseback he would alight oa the least appearance of danger; he was particularly timorous on the water; and when he went out of a vessel, would always stay till the last, frequently using this expression: “De puppe novissimus exi.” In every other respect his temper was firm and unruffled.

He was of an amorous constitution, and very apt to receive impressions from every beautiful object; violent in his attachments, impatient of a rival; but in his amours he was discreet, cautious, and secret. It has been said that he might possibly allude to this by the sculpture of his ink-standish, on the top of which was a Cupid, with his fore-finger placed on his lip, as an emblem of silence. This disposition to gallantry, which he retained to the last year of his life, is confirmed by many parts of his writings. The names of the women, whom he loved, do not appear to'be mentioned, except one whom he is said to have been strongly attached to, of the name of Geneura, to whom he is supposed to allude in one of his sonnets.

In his early life he contracted an intimacy with a noble Florentine called Nicolo Vespucci, whom he accompanied into Florence in 1513, being then thirty-nine years old, to perfect himself in the Tuscan dialect, and to be present at the magnificent ceremony used at the feast of St. Baptist; here he fell violently in love with a kinswoman of Vespucci, whom he found preparing a dress of silver embroidered with purple for her sons to appear in at, the jousts. It has been the opinion of some, that he was privately married, but that he was obliged to keep it secret for fear of forfeiting some church benefices which he enjoyed; some go so far as to say that his wife’s name was Alexandra.

Concerning the person of Ariosto, he was rather above the common size, of a countenance generally grave and contemplative, as appears from the admirable picture painted by Titian: his head was partly bald; his hair black and curling; his forehead high; his eye-brows raised; his eyes black and sparkling; his nose large and aquiline; his lips well formed; his teeth even and white; his cheeks rather thin, and his complexion inclining to the olive; he was well made, except that his shoulders were somewhat large, which made him appear to stoop a little; his walk was slow and deliberate, as indeed were his actions in general. Ariosto left behind him two sons by Alexandra, who were always considered illegitimate; Virginio before named, and J. Baptista; the first of whom being brought up under his father, who took great pains to instruct him, was made a canon of the house of Ferrara, and Ariosto resigned a great part of his benefices to him; the latter went very young into the army, and, having acquired considerable reputation as a soldier, returned to Ferrara a little while before Ariosto’s death, and died himself an officer in the duke’s service.

Ariosto’s reputation rests now entirely on his Orlando, concerning which modern critics are nearly agreed, and can perceive its blemishes without a wish to detract from its genuine merit. The monstrous extravagance of his fictions, as far as respects the agency of demons and aerial beings, were not ill suited to the age in which he lived, and supported the reputation of his poem, until it attracted the admiration of more enlightened minds, by the display of an imagination infinitely exuberant, yet directed by the finest taste, by the extraordinary power the author possessed of interesting both the gentler and severer passions, and by his masterly skill in all graphical paintings and descriptions. “Orlando,” says Dr. Blair, who seems to have collected the opinions of all the modern critics on this poem, "unites all sorts of poetry sometimes comic and satiric; sometimes light and licentious; at other times, highly heroic, descriptive, and tender. Whatever strain the poet assumes, he excels in it. He is always master of his subject; seems to play himself with it; and leaves us sometimes at a loss to know whether he be serious or in jest. He is seldom dramatic; sometimes, but not often, sentimental; but in narration and description, perhaps no poet ever went beyond him. He makes every scene which he describes, and every event which he relates, pass before our eyes; and in his selection of circumstances, is eminently picturesque. His style is much varied, always suited to the subject, and adorned with a remarkable smooth and melodious versification. The most valued editions of the Orlando are, that printed at Venice, fol. 1584, with Ruscelli’s notes, and engravings by Porro; and the edition of Molini, published in 1772, in 4 vols. 8vo, which has very beautiful engravings, and was printed with Baskerville’s types. There is likewise a very correct edition published at Paris by Pankouke in 10 vols. 12mo, 1787; and another, likewise very correct, in 4 vols. 8vo, by Mr. Isola, at London, 1789. Ariosto’s other pieces have been frequently reprinted, but none of them are in much demand. The English reader has been made acquainted with the merits of the Orlando by Mr. Hoole, who, in 1783, completed his translation, in 5 vols. 8vo. His predecessors in that labour were sir John Harrington and Mr. Huggins, but they are now little known and little read. In 1759 the satires of Ariosto were translated into English, and published in a 12mo volume. Ariosto had a nephew, Horace, who was born in 1555, and died in 1593. He defended the Orlando Furioso against the criticisms of Pellegrino, and was himself a poet, and a writer of comedies.

