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

, an ingenious French writer, wa born at Clermont in Auvergne in 1678, and educated for the church. In his youth he had a canonry in the collegiate church of Notre Dame de Monferrand, but resigned it to one of his brothers, that he might be at liberty to go to Paris and devote his time to literary pursuits. There by the interest of some friends he was made almoner to the duchess of Berri, daughter of the regent, and also obtained the place of king’s interpreter for the Sclavonian and Russian languages. In 1744 he was admitted a member of the French academy. He died Feb. 4, 1748. The work by which he is best known, and to which indeed he chiefly owed his reputation in France, is his “Synonymes Fransais,” 12mo, of which a new edition, with some posthumous pieces by Girard, was published by M. Beauzee in 1769, 2 vols. 12mo. No grammatical work was ever more popular in France, nor more useful in denning the precise meaning of words apparently synonymous; and the elegance and moral tendency of the examples he produce* have been much admired. The abbe“Roubaud has since published” Les Nouveaux Synonymes Francais,“1786, 4 vols. 8vo, which may be considered as a supplement to Girard. Our author published also a grammar under the title of” Les vrais principes de la laugue Franc.ais," 2 vols. 12mp, far inferior in ingenuity to his former, and full of metaphysical whims on the theory of language, not unmixed with those infidel principles which were in his time beginning to be propagated.

, a German physician, was born in 1595, at Cologne, where his father was a surgeon. His first application to letters was at Bremen; whence he returned to Cologne, and devoted himself to philosophy, physic, and chirurgery. He studied four years under Peter Holtzem, who was the elector’s physician, and professor in this city; and he learned the practical part of surgery from his father. To perfect himself in these sciences, he went afterwards into Italy, and made some stay at Padua; where he greatly benefited himself by attending the lectures of Jerome Fabricius ab Aquapendente, Adrian Spigelius, and Sanctorins. He was here made M. D. After having visited the principal towns of Italy, he returned to his country in 1618, and settled at Bremen; where he practised physic and surgery with so much success, that the archbishop of this place made him his physician in 1628. He was also made physician of the republic of Bremen. The time of his death is not precisely known; some say 1640, but the dedication of his last work is dated Oct. 8, 1652. He published at Bremen, “ Speculum Chirurgorum,” in 1619, 8vo; reprinted in 1628, 4to; “Methodus Medendse Paronychia?,” in 1633; “Tractatus de Polypo Narium affectu gravissimo,” in 1628; and “Gazophylacium Polypusium Fonticulorum & Setonum Reseratum,” in 1633. These four pieces were collected and published, with emendations, tinder the title of his Works, at London, in 1729, 4to, with his life prefixed, and some curious tracts on Roman antiquities. It must needs suggest an high opinion of this young physician, that though he died a young man, yet his works should be thought worthy of a republication 100 years after; when such prodigious improvements have been made in philosophy, physic, and sciences of all kinds, of which he had not the benefit.

, a grandson of the preceding, war born at Broad Hinton in 1664, and became at the age of fourteen a commoner of Trinity-college, Oxford. He studied law afterwards in Lincoln’s-inn, and was admitted to the bar. He is known by some minor poems, the best of which may be seen in Mr. Nichols’s Collection. He made the first English translation of Fontenelle’s “Plurality of Worlds.” He died at Broad Hinton in 1735.

, an English physician, was son of William Glisson, of Rampisham, in Dorsetshire, and grafidson of Walter Glisson, of the city of Bristol. He appears to have been born in 1596. Where he learned the first rudiments of his grammar is not known; but he was admitted June 18, 1617, of Caius college, in Cambridge, apparently with a view to physic. He first, however, went through the academical courses of logic and philosophy, and proceeded in arts, in which he took both degrees, that of B. A. in 1620, and of M. A. in 1624; and being chosen fellow of his college, was incorporated M. A. at Oxford, Oct. 25, 1627. From this time he applied himself particularly to the study of medicine, and took his doctor’s degree at Cambridge in 1634, and was appointed regius professor of physic in the room of Ralph Winterton; which office he held forty years. But not chusing to reside constantly at Cambridge, he offered himself, and was admitted candidate of the college of physicians, London, in 1634, and was elected fellow, Sept. 30, the ensuing year.

Amidst this high encouragement, the services of Dr. Pemberton must not be forgotten. Soon after the appearance of “Leonidas,” this steady friend endeavoured to fix the public attention on it, by a long pamphlet, entitled “Observations on Poetry, especially Epic, occasioned by the late poem upon Leonidas,” 1738, 12mo. In this, with, many just remarks of a general kind, the author carries his opinion of Glover’s production beyond all reasonable bounds. In the following year, Glover published “London, or the Progress of Commerce,” and the more celebrated ballad of “Hosier’s Ghost,” both written with a view to rouse the nation to resent the conduct of the Spaniards, and to promote what had seldom been known, a war called for by the people, and opposed by the ministry. During the same political dissentions, which, as usual, were warmest in the city of London, Glover presided at several meetings called to set aside, or censure the conduct of those city magistrates or members of parliament who voted for the court. His speeches at those meetings, if we may trust to the report of them in the periodical journals of 1739 and 1740, were elegant, spirited, and calculated to give him considerable weight in the deliberative assemblies of his fellow-citizens. The latter were, indeed, so fully convinced of his talents and zeal, as to appoinfe him to conduct their application to parliament, on the subject of the neglect shewn to their trade by the ruling administration. His services in this last affair may be seen in a pamphlet published in 1743, under the title of A short Account of the late application to parliament made by the merchants of London upon the neglect of their trade; with the substance of the evidence thereupon, as summed up by Mr. Glover."