, an Italian lawyer, and a scholar of great learning, was born at Cremona, Feb. 3, 1657, the son of Louis Arisi and Lucia Negri, both of distinguished families in that place. His infirm state of health in his infancy made him be consigned, for some time, to the care of a private tutor; but he afterwards studied philosophy in the Jesuits’ college. In 1674, his father sent him to Rome to study law, from whence, in 1677, he went to Bologna with a view to continue that pursuit, but the death of his father obliged him next year to return to his own country. Still desirous, however, to complete his course, he went first to Pavia, where he obtained a doctor’s degree, and then to Milan for six months, where he improved himself under an able advocate. On his return to Cremona, he divided his time between his professional studies, and that of polite literature, particularly poetry, for which he had a very early taste. Connecting himself, by correspondence or personal acquaintance, with the most eminent scholars of nis time, he became a member of many of the Italian academies; and the extensive knowledge and probity he displayed as a lawyer, occasioned his being employed in many public transactions, in which he acquitted himself to the entire satisfaction of the government of his country. He died of a lingering disorder, Jan. 25, 1743. Mazzuchelli’s list of his works, printed and manuscript, amounts to sixtyfour articles. The most esteemed of the printed works are, 1. “La Tirranide soggiogata,” an oratorio for St. Anthony of Padua, Cremona, 1677, 4to, and he published three others in different years for the festival of that saint. 2. “Cremona litterata, sen in Cremonenses, doctrina et litterariis dignitatibus eminentiores, chronologic^ adnotationes,” 3 vols. fol. The first two were published at Parma, 1702 and 1705, and the third at Cremona, 1741. 3. “Scnatorum Mediolanensium ex collegio judicum Cremonae ab ipso erecto, usque ad hocc tempora continuata series,” &c. Cremona, 1705, fol. 4. “Rime per le sacre stimate del Santo Patriarca Francesco,” &c. Cremona, 1713, 4to, an astonishing instance of superstitious poetry, containing no less than three hundred and twenty-five sonnets on the marks on the body of St. Francis. He published many other poems separately, and in collections.

was, according to, the common opinion, a Greek pagan writer, who lived in the fourth century, but his existence has been doubted. If indeed he be the person mentioned by Ammianus Marcellinus, who lived in that century, there is some foundation to believe that there was such a person. Some think, however, that the name prefixed to the first “Love Epistle” was taken by the publisher for that of the writer. His work, which consists of “Love Epistles,” w:is never known, or certainly not generally known, till Sambucus published it in 1566; since which time there have been several editions of it printed at Paris, where the book seems to have been held in greater estimation than amongst us. As to the real date of its composition, we have nothing but conjecture to offer. By the twenty-sixth epistle it should appear that the author lived in the time of the later emperors, when Byzantium was called New Rome; and in that epistle mention is made of the pantomime actor Caramallus, who was contemporary with Sidonius Apollinaris. The Epistles are certainly terse, elegant, and very poetical, both in language and sentiment; yet they have scarcely any thing original in them, being a cento from the writings of Plato, Lucian, Philostratus, and almost all the ancient Greek authors, whose sentences are pleasingly woven together, and applied to every passion incident to love.

The best editions of Aristsenetus are those of Pauw, printed at Utrecht, 12mo, 1736 7; and of Abresch, 8vo, Zwoll, 1749, a most excellent edition, not only on account of the learned editor’s notes, but also for the emendations of Tollius, d'Orville, and Valckenaer. Abresch published a small volume of supplemental notes and observations at Amsterdam, 1752. About the beginning of the last century the facetious Tom Brown, as he is usually called, translated, or rather imitated, some select pieces of Aristaenetus, but without either fidelity, or poetic beauty. The first part of the epistles, however, were translated with more effect, and published in 1771, 12mo, by two young gentlemen who have since risen to high distinction in the literary and political world. But it is to be regretted that they imbibed rather too much of the licentious spirit of their author; and the offence taken at this by the critics of that time was probably the reason of their not being encouraged to proceed in translating the second part. Yet as the production of one of the first oriental scholars, and one of the first orators of the day, of Halhed and of Sheridan, this translation may be regarded as a literary curiosity.