Glover’s “Leonidas” amply entitles him to a distinguished place among the poets of his country, but the public has not held it in uniform estimation. From the time of its first appearance in 1737, it went through six, if not seven editions; but for nearly forty years there has not been a demand for another, although that published in 1770 was highly improved and enlarged. Its history may probably account in part for this singular fate, and public taste must explain the rest. On its first publication, it was read and praised with the utmost avidity. Besides the encomiums it drew from Lyttelton and Pemberton, its fame reached Ireland, where it was reprinted, and became as much in fashion as it had been in England. “Pray who is that Mr. Giover,” says Swift to Pope, in one of his letters, *' who writ the epic poem called Leonidas, which is reprinting here, and hath great vogue“Unfortunately, however, the whole of this tribute of praise was not paid to the intrinsic merit of the poem. It became the adopted favourite of the party in opposition (to sir Robert Walpoie) who had long endeavoured to persuade the nation that public liberty was endangered by the measures of that minister, and that they formed the chosen band who occupied the straits of Thermopylae in defiance of the modern. Xerxes. Leonidas therefore was recommended, to rouse an oppressed and enslaved people to the vindication of their rights. That this should be attempted is less wonderful than that it should succeed. We find very few passages in this poem which will apply to the state of public affairs in. England at that time, if we except the common-place censure of courts and courtiers, and even that is appropriated with so strict historical fidelity to the court of Xerxes, that it does not seem easy to borrow it for any other purpose.” Nothing else,“however, Dr. Warton informs us,” was read or talked of at Leicester-house," the illustrious owner of which extended his patronage to all poets who fanned the sacred flame of patriotism. The consequence of all this was, that Leonidas, which might have laid claim to a considerable rank among English poems of the higher order, was pushed beyond it, and when the purposes for which it had been extolled were either answered, or no longer desirable, it fell lower than it deserved. This is the more justly to be regretted, as we have no reason to think the autlior solicited the injudicious praise of his friends and patrons, or had any hand in building the airyedifice of popular fame. He was, indeed, a lover of liberty, which has ever been the favourite theme of poets, but he did not write for a temporary purpose. Leonidas had been the fruit of very early ambition to be known to posterity, and when he had outlived the party who pressed his poem, into their service, he corrected and improved it for a generation that knew nothing of the partialities which first extended its fame. If his object, however, in this epopee, had been solely to inculcate a love of liberty, a love of our country, and a resolute determination to perish with its freedom, he could not have chosen a subject, at least from ancient times, so happily adapted to elevate the mind. The example was unparalleled in history, and therefore the more capable of admitting the embellishments and attractions that belong to the epic province. Nor does it appear that he undertook a task to which his powers were inadequate, when he endeavoured to interest his readers in the fate of his gallant hero and faithful associates. He is not deficient either in the sublime or the pathetic, although in these essentials he may not bear an uniform comparison with the great masters of the passions. The characters are varied with much knowledge of the human heart. Each has his distinctive properties, and no one is raised beyond the proportion of virtue or talent which may be supposed to correspond with the age he lived in, or the station he occupied.

, was one of the Byzantine historians, but biographers are not agreed as to the period when he lived. Some years ago, professor Walchius published in the Gottingen Transactions an inquiry into this subject, but was obliged to confess that he could arrive at no probable conclusion. Some place Glycas in the twelfth, and some in the fifteenth century. No ancient record or writer mentions even his name, and all that is known of him has been gleaned from his works. It appears that he was a native of Constantinople; but passed a great part of his life in Sicily. Some have thought he was a monk, but this is uncertain, nor do we know whether he lived in public life, or in retirement. His letters, however, show that he was a grammarian, and was acquainted with theology, history sacred and profane, and other branches of knowledge; and such was his reputation that he was frequently consulted by monks, bishops, and the most celebrated doctors of his time. His “Annals,” by which only he is now known, contain an account of the patriarchs, kings, and emperors, and, in a word, a sort of history of the world as far as the emperor Alexis Comnenus, who died in 1118, including many remarks on divinity, philosophy, physic, astronomy, &c. Leunclavius first translated this work into Latin, and the whole was published by father Labbe, Paris, 1660, fol. Some of his letters have been published in the “Deliciae eruditorum,” Florence, 1736, and other collections.

, a learned Jesuit, and secretary to the Chinese missionaries, was born at St. Malo in 1653, and having been educated in the academies belonging to his order, was made professor of philosophy and classics, which he taught for eight years with reputation. He then came to Paris, where he was appointed secretary and procurator to the Chinese missionaries. He died May 1708. He wrote many tracts on the progress of religion in China, and entered warmly into the disputes between the missionaries on the worship of Confucius. The best known of his works are, his “Lettres sur les Progres de la Religion a la Chine,” 1697, 8vo; his “Hist, de PEditde P empereur de la Chine en faveur de la religion Chretienne,” 1698, 12mo, which makes the third volume of le Comte’s Memoirs of China; his “Hist, des Isles Mariannes,” 1700, 12mo and eight parts or volumes of the “Lettres edifiantes et curieuses,” written by the Chinese missionaries. Of these letters there was afterwards a collection made, extending to 34 vols. 12mo; and in 1780, the abbe de Querbeuf published a new edition in 26 vols. They are still consulted as affording information respecting the natural history, geography, and politics of the countries which the Jesuits had explored, although they are not unfrequently mixed with improbable tales.

Bishop Burnet says, “that he was the silentest and mojdestest man, who was perhaps ever bred in a court. He had a clear apprehension, and dispatched business with great method, and with so much temper, that he had no personal enemies. But his silence begot a jealousy, which hung long upon him. His notions were for the court; but his incorrupt and sincere way of managing the concerns of the treasury created in all people a very high esteem for him. He had true principles of religion and virtue, and never heaped up wealth. So that, all things being laid together, he was one of the worthiest and wisest men, who was employed in that age.” In another place the same historian observes, “that he was a man of the clearest head, the calmest temper, and the most incorrupt of all the ministers he had ever known; and that after having been thirty years in the treasury, and during nine of those lord treasurer, as he was never once suspected of corruption, ur of suffering his servants to grow rich under Jiim, so in all that time his estate was not increased by him to the value of four thousand pounds.” It is also said, that he had a penetrating contemplative genius, a slow, but unerring apprehension, and an exquisite judgment, with few words, though always to the purpose. He was temperate in his diet. His superior wisdom and spirit made han despise the low arts of vain-glorious courtiers; for he never kept suitors unprofitably in suspense, nor promised any thing, that he was not resolved to perform; but as he accounted dissimulation the worst of lying, so on the other hand his denials were softened by frankness and condescension to those whom he could not gratify. His great abilities and consummate experience qualified him for a prime minister; and his exact knowledge of all the branches of the revenue particularly fitted him for the management of the treasury. He was thrifty without the least tincture of avarice, being. as good an ceconomist of the public wealth, as he was of his private fortune. He had a clear conception of the whole government, both in church and state; and perfectly knew the temper, genius, and disposition of the English nation. And though his stern gravity appeared a little ungracious, yet his steady and impartial justice recommended him to the esteem of almost every person; so that no man, in so many different public stations, and so great a variety of business, ever had more friends, or fewer enemies. Dean Swift’s character of him is not so favourable, and in our references may be found many other opposite opinions of his merit and abilities. He had a brother of some poetical talent, noticed by Mr. Ellis.