, a celebrated grammarian, who flourished 160 years B. C. was born in Samothracia, but chose Alexandria for the place of his residence. He was highly esteemed by Ptolemy Philometor, who intrusted him with the education of his son. He applied himself much to criticism, and made a revisal of Homer’s poems with great exactness, but without the equity or impartiality of critic cism, for such verses as he did not like he treated as spurious. He marked these with the figure of a dart, uStbixe: whence othieiv was used for to condemn in general. Some have said, that he'never would publish any thing, for fear of giving the world an opportunity of retorting upon him; but others assure us that he published several works. Cicero and Horace have used his name to express a very rigid critic, and it is employed to this day for the same purpose, but not without opprobrium, derived partly from himself, and perhaps yet more from the manner of modern verbal critics. Growing dropsical, he found no other remedy than to starve himself to death. Suidas relates, that he died in Cyprus, aged seventy-two. Villoison, in his edition of the Iliad, has afforded the moderns an opportunity of appreciating the value of Aristarchus’ s criticisms on Homer, as well as those of the first editors of that immortal bard.

, a celebrated Greek philosopher and astronomer, was a native of the city of Samos; but of what date is not exactly known; it must have been, however, before the time of Archimedes, as some parts of his writings and opinions are cited by that author, in his Arenarius: he probably, therefore, flourished about 420 years B. C. He held the opinion of Pythagoras as to the system of the world, but whether before or after him, is uncertain, teaching that the sun and stars were fixed in the heavens, and that the earth is moved in a circle about the sun, at the same time that it revolved about its own centre or axis. He taught also, that the annual orbit of the earth, compared with the distance of the fixed stars, is but as a point. On this head Archimedes says, “Aristarchus the Samian, confuting the notions of astrologers, laid down certain positions, from whence it follows, that the world is much larger than is generally imagined; for he lays it down, that the fixed stars and the sun are immoveable, and that the earth is carried round the sun in the circumference of a circle.” On which account, although he did not suffer persecution and imprisonment, like Galileo, yet he did not escape censure for his supposed impiety; for it is said Cleanthus was of opinion, that Aristarchus ought to have been tried for his opinions respecting the heavenly bodies and the earth. Aristarchus invented a peculiar kind of sun-dial, mentioned by Vitruvius. There is extant of his works only a treatise upon the magnitude and distance of the sun and moon; this was translated into Latin, and commented upon by Commandine, who first published it with Pappus’s explanations, in 1572, Pisaur, 4to. Dr. Wallis afterwards published it in Greek, with Commandine’s Latin version, in 1688, at Oxford, and which he inserted again in the third volume of his mathematical works, printed in folio at Oxford, in 1699. In 1644 was published, at Paris, a work entitled “De Mundi Systemate, cum notis Bl. P. Roberval,” 8vo, which goes under the name of Aristarchus; but it has been supposed to be a fiction.

, a prefect or officer under Ptolemy Philadelphus, king of Egypt, who respected him on account of his moderation and wisdom, is said to have been df Jewish origin. Ptolemy is reported to have sent him to demand of the high priest Eleazar, some learned men to translate the Jewish laws from Hebrew into Greek, and Eleazar complied by choosing seventy-two persons, who made the translation known by the name of the Septuagint. ArLteas has the credit of having written the history of this translation; and there exists a work of the kind which bears his name, entitled “Historia de S. Scripturse interpretibus,” Oxon. 1692, 8vo, which was first published in the Bible printed at Rome in 1471 2 vols. fol. But archdeacon Hody published it, with a confutation, in his work entitled “De Bibliorum Textibus Originalibus,” Oxon. 1705, fol. Van Dale and others have taken the same side of the question, which is amply discussed in Hody, already mentioned, and in Van Dale, “Dissert, sup. Arist.” Amst. 1704, 4to; Prideaux’s “Connections;” Owen’s “Inquiry into the Septuagint Version;” Blair’s “Lectures on the Canon;” Dupin’s “Preliminary Dissertation to the Bible;” Michaelis’s “Introduction to the New Testament,” &c. &c.