, better known by the name of Woollstonecraft, a lady of very extraordinary genius, but whose history and opinions are unhappily calculated to excite a mixture of admiration, pity, and scorn, was born in or near London, April 27, 1759, of poor parents, who then resided at Epping, but afterwards removed to a farm near Beverley in Yorkshire, where this daughter frequented a day-school in the neighbourhood. From this place her father again removed to Hoxton near London, and afterwards to Walworth. During all this time, and until Miss Woollstonecraft arrived at her twenty-fourth year, there appears little that is interesting, or extraordinary in her history, unless it may be considered as such that she early affected an original way of thinking, accompanied with correspondent actions, and entertained a high and romantic sense of friendship, which seems greatly to have prevailed over filial affection. In her twenty-fourth year, she formed the plan of conducting a school at Islington, in conjunction with her sisters, which in the course of a few months she removed to Newington-green, where she was honoured by the friendship of Dr. Price. Of her opinions on religious subjects at this time, we have the following singular account from her biographer: “Her religion was, in reality, little allied to any system of forms, and was rather founded in taste, than in the niceties of polemical discussion. Her mind constitutionally attached itself to the sublime and amiable. She found an inexpressible delight in the beauties of nature, and in the splendid reveries of the imagination. But nature itself, she thought, would be no better than a vast blank, if the mind of the observer did not supply it with an animating soul. When she walked amidst the wonders of nature, she was accustomed to converse with her God. To her mind he was pictured as not less amiable, generous, and kind, than great, wise, and exalted. In fact she had received few lessons of religion in her youth, and her religion was almost entirely of her own creation. But she was not on that account the less attached to it, or the less scrupulous in discharging what she considered as its duties. She could not recollect the time when she had believed the doctrine of future punishments,” &c.

, a laborious writer in civil law and history, was born at Bischoffsel in Switzerland, in 1576, and was a protestant of the confes-^ sion of Geneva. He studied the civil law at Altorf under Conrade Rittershusius, with whom he boarded; and returned in 1598 to Bischoffsel, where for some time he had no other subsistence but what he acquired by writing books, of which, at the time of publication he used to send copies to the magistrates and people of rank, from whom he received something more than the real value; and some of his friends imagined they did him service in promoting this miserable traffic. In 1599 he lived at St. Gal, in the house of a Mr. Schobinger, who declared himself his patron; but the same year he went to Geneva, and lived at the house of professor Lectius, with the sons of Vassan, whose preceptor he was. In 1602 he went to Lausanne, from a notion that he could live cheaper there than at Geneva. His patron Schobinger, while he advised him to this step, cautioned him at the same time from such frequent removals as made him suspected of an unsettled temper. But, notwithstanding Schobinger’s caution, he returned soon after to Geneva; and, upon the recommendation of Lectius, was appointed secretary to the duke of Bouillon, which place he quitted with his usual precipitation, and was at Francfort in 1603, and had a settlement at Forsteg in 1604. In 1605 he lived at Bischoffsel; where he complained of not being safe on the score of his religion, which rendered him odious even to his relations. He was at Francfort in 1606, where he married, and continued till 1610, in very bad circumstances. Little more is known of his history, unless that he lost his wife in 1630, and died himself Aug. 11, 1635. He appears to have been a man of capricious temper, and some have attributed to him a want of integrity. The greatest part of the writings published by Goldast are compilations arranged in form, or published from Mss. in libraries; and by their number he may be pronounced a man of indefatigable labour. Conringius says he has deserved so well of his country by publishing the ancient monuments of Germany, that undoubtedly the Athenians would have maintained him in the Prytaneum, if he had lived in those times; and adds, that he neither had, nor perhaps ever will have, an equal in illustrating the affairs of Germany, and the public law of the empire. The following are the most considerable among his various works: A collection of different tracts on civil and ecclesiastical jurisdiction, entitled “Monarcbia Sancti Romani Imperii*” &c. 1611, 1613, and 1614, 3 vols. fol. “Alamaniae Scriptores,” 1730, 5 vols. fol.; “Scriptores aliquot rerum Suevlearum,” 1605, 4to; “Commentarius de Bohemise regno,” 4to “Informatio de statu Bohemia3 quoad jus,” 4to “Sybilla Francica,” 4to which is a collection of pieces relating to the Maid of Orleans “Paraeneticorum veterum pars prima,” 1604, 4to. A curious collection of letters was published in 1688, under the title “Virorum clarissimorum ad Melchior Goldastum Epistolae,” 4to, Francfort.

, a man of some poetical turn, but principally known as a translator, in the sixteenth century, was a native of London. In 1563 we find him living with secretary Cecil at his house in the Strand, and in 1577 in the parish of Allhallows, London Wall. Amongst his patrons, as we may collect from his dedications, were, sir Walter Mildmay, William lord Cobham, Henry earl of Huntingdon, lord Leicester, sir Christopher Hatton, lord Oxford, and Robert earl of Essex. He was connected with sir Philip Sydney, for he finished an English translation of Philip Mornay’s treatise in French, on the “Truth of Christianity,” which had been begun by Sydney, and was published in 1587. His religious turn appears also from his translating many of the works of the early reformers and protestant writers, particularly Calvin, Chytraeus, Beza, Marlorat, Hemingius, &c. He also enlarged our treasures of antiquity, by publishing translations of Justin in 1564; and of Csesar in 1565. Of this last, a translation as far as the middle of the fifth book by John Brend, had been put into his hands, and he therefore began at that place, but afterwards, for uniformity, re-translated the whole himself. He also published translations of Seneca’s Benefits, in 1577; of the Geography of Pomponius Mela the Poly history of Solinus, 1587, and of many modern Latin writers, which were then useful, and suited to the wants of the times. Warton thinks his only original work is a “Discourse of the Earthquake that happened in England and other places in 1580,” 12mo; and of his original poetry, nothing more appears than an encomiastic copy of verses prefixed to Baret’s “Alvearie” in 1580. His chief poetical translation is of “Ovid’s Metamorphoses,” the first four books of which he published in 1565, and the whole in 1567. Pope, who read much in old English translations, used to say “it was a pretty good one considering the time when it was written.” The style is certainly poetical and spirited, and his versification clear; hi manner ornamental and diffuse; yet with a sufficient observance of the original. He has obtained a niche in the “Biographia Dramatica” for having translated a drama of Beza’s, called “Abraham’s Sacrifice,” 1577, 18mo.