, the Proconnesian, an ancient Greek historian and poet, flourished in the time of Cyrus 5 and of Crœsus, about 565 years B. C. He is said to have written an epic poem, in three books, on the war of the Arimaspes, or Scythian hyperboreans, which is now lost. Longinus quotes six verses from it in his treatise on the Sublime, and Tzetzes six others. He had also composed a book on Theogony, or the history of the gods, which is likewise lost. Herodotus, Pliny, Pausanias, and Suidas, relate the grossest absurdities about this author, as, that his soul could leave his body at pleasure, and that he wrote poems after he was dead, &c.

, the sophist, was a native of Adriani, a small town in Mysia, and was disciple of Polemon the rhetorician of Smyrna, son of Eudaimon, a philosopher and priest of Jupiter in his own country. He also heard Herod at Athens, and Aristocles at Pergamus. He is supposed to have flourished about the year 176 of the Christian era. He appears to have been a good writer and an able orator. He is credulous, indeed, and superstitious, but there are many excellent passages in his writings in favour of truth and virtue, and he seems to have considered private virtue as indispensable to public character. A man of such eminence was no doubt an ornament to the heathen religion; and his eloquent hymns to the gods, and his other orations, must have had powerful attractions. To the city of Smyrna he was a great benefactor, for when, it was almost destroyed by an earthquake, he so pathetically represented their calamities, in a letter to the emperor Marcus, that this prince could not forbear weeping at some parts of it, and presently promised to restore the city. Besides this letter, he published a monody, bewailing the unhappy circumstances of the people of Smyrna, and after that wrote an oration, or epistle, in the year 173, congratulating tjiem on their restoration. In this last he celebrates not only the favour and liberality of the emperor, but likewise the generous compassion of many others, among whom Tillemont thinks he glanced at the Christians. Lardner has produced several passages from him, among his “Testimonies of ancient Heathens.” Aristides’s constitution was infirm, yet it is supposed he reached his sixtieth or seventieth year. The best edition of his works was published by Dr. Jebb, 2vols. 4to, Oxford, 1722—30.

, surnamed The Just, one of the most virtuous characters in ancient history, was the son of Lysimachus, and a native of Athens. He was educated in the principles of Lycurgus, the Lacedemonian legislator, and had Themistocles for his rival. These two celebrated men, although brought up from their infancy together, discovered very different qualities as they advanced in life. Aristides was all candour and concern for the public good: Themistocles was artful, deceitful, and ambitious. Aristides wished to remove such a character from any share in the government, but the intrigues of his enemy prevailed so far as to procure the banishment of Aristides about the year 483 B. C. The practice of ostracism was employed on this occasion, and it is said that a citizen who did not know Aristides came to him, and asked him to write the name of Aristides on his shell. Surprised at this, he asked the man, if Aristides had ever injured him, “Not at all,” replied the other, “but I am weary of hearing him perpetually called The Just” Aristides immediately wrote his name on the shell, and gave it to the man; The Athenians, however, soon repented having banished such a patriot, and recalled him, upon which he went to Themistocles, to engage him to act in concert for the welfare of the state, and his old enemy received this offer with a better grace than his character promised. Aristides persuaded the Greeks to unite against the Persians, and displayed his personal courage at the battles of Marathon, Salamis, and Platsea. He besides established a military chest for the support of the war, and the equity with which he levied taxes for this purpose made his administration be termed the golden age. He died so poor that the republic found it necessary to defray the expences of his funeral, and provide for his son and daughters. The time of his death is not known. Themistocles, Cimpn, and Pericles, filled Athens with superb buildings, vast porticoes, and rich statues, but Aristides adorned it by his virtues. Such is the testimony of Plato, and of impartial posterity. The name of Just was frequently confirmed to him during his life-time, and he appears by every testimony to have been a man of great and inflexible integrity. Plutarch hints at the only blemish in his character, when he informs us that the enmity between him and Themistocles began first in a love affair.

, an Athenian philosopher, became a convert to Christianity in the second century, and wrote “An Apology for the Christian faith,” which, at the same time with Quadratus, he presented to the emperor Adrian. It is not now extant, but is mentioned by Jerom and by Eusebius who had probably seen it. Jerom adds, that after he was converted he continued to wear the habit of a philosopher. He speaks very highly of the learning displayed in the “Apology,” which Justin imitated in the book he presented to Antoninus Pius, and his sons, and the Roman senate.

, an eminent painter, was a native of Thebes, and contemporary with Apelles, about the year 300 or 340 B. C. His cheftfaeuvrc was the sacking of a town. Mr. Fuseli gives a very high character of him and of it. He applied the refinements of art to the mind. The passions which history had organized for Timanthes (an illustrious predecessor), Aristides caught as they rose from the breast, or escaped from the lips of nature herself: his volume was man, his scene society: he drew the subtle discriminations of mind in every stage of life, the whis. pers t the simple cry of passion, and its most complex accents. Such, as history informs us, was the suppliant whose voice you seemed to hear, such his sick man’s half extinguished eye and labouring breast, such the sister dying for her brother, and above all, the half-slain mother shuddering lest the eager babe should suck the blood from her palsied nipple. This picture was probably at Thebes, when Alexander sacked that town: what his feelings were when he saw it, we may guess from his sending it to Pella. Its expression, poised between the anguish of maternal affection and the pangs of death, gives to commiseration, an image, which neither the infant piteously caressing his slain mother in the groupe of Epigonus, nor the absorbed feature of the Niobe, nor the struggle of the Laocoon, excite. Euphranor the Isthmian, who excelled equally as painter and statuary, was the disciple of Aristides, and carried the refinements of expression still farther. Pliny gives an account of the principal works of Aristides, a great part of which were destroyed at the taking of Corinth by the Romans. King Attalus, having discovered among the booty a Bacchus painted by Aristides, offered 6000 sesterces for it, which Mummius the consul hearing, got possession of the picture, and brought it to Rome. When on his death-bed, Aristides began an Iris, which he left unfinished, and which no painter of the age would undertake to finish.

, a writer on music, is supposed to have lived about the beginning of the second century of the Christian sera, a little before Ptolemy. There are three books of his extant on Greek music, which he treats sometimes more like a moralist than a professional man, but affords many curious particulars and opinions on, the art as practised in his days. Dr. Burney frequently quotes his work, which was printed with notes, Gr. and Lat. by Meibomius, among the a Antiquae musicse auctores," Amst. 1652, 4to.

, of Cyrene in Africa, disciple of Socrates, founder of the Cyrenaic sect, quitted Libya, the seat of his family, that he might go and hear Socrates at Athens; but he differed widely from the plan of wisdom laid down by that great man. The basis of his doctrine was, that pleasure is the sovereign good of man, and he made no distinction between the pleasures of the soul and those of the senses. He admitted of no certain knowledge, but that which we owe to the inward sentiment. “We have,” said he, “distinct ideas of pleasure and pain; but that which causes the sensations of it is unknown, because we are perpetually deceived by the outward senses. The same person judges differently of an outward object, according as he is differently affected. Of two persons who taste of the same dish, the one shall find it insipid, and the other agreeable. Consequently there is nothing certain in outward things, but only in what touches us internally. Of the different internal sentiments, some are agreeable, others disagreeable, while others again are indifferent. Nature abhors those which cause pain, and seeks the sovereign' good in those which occasion pleasure.” Aristippus, however, did not reject virtue; but regarded it only as a good, inasmuch as it produces pleasure. He held that it was not to be sought after for itself, but only upon account of the pleasures and advantages it may procure. In consonance with his principles, he denied himself nothing that could render life agreeable; and, as he was of a pliant and insinuating temper, and his philosophy easy and accommodating, he had a great number of followers. The nobles were fond of him; Dionysius the tyrant courted him, and at his court he covered the cloak of the philosopher with the mantle of the courtier. He danced and drank with him, regulated the banquets; and the cooks took his orders for the preparation and the delicacy of the viands. His conversation was rendered agreeable by continued flashes of wit. Dionysius the tyrant having asked him, how it happened that the philosophers were always besieging the doors of the great, whereas they never went to the philosophers?“It is,” replied Aristippus, “because the philosophers know their wants, and the great are ignorant of theirs.” According to others, his answer was more concise: “Because the pnysicians usually go to the sick.” One day that prince gave him the choice of three courtesans. The philosopher took them allthree, saying: “That Paris did not fare the better for having pronounced in favour of one goddess against two others.” He then conducted them to the door of his house, and there took leave of them. Being rallied one day on his intercourse with the wanton Lais: “It is true,” said he, “that I possess her, but she possesses not me.” On being reproached with living in too much splendour, he said, “If indulgence in good living were blameable, would such great feasts be made on the festivals of the gods?” “If Aristippus could be content to live upon vegetables (said Diogenes the cynic to him), he would not stoop so low as to pay his court to princes.” “If he who condemns me (replied Aristippus) was qualified to pay his court to princes, he would not be obliged to be content with vegetables.” On being asked, “What philosophy had taught him?” “To live well with all the world, and to fear nothing.” In what respect are philosophers superior to other men?“In this,” said he, “that though there were 110 laws, they would live as they do.” On being rallied, he used gently to withdraw. One day, however, he by whom he was attacked pursued him, and asked him why he went away?“Because, as you have a right to throw jests at me, I have also a right not to stay till they reach me.” It was one of his maxims, that it was better to be poor than ignorant, because the poor man Wants only to be assisted with a little money, whereas the ignorant man wants to be humanized. One bragging that he had read a great deal, Aristippus told him that it was no sign of good health to eat more than one can digest. It is said that he was the first who took payment of his disciples. Having asked 50 drachmas of a father for the instruction of his son: “How, fifty drachmas!” exclaimed the man, “I can buy a slave for that money.” “Well,” replied the philosopher, (who could assume the cynic as well as the courtier) “buy one, and then thou wilt have two.” Aristippus flourished about the year 400 B. C. He died at Gyrene, on his return from the court of Syracuse. He composed books of history and ethics, which have not reached our times. One on ancient luxury, mentioned by Diogenes Laertius, is certainly not his. He left a daughter named Arete, whom he carefully instructed in all the parts of philosophy, who was of extraordinary virtue as well as beauty, and obtained a place among the class of philosophers.