, a mathematician, was born at Breslaw, in Silesia, in 1623, and died at Leyden in 1665. The works by which he is generally known are “Elementa Architecture Militaris,” 1643, 8vo “De Usu Proportionarii Circuli” “De Stylometricis,” 1662 and another treatise “On Architecture,” published in 1696, by Christopher Sturm, with numerous engravings, and the life of the author. He had also improved the description of Solomon’s Temple by Villapandus, but this was never published.

, an eminent modern Italian dramatist, was born at Venice in 1707. In his infancy the drama was his darling amusement, and all his time was devoted to the perusing comic writers, among whom was Cicognini, a Florentine, little known in the dramatic commonwealth. After having well studied these, he ventured to sketch out the plan of a comedy, even before he went to school. When he had finished his grammatical studies at Venice, and his rhetorical studies at the Jesuits’ college in Perugia, he was sent to a boarding-school at Rimini, to study philosophy, but he paid far more attention to the theatres, entered into a familiar acquaintance with the actors, and when they were to remove to Chiozza, made his escape in their company. This was the first fault he committed, which, according to his own confession, drew a great many others after it. His father had intended him to be a physician, like himself: the young man, however, was wholly averse to the study. He proposed afterwards to make him an advocate, and sent him to be a practitioner in Modena; but a horrid ceremony of ecclesiastical jurisdiction, at which he was present, inspired him with a melancholy turn, and he determined to become a Capuchin. Of this, however, he was cured by a visit to Venice, where he indulged in all the fashionable dissipation of the place. He was afterwards prevailed upon by his mother, after the death of his father, to exercise the profession of a lawyer in Venice, but by a sudden reverse of fortune he was compelled to quit at once both the bar and Venice. He then went to Milan, where he was employed by the resident of Venice in the capacity of secretary, and becoming acquainted with the manager of the theatre, he wrote a farce entitled “II Gondoliere Veneziano,” the Venetian Gondolier; which was the first comic production of his that was performed and printed. Some time after, Goldoni quitted the Venetian resident, and removed to Verona, where he got introduced to the manager of the theatre, for which he composed several pieces. Having removed along with the players to Genoa, he was for the first time seized with an ardent passion for a lady, who soon afterwards became his wife. He then returned with the company to Venice, where he displayed, for the first time, the powers of his genius, and executed his plan of reforming the Italian stage. He wrote the “Momolo,” “Courtisan,” the “Squanderer,” and other pieces, which obtained universal admiration. Feeling a strong inclination to reside some time in Tuscany, he repaired to Florence and Pisa, where he wrote “The Footman of two Masters,” and “The Son of Harlequin lost and found again.” He returned to Venice, and set about executing more and more his favourite scheme of reform. He was now attached to the theatre of S. Angelo, and employed himself in writing both for the company, and for his own purposes. The constant toils he underwent in these engagements impaired his health. He wrote, in the course of twelve months, sixteen new comedies, besides forty-two pieces for the theatre; among these many are considered as the best of his productions. The first edition of his works was published in 1753, in 10 vols. 8vo. As he wrote afterwards a great number of new pieces for the theatre of S. Luca, a separate edition of these was published, under the title of “The New Comic Theatre:” among these was the “Terence,” called by the author his favourite, and judged to be the master-piece of his works. He made another journey to Parma, on the invitation of duke Philip, and from thence he passed t Rome. He had composed 59 other pieces so late as 1761, five of which were designed for the particular use of Marque Albergati Capacelli, and consequently adapted to the theatre of a private company. Here ends the literary life of Goldoni in Italy, after which he accepted of an engagement of two years in Paris, where he found a select and numerous company of excellent performers in the Italian theatre. They were, however, chargeable with the same faults which he had corrected in Italy; and the French supported, and even applauded in the Italians, what they would have reprobated on their own stage. Goldoni wished to extend, even to that country, his plan of reformation, without considering the extreme difficulty of the undertaking. His first attempt was the piece called “The Father for Love;” and its bad success was a sufficient warning to him to desist from his undertaking. He continued, during the remainder of his engagement, to produce pieces agreeable to the general taste, and published twenty-four comedies; among which “The Love of Zelinda and Lindor” is reputed the best. The term of two years being expired, Goldoni was preparing to return to Italy, when a lady, reader to the dauphiness, mother to the late king, introduced him at court, in the capacity of Italian master to the princesses, aunts to the king. He did not live in the court, but resorted there, at each summons, in a post-chaise, sent to him for the purpose. These journeys were the cause of a disorder in the eyes, which afflicted him the rest of his life; for being accustomed to read while in the chaise, he lost his sight on a sudden, and in spite of the most potent remedies, could never afterwards recover it entirely. For about six months lodgings were provided him in the chateau of Versailles. The death, however, of the dauphin, changed the face of affairs. Goldoni lost his lodgings, and only, at the end of three years, received a bounty of 100 Louis in a gold box, and the grant of a pension of four thousand livres a year. This settlement would not have been sufficient for him, if he had not gained, by other means, farther sums. He wrote now and then comedies for the theatres of Italy and Portugal; and, during these occupations, was desirous to shew to the French that he merited a high rank among their dramatic writers. For this purpose, he neglected nothing which could be of use to render himself master of the French language. He heard, spoke, and conversed so much in it, that, in his 62d year, he ventured to write a comedy in French, and to have it. represented in the court theatre, on the occasion of the marriage of the king. This piece was the “Bourru Bienfaisant;” and it met with so great success, that the author received a bounty 'of 150 Louis from the king, another gratification from the performers, and considerable sums from the booksellers who published it. He published soon after, another comedy in French, called “L'Avare Fastueux.” After the death of Lewis XV. Goldoni was appointed Italian teacher to the princess Clotilde, and after her marriage, he attended the late unfortunate princess Elizabeth in the same capacity. His last work was the “Volponi,” written after he had retired from court. It was nis misfortune to live to see his pension taken away by the revolution, and, like thousands in a similar situation, he was obliged to pass his old age in poverty and distress. He died in the beginning of 1793. As a comic poet, Goldoni is reckoned among the best of the age in which he flourished. His works were printed at Leghorn in 1788—91, in 31 vols. 8vo. He has been reckoned the Moliere of Italy, and he is styled by Voltaire “The Painter of Nature.” Dr. Burney says that he is, perhaps, the only author of comic operas in Italy who has given them a little common sense, by a natural plot, and natural characters; and his celebrated comic opera of the “Buona Figliuola,” set by Piccini, and first performed in London Dec. 9th, 1766, rendered both the poet and composer, whose names had scarcely penetrated into this country before, dear to every lover of the Italian language and music, in the nation.

He arrived in London in the extremity of distress, and first tried to be admitted as an usher in a school or academy, and having with some difficulty obtained that situation, he remained for some time in it, submitting to mortifications., of which he has given, probably, an exaggerated account in the story of the philosophic vagabond. He next procured a situation in the shop of a chemist, and while here, was found out by Dr. Sleigh, one of his fellow-students at Edinburgh, who liberally shared his purse with him, and encouraged him to commence practitioner. With this view, he settled, if any measure of our poet deserves that epithet, in Bankside, Southwark; and afterwards removed to the Temple or its neighbourhood. In either place his success as a physician is not much known; his ovyn account was, that he had plenty of patients, but got no fees.

In 1765 he published “The Traveller,” which at once established his fame. The outline of this he formed when in Switzerland, but polished it with great care, before he submitted it to the public. It soon made him known and admired, but his roving disposition had not yet left him. He had for some time been musing on a design of penetrating into the interior parts of Asia, and investigating the remains of ancient grandeur, learning, and manners. When he was told of lord Bute’s liberality to men of genius, he applied to that nobleman for a salary to enable him to execute his favourite plan, but his application was unnoticed, as his name had not then been made known by his Traveller. This poem, however, having procured him the unsolicited friendship of lord Nugent, afterwards earl of Clare, he obtained an introduction to the earl of Northumberland, then lord Lieutenant of Ireland, who invited our poet to an interview. Goldsmith prepared a complimentary address for his excellency, which, by mistake, he delivered to the groom of the chambers, and when the lord lieutenant appeared, was so confused that he came awa.y without being able to explain the object of his wishes. Sir John Hawkins relates, that when the lord lieutenant said he should be glad to do him any kindness, Goldsmith answered, that “he had a brother in Ireland, a clergyman, that stood in need of help as for himself, he had no dependence on the promises of great men he looked to the booksellers they were his best friends, and he was not inclined to forsake them for others.” This was very characteristic of Goldsmith, who, as sir John Hawkins adds, was “an ideot in the affairs of the world,” but yet his affectionate remembrance of his brother on such an occasion merits a less harsh epithet. Goldsmith was grateful for the kindness he had received from this brother, and nothing probably would have given him greater pleasure than if he had succeeded in transferring the earl’s patronage tp him. From this time, however, although he sometimes talked about it, he appears to have relinquished the project of going to Asia. “Of all men,” said Dr. Johnson, “Goldsmith is the most unfit to go out upon such an inquiry for he is utterly ignorant of such arts as we already possess, and consequently could not know what would be accessions to our present stock of mechanical knowledge. He would bring home a grinding barrow, and think that he had furnished a wonderful improvement.”

“He was,” adds his biographer, “generous in the extreme, and so strongly affected by compassion, that he has been known at midnight to abandon his rest in order to procure relief and an asylum for a poor dying object who was left destitute in the streets. Nor was there ever a mind whose general feelings were more benevolent and friendly. He is, however, supposed to have been often soured by jealousy or envy, and many little instances are mentioned of this tendency in his character; but whatever appeared of this kind was a mere momentary sensation, which he knew not how like other men to conceal. It was never the result of principle, or the suggestion of reflection; it never embittered his heart, nor influenced his conduct. Nothingcould be more amiable than the general features of his mind; those of his person were not perhaps so engaging. His stature was under the middle size, his body strongly built, and his limbs more sturdy than elegant; his complexion was pale, his forehead low, his face almost round, and pitted with the small-pox; but marked with strong lines of thinking. His first appearance was not captivating; but when he grew easy and cheerful in company, he relaxed into.such a display of good-humour, as soon removed every unfavourable impression. Yet it must be acknowledged that in company he did not appear to so much advantage as might have been expected from his genius and talents. He was too apt to speak without reflection, and without a sufficient knowledge of the subject; which made Johnson observe of him, * No man was more foolish when he had not a pen in his hand, or more wise when he had.' Indeed, with all his defects (to conclude nearly in the words of that great critic), as a writer he was of the most distinguished abilities. Whatever he composed he did it better than any other man could. And whether we consider him as a poet, as a comic writer, or as an historian (so far as regards his powers of composition) he was one of the first writers of his time, and will ever stand in the foremost class.”