, a Greek philosopher of the Stoic sect, was a native of the island of Chios, and a disciple of Zeno, from whom, however, he differed, and set up a new sect. He rejected logic and natural philosophy, the one as useless^ and the other as above the human comprehension. He departed after some time from the precepts of morality, and would have no relative duties taught, but merely general ideas of wisdom. He held that the nature of God was not intelligible, and hence it has been thought that he respected the contemplation of divine things. He became very voluptuous in his old age, as indeed he had begun to be in his youth. His death is said to have been occasioned by the sun scorching his bald head. He flourished about 260 B. C.

was a Roman lawyer of great celebrity, under the emperor Trajan, about the year 110. Pliny has bestowed the highest praises on him, as excelling in all manner of learning, public and civil law, history, and antiquities, and not less estimable for his integrity and personal virtues. It is a considerable deduction from his character, however, that he appears to have meditated suicide during an illness, provided the physicians should pronounce it incurable. He is said to have lived to an extreme old age after this, but the fact seems doubtful, and to have been the author of some books, which have not descended to us, but are mentioned by Aulus Gellius.

, an Alexandrian Jew, and peripatetic philosopher, who lived about 120 B. C. composed a commentary in Greek on the Pentateuch, which he dedicated to Ptolomy Philometor. His object in this voluminous work was to prove that the ancient Greek poets and philosophers had availed themselves of the books of Moses, and that the Jews and their history were not unknown to the ancient Greek historians. To prove this, he forged a number of quotations from these poets and historians, and that so artfully as not only to impose on the fathers of the church, but on many p-ofane writers. Brucker informs us that he was an admirer of the Greek philosophy, and united with the study of the Mosaic law, in the mystical and allegorical method introduced in his time, some knowledge of the Aristotelian philosophy.