, professor of Arabic at Leyden, descended from a considerable family in that city, was born at the Hague, in 1596. At Leyden he made himself master of all the learned languages, and proceeded to physic, divinity, and the mathematics. His education being finished, he took a journey to France with the duchess de la Tremouille; and was invited to teach the Greek language at Rochelle, which he continued to do, until that city was in the following year reduced again to the dominion of the French king, after which he resolved to return to Holland. He had early taken a liking to Erpenius, the Arabic professor at Leyden; by the help of whose lectures he made a great progress in the Arabic tongue, and having in 1622 an opportunity of attending the Dutch ambassador to the court of Morocco, he consulted with Erpenius, who directed him to observe carefully every production, either of nature, art, or custom, which were unknown in Europe; and to describe them, setting down the proper name of each, and the derivation of it, if known. He also gave him a letter directed to that prince, together with a present of a grand atlas, and a New Testament in Arabic. These procured him a very gracious reception from Muley Zidan, then king of Morocco, who expressed great satisfaction in the present, and afterwards read them frequently. In the mean time Golius made so good use of Erpenius’ s advice, that tie attained a perfect skill in the Arabic tongue; and in indulging his curiosity respecting the customs and learning of that country, contrived to make himself very agreeable to the doctors and courtiers. By this means he became particularly serviceable to the ambassador, who growing uneasy because his affairs were not dispatched, was advised to present to his majesty a petition written by Golius in the Arabic character and language, and in the Christian style, both circumstances rather novel in that country. The king was astonished at the beauty of the petition, both as to writing and style; and having learned from the ambassador that it was done by Golius, desired to see him. At the audience, the king spoke to him in Arabic, and Golius said in Spanish, that he understood his majesty very well, but could not keep up a conversation in Arabic, by reason of its guttural pronunciation, to'which his throat was not sufficiently inured. This excuse was accepted by the king, who granted the ambassador’s request, and dispatched him immediately. Before his departure, Golius had an opportunity of examining the curiosities of Fez, and took a plan of the royal palace, which was afterwards communicated to Mr. Windus, and inserted in his “Journey to Mequinez,” 1721, 8vo. Go* lius brought with him to Holland several books unknown in Europe; and among others, “The Annals of the Ancient Kingdom of Fez and Morocco,” which he resolved to translate. He communicated every thing to Erpenius, who well knew the value of them, but did not live long enough to enjoy the treasure; that professor dying in Nov. 1624, after recommending this his best beloved scholar to the curators of the university for his successor. The request was complied with, and Golius saw himself immediately in the Arabic chair, which he filled so ably as to lessen their sense of the loss of Erpenius. Being, however, still desirous of cultivating oriental languages and antiquities, he applied to his superiors for leave to take a journey to the Levant; and obtained letters patent from the prince of Orange, dated Nov. 25, 1625. He set out immediately for Aleppo, where he continued fifteen months; after which, making excursions into Arabia, towards Mesopotamia, he went by land to Constantinople, in company with Cornelius Hago, ambassador from Holland to the Porte. Here the governor of the coast of Propontis gave him the use of his pleasant gardens and curious library in which retirement he applied himself wholly to the reading of the Arabic historians and geographers, whose writings were till then either unknown to, or had not been perused by him. Upon his return to the city, discovering occasionally in conversation with the great men there a prodigious memory of what he had read, he excited such admiration, that a principal officer of the empire made him an offer of a commission from the grand signor to take a survey of the whole empire, in order to describe the situation of places with more exactness than was done in such maps as they then had; but he pretended that this would interfere with the oath which he had taken to the States, although his real fear arose from the danger of such an undertaking. In this place also he found his skill in physic of infinite service in procuring him the favour and respect of the grandees; from whom, as he would take no fees, he received many valuable and rich presents, and every liberal offer to induce him to settle among them. But after a residence of four years, having in a great measure satisfied his thirst of eastern learning, and made himself master of the Turkish, Persian, and Arabic tongues, he returned in 1629, laden with curious Mss. which have ever since been valued among the richest treasures of the university library at Leyden. As soon as he was settled at home, he began to think of making the best use of some of these manuscripts by communicating them to the public; but first printed an “Arabic Lexicon,” 1653, folio; and a new edition of “Erpenius’s Grammar, enlarged with notes and additions;” to which also he subjoined several pieces of poetry, extracted from the Arabian writers, particularly Tograi and Ababella. One purpose on which he employed his knowledge and influence cannot be too highly commended. He had been an eye-witness of the wretched state of Christianity in the Mahometan countries, and with the compassion of a Christian, resolved, therefore, to make his tfkill in their language serviceable to them. With this laudable view he procured an edition of the “New Testament” in the original language, with a translation into the vulgar Greek by an Archimandrite, which he prevailed with the States to present to the Greek church, groaning under the Mahometan tyranny; and, as some of these Christians use the Arabic tongm? in divine service, he took care to have dispersed among them an Arabic translation of the confession of the reformed protestants, together with the catechism and liturgy .

, a celebrated engraver and painter, was born in 1658, at Mulbrec, in the duchy of Juliers; and learned his art at Haerlem, where he married. An asthmatic disorder afterwards inclining him to travel in Italy, his friends remonstrated against this, but he answered, that “he had rather die learning something, than live in such a languishing state.” Accordingly, he passed through most of the chief cities of Germany, where he visited the painters, and the curious; and went to Rome and Naples, where he studied the works of the best masters, and designed a great number of pieces after them. To prevent his being known, he passed for his man’s servant, pretending that he was maintained and kept by him for his skill in painting; and by this stratagem he came to hear what was said of his works, without being known, which afforded him no small amusement as well as instruction. His disguise, his diversion, the exercise of travelling, and the different air of the countries through which he travelled, had such an effect upon his constitution, that he recovered his former health and vigour. He relapsed, however, some time after, and died at Haerlem in 1617. Mr. Evelyn has given the following testimony of his merit as a graver: “Henry Goltzius,” says he, “was a HoU lander, and wanted only a good and judicious choice, to 'have rendered him comparable to the profoundest masters that ever handled the burin for never did any exceed this rare workman witness those things of his after Gasporo Celio, &c. and in particular his incomparable imitations after Lucas Van Leyden, in The Passion, the Christus Mortuus, or Pieta; and those other six pieces, in each of which. he so accurately pursues Durer, Lucas, and some others of the old masters, as makes it almost impossible to discern the ingenious fraud.” As a painter he drew his resources from the study of the antique, of Raphael, Polidoro, and Michael Angelo; the last of whom appears to have been his" favourite, but whose faults he exaggerated in an outrageous manner, seldom attaining any of his beauties. Hence his style of design is inflated and caricature and his expressions participate of the same taste but his sense of hue in colour is rich, vigorous, and transparent. 7t is as an engraver, however, that he deserves the highest commendation, having never been surpassed, and seldom equalled in the command of the graver, and in freedom of execution.

, one of the great opponents of Arminius, and from whom the Calvinists were at one time called Gomarists, was born at Bruges, Jan. 30, 1S63. His father and mother, Avho were protestants, retired into the palatinate in 1578, and sent him to Strasburgh to study under the celebrated John Stimulus. Three years after he went to prosecute his studies at Newstad, where the professors of Heidelberg found a refuge when Lewis, the elector palatine, had banished them because they were not Lutherans. In 1582 he came to England, and heard at Oxford the divinity lectures of Dr. John Rainolds, and at Cambridge those of Dr. William Whitaker, and at this latter university he was admitted to the degree of bachelor of divinity, June, 1584. The elector Lewis dying in 1583, prince Casimir, his brother, restored the professors of Heidelberg, to which place Gomar returned from Cambridge, and spent two years. In 1587 he accepted an invitation from the Flemish church at Francfort to be their minister, and exercised the functions of that office until 1593, when his flock were dispersed by persecution. The following year he was appointed professor of divinity at Leyden, but before entering upon the office, he took his degree of doctor at Heidelberg. Here he remained quietly until 1603, when his colleague Arminius began to place himself at the head of a party, known by his name ever since, and Gomarus resisted him with a zeal which his enemies have construed into bigotry and intolerance. The truth seems to have been that Arminius and his followers, while they disputed with equal warmth, chose to represent the subjects of their disputes as matters of indifference which need not interrupt church-fellowship, while Gomarus considered them as essentials. Vorstius having succeeded Arminius, Gomarus foresaw only a renewal of the controversy under such a colleague, and retired to Middleburgh in 1611, where he preached and read lectures until 1614. He was then invited by the university of Saumur to be professor of divinity, and four years after he exchanged this for the professorship of divinity and Hebrew at Groningen, where he remained during the rest of his life. The only times when he was absent were, once when he attended the synod of Dort, where the errors of Arminius were condemned; and again when he went to Leyden in 1633 to revise the translation of the Old Testament. He died Jan. 11, 1641. His various works, most of which had been published separately, were printed together at Amsterdam in 1644, fol. He was a man of acknowledged abilities, especially in the Oriental languages.

, a French lady, whose romances and tales are known in this country by translations, was the daughter of Paul Poisson, a player, and was born at Paris in 1684. She was courted by M. de Gomez, a Spanish gentleman of small fortune, who, knowing her talents, foresaw many advantages from an union with her, while she, in accepting him, appears to have been deceived concerning his circumstances. Her works, however, procured some pensions, by which she was enabled to live at St. Germain-en-L.aye till 1770, in which year she died, respected by all who knew her. This lady left some tragedies, which may be found in her “Miscellaneous Works,” 12mo, but were all unsuccessful, and a great number of romances. “Les Journees Amusantes,” 8 vols. “Crementine,” 2 vols. “Anecdots Persanes,” 2 vols. “Hist, du Comte d'Oxford,” one vol. “La Jeune Alcidiane,” 3 vols. (see Gomberville) “Les CentNouvelles Nouvelles,” 36 parts comprised in 8 vols. These are all well written, and with great delicacy, and were at one time very popular in France.

, a Spanish poet, was born at Cordova, in 1562, of a very distinguished family. He studied at Salamanca, and was known to have a talent for poetry, though he never could be prevailed on to publish any thing. Going into orders, he was made chaplain to the king, and prebendary of the church of Cordova, in which station he died, in 1627. His works are all posthumous, and consist of sonnets, elegies, heroic verses, a comedy, a tragedy, &c. and have been published several times under the title of “Obras de Dom. Louis de Gongora-y- Argore,” 4to. The best edition is that with notes by D. Garcia de Salcedo Coronel, Madrid, 1636—1648, 3 vols. 4to. The Spaniards have so high an idea of this poet, as to entitle him prince of the poets of their nation, and notes and commentaries have been written on his works but he is not free from affectation in theuse of figures, a false sublime, and an obscure and embarrassed diction.

, a lady of the sixteenth century, remarkable for her wit and high birth, is chiefly known, and that very imperfectly, from a collection of her letters, printed at Venice in 1552. By these she appears to have been learned, and somewhat of a criticin Aristotle and yEschylus. All the wits of her time are full of their encomiums on her: and Hortensio Landi, besides singing her praises most zealously, dedicated to her a piece, “Upon moderating the passions of the soul,” written in Italian. If, however, it be true that this Horatio Landi wrote the whole of the letters attributed to Lucretia, it is difficult to know what to believe of the history of the latter. Her marriage at the age of fourteen with John Paul Manfroni was unhappy, He engaged in a conspiracy against the duke of Ferrara; was detected and imprisoned by him; but, though condemned, not put to death. Lucretia, in this emergency, applied to all the powers in Europe to intercede for him; and even solicited the grand signior to make himself master of the castle, where her husband was kept. During this time, although she was not permitted to visit him, they could write to each other. But all her endeavours were vain; for he died in prison in 1552, having shewn such an impatience under his misfortunes as made it imagined he lost his senses. She never would listen afterwards to any proposals of marriage, though several were made her. Of four children, which she had, there were but two daughters left, whom she placed in nunneries. All that came from her pen was so much esteemed, that a collection was made e^-en of the notes she wrote to her servants: several of which are to be met witli in the above-mentioned edition of her letters. She died at Mantua in 1576.

was a celebrated poet and translator, who lived in the sixteenth century, but of whom little is known, unless that he was educated at Christ’s College, Cambridge, whence he removed to Staples Inn. Mr. Ellis conjectures that he might have been born about 1538. We have no doubt that he was the same Barnaby Googe who was a relation and retainer to sir William Cecil, queen Elizabeth’s minister, and who was gentleman-pensioner t6 the queen. Mr. Churton thinks, with great probability, that he was the father of Barnaby Googe, master of Magdalen college, Cambridge, who was incorporated at Oxford in August 1605, when king James was there. In 1563 he published a very elegant little volume, now of the greatest rarity, entitled “Eglogs, Epitaphs, and Sonnetes.” One of the sonnets, superior, as the rest are, in point of harmony, to most of the productions of those days, is addressed to Alexander No well, afterwards the celebrated dean of St. Paul’s, and reprinted in Mr. Churton’s elaborate life of that divine. It is said there are only two copies of this volume in existence, one in the possession of Mr. Heber, who purchased it at George Steevens’s sale, and the other in the library of Trinity college, Cambridge Googe’s principal translation was the “Zodiake of Life,” from Marcellus Palingenius Stellatus, a very moral, but tiresome satire, perfectly unconnected with astronomy, the author merely distinguishing each of the twelve books of his poem by the name of a celestial sign. The first three books appeared in 1560, and the first six in 1561; the whole was printed complete in 1565, 12mo. In 1570 he translated from Naogeorgus, a poem on Antichrist; in 1577, Herebach’s ceconomical treatise on agriculture; and in 1579, Lopes de Mendoza’s Spanish proverbs, and afterwards Aristotle’s “Table of the Ten Categories.” The few specins published from these very rare works are highly favourable to the author’s talents and principles.

or Gregorio, the son of Raynier, of the family of Sinigardi, of Arezzo, in Italy, lived in the fourteenth century, and was notary of Arezzo, an office of considerable rank. In his fiftieth year he formed the design of writing the history of his country in Italian verse, and unfortunately took Dante for his model, whom he was unable to follow. The events he relates concern the period from 1310 to 1384, and may be consulted with advantage by those who will overlook the badness of the poetry. When he died is not known. Muratori has inserted his history in his collection of Italian historians.

It is not difficult to conceive that his parents and friends would be desirous to encourage a turn of mind which indicated so powerful a sense of the value of time and instruction; and accordingly we find him in about three years completing a translation of “The Customs of the Israelites, translated from the French of the abbot Fleury, by R. G.” 1750, 8vo. This was also printed for distribution among friends. He had about this time fully prepared for the press, even to the title-page and preface, a work of great labour and research, under the title of “Atlas Renovatus, or Geography Modernized; being a particular description f the world as far as known to the ancients, and the present names of such places as now subsist; containing all the cities, towns, villages, castles, &c. mentioned in ancient authors, with all the remarkable occurrences that happened at the several places; the birth-places of famous men, the memorable sieges and battles, &c. the bounds, soil, air, manners, government, religion of each country. The whole being the most complete system ever composed before. To which is annexed a list of the Roman ways, and a copious index to facilitate the whole. Drawn upon the plans of Hornius’s and Cellarius’s maps.” This is a folio volume, dated 1751, fairly written, and now preserved in Mr. Nichols’s library, as a memorial of his consummate industry. Such a compilation, indeed, at the age of sixteen, is probably without a parallel; for much of the design, arrangement, &c. is perfectly original, and such intenseness of application could not have been recommended by any master. After the death of his father (July 13, 1751) Mr. Gough was admitted, in July 1752, fellow-commoner of Bene'tcollege, Cambridge. The college tutor at this time was Dr. John Barnardiston, afterwards master; but Mr. Gough’s private tutor was the rev. John Cott, fellow of the college, and afterwards rector of Braxted, in Essex, “to whom,” says Mr. Gough, “I regularly repeated my lesson, without a grain of instruction on his part.” To the university Mr. Gough brought a considerable fund of classical literature, and having already imbibed a curiosity after matters of antiquity, found his enthusiasm heightened by a connexion with a college eminent for producing a succession of British antiquaries; and it is certain that he here laid the plan of his “British Topography*.” He applied, in the mean time, to academical studies, with an ardour which even at this age was become habitual, and the knowledge he acquired in philosophy and the sciences was often displayed in his future labours; some of which prove that he had paid no little attention to subjects of theology and sacred criticism; and indeed it was inferred by the friends who kpew his acquisitions most intimately, that he might have passed into any of the learned professions by a very easy transition. Before he left the university he had prepared for the press, although they all remain still in ms. the following works: 1. “Notes on Memnon, annexed to the abbe Gedoyn’s French translation.” 2. “Astro-mythology; or, a short account of the Constellations, with the names of the principal stars in each, and their connexion with mythology.” 3. The History of Bythynia, translated from the French of the abbe“Sevin.” 4. “Memoirs of celebrated Professors of the belles lettres in the academy of inscriptions, &c. at Paris, translated and abridged from the Elogia, &c.” 5. “Reflections on the Egyptian Government; and also on the Jewish, Persian, Cretan, Carthaginian, Spartan, Athenian, and Roman Governments.” 6. “Memoirs of the Life and Character of Mithridates, king of Pontus, extracted from various and genuine authors.” All these, with many voluminous commonplace books, were executed before our author had reached

His library, with the exception of his legacy to the Bodleian, was sold, agreeably to his own direction, by Messrs. Leigh and Sothehy, in twenty days, April 5—28, 1810, and produced 3552/, 3.s. His prints, drawings, coins, medals, ike. were sold July 19, 1812, and the two following days, and produced 517l. 6s. 6d. By his last will, he bequeathed to the university of Oxford all his printed books and manuscripts on Saxon and Northern literature, for the use of the Saxon professor; all his manuscripts, printed books, and pamphlets, prints, and drawings, maps, and copperplates relating to British topography, (of which,' in 1808, he had nearly printed a complete catalogue); his interleaved copies of the “British Topography,” “Camden’s Britannia,” and the “Sepulchral Monuments of Great Britain,” with all the drawings relative to the latter work; and all the copper-plates of the “Monuments” and the “Topography;” with fourteen volumes of drawings of sepulchral and other monuments in France. All these he wills and desires may “be placed in the Bodleian library, in a building adjoining to the picture gallery, known by the name of the” Antiquaries closet.“These were accordingly deposited in the closet, and a catalogue has since been printed in a handsome quarto, under the care of the rev. B. Bandinel, librarian of the Bodleian. A more valuable or extensive treasure of British topography was never collected by an individual. The Mss. are very numerous, and many of the most valuable printed books are illustrated by the ms notes of Mr. Cough and other eminent antiquaries. The remainder of his will, for which we refer to our authority, is not less in proof of his liberality, affection, and steady friendship. Such was the life of Mr. Gough, of which he says, in a memoir already quoted,” If I have relieved the wants and distresses of the unhappy without ostentation, have done justice without interest, have served the common cause of literature without vanity, maintained my own independence without pride or insolence, have moderated my attachment to external objects, and placed my affections on the virtuous and honest character, and may trust to have so passed through things temporal as finally not to lose things eternal I shall have lived enough."

A few of Mr. Cough’s publications yet remain to be noticed: l.New editions of “Description desRoyaulmes d‘Angleterre et d’Ecosse, composed par Etienne Perlin,” Paris, 1558; and of “Histoire de I'entree de la Reine Mere dans le Grande Bretagne, par de la Serre,” Paris, 1639; which he illustrated with cuts, and English notes; and introduced by historical prefaces, in 1775. 2. “A Catalogue of the Coins of Canute, king of Denmark and England, with specimens,” 1777, 4to. 3. “An Essay on the Rise and Progress of Geography in Great Britain and Ireland; illustrated with specimens of our oldest maps, M 1780, 4to; and” Catalogue of Sarum and York Missals,“1780, both extracted from the second edition of his” British Topography.“5.” A comparative view of the ancient Monuments of India,“&c. 1785, 4to. 6.” List of the members of the Society of Antiquaries of London, from their revival *n 1717 to June 1796; arranged in chronological and alphabetical order,“1798, 4to. 7. In the same year he amended and considerably enlarged, from the Paris edition of 1786, an English translation of the” Arabian Nights Entertainments,“to which he added notes of illustration, and a preface, in which the supplementary tales published by Dom. Chavis are proved to be a palpable forgery. 8.” A Letter to the Lord Bishop of London, by a Layman,“1799, 8vo, on various subjects connected with the prosperity of the church. 9. * Rev. Kennett Gibson’s comment upon part of the fifth journey of Antoninus through Britain,” &c. 1800, 4to. 10. “Description of the Beauchamp chapel, adjoining to the church of St. Mary at Warwick,” 1804, 4to. As to his assistance to his friends engaged in literary pursuits, it was more extensive than probably will ever be known; but some particulars are stated by his biographer, to which we refer, and many other acknowledgments may be found in various works published within the last forty years. It is to be regretted that no portrait of Mr. Gough exists, nor is it known that he ever would consent to sit to any of the many artists with whom he was connected, and to some of whom he was a steady patron. His person was short, inclining to corpulence. His features bespoke the energy and activity of his mind. In youth he was peculiarly shy, which he attributed to a late entrance into the world, and an irresistible habit of application to books. As his intercourse with society advanced, his manner became more easy, and his conversation was always lively, often with a pleasant flow of humour, and his disposition communicative,

He left a great number of Mss