, a celebrated comic poet, was the son of Philip, and probably an Athenian by birth; but his place of nativity has been contested, his enemies endeavouring to represent him as a stranger. He was contemporary with Plato, Socrates, and Euripides; and most of his plays were written during the Peloponnesian war. His imagination was warm and lively, and his genius particularly turned to raillery: he had also great spirit and resolution, and was a declared enemy to slavery, and to all those who wanted to oppress their country. When the Athenians suffered themselves in his time to be governed by men who had no other view than to make themselves masters of the commonwealth, Aristophanes exposed their artifices with great wit and severity upon the stage. Cleo was the first whom he attacked, in his comedy of the “Equites:” and when none of the comedians would venture to personate a man of his great authority, Aristophanes played the character himself; and with so much success, that the Athenians obliged Cleo to pay a fine of five talents, which were given to the poet. This freedom of his likewise was so well received by the Athenians, that they cast handfuls of flowers upon his head, and carried him through the city in triumph with the greatest acclamation. They made also a public decree, that he should be honoured with a crown of the sacred olive-tree in the citadel, which was the greatest honour that could be paid to a citizen. He described the affairs of the Athenians in so exact a manner, that his comedies are a faithful history of that people. For this reason, when Dionysius king of Syracuse desired to learn the state and language of Athens, Plato sent him the plays of Aristophanes, telling him these were the best representation thereof. He wrote above 50 comedies, but there are only 11 extant which are perfect; these are “Plutus, the Clouds, the Frogs, Equites, the Acharnenses, the Wasps, Peace, the Birds, the Ecclesiazusae or Female Orators, the Thesmophoriazusae or Priestesses of Ceres, and Lysistrata.” The “Clouds,” which he wrote in ridicule of Socrates, is the most celebrated of all his comedies: Socrates had a contempt for the comic poets, and never went to see their plays, except when Alcibiades or Critias obliged him to go thither. He was shocked at the licentiousness of the old comedy; and as he was a man of piety, probity, candour, and wisdom, could not bear that the characters of his fellow-citizens should be insulted and abused. This contempt which he expressed to the comic poets, was the ground of their aversion to him, and the motive of Aristophanes’s writing the “Clouds” against him. Madam Dacier tells us, she was so much charmed with this performance, that after she had translated it, and read it over 200 times, it did not become tedious; and that the pleasure she received from it was so exquisite, as to make her forget all the contempt and indignation which Aristophanes deserved, for employing his wit to ruin a man, who was wisdom itself, and the greatest ornament of the city of Athens. Aristophanes having conceived some aversion to the poet Euripides, satirizes him in several of his plays, particularly in his “Frogs” and his “Thesmophoriazusae.” He wrote his “Peace” in the 10th year of the Peloponnesian war, when a treaty for 50 years was concluded between the Athenians and the Lacedaemonians, though it continued but seven. The “Acharnenses” was written after the death of Pericles, and the loss of the battle in Sicily, in order to dissuade the people from intrusting the safety of the commonwealth to such imprudent generals as Lamachus. Soon after, he represented his “Aves” or Birds, by which he admonished the Athenians to fortify Decelaea, which he calls by a fictitious name Nepheloccoccygia. The “Vespae,” or Wasps, was written after another loss in Sicily, which the Athenians suffered from the misconduct of Chares. He wrote the “Lysistrata” when all Greece was involved in a war, and in this the women are introduced debating on the affairs of the commonwealth, and come a resolution, not to cohabit with their husbands, 'till a peace should be concluded. His “Plutus,” and other comedies of that kind, were written after the magistrates had given orders, that no person should be exposed by name upon the stage. He invented a peculiar kind of verse, which was called by his name, and is mentioned by Cicero in his “Brutus;” and Suidas says, that he also was the inventor of the tetrameter and octameter verse.

Aristophanes was greatly admired among the ancients, especially for the true attic elegance of his style: “It is,” says madam Dacier, “as agreeable as his wit; for besides its purity, force, and sweetness, it has a certain harmony, which sounds extremely pleasant to the ear: when he has occasion to use the common ordinary style, he does it without using any expression that is base and vulgar; and when he has a mind to express himself loftily, in his highest flight he is never obscure.” “Let no man,” says Scaliger, “pretend to understand the Attic dialect, who has not read Aristophanes: in him are to be found all the Attic ornaments, which made St. Chrysostom so much admire him, that he always laid him under his pillow when he went to bed.” Mr. Frischlin observes, that Plautus has a great affinity to Aristophanes in his manner of writing, and has imitated him in many parts of his plays. Frischlin has written a vindication of our poet, in answer to the objections urged against him by Plutarch. How great an opinion Plato had of Aristophanes, is evident even from Plutarch’s acknowledgement, who tells us, that this poet’s Discoure upon Love was inserted by that philosopher in his Symposium: and Cicero, in his first book “De legibus,” styles him “the most witty poet of the old comedy.” The time of his death is unknown; but it is certain he was living after the expulsion of the tyrants by Thrasybulus, whom he mentions in his Plutus and other comedies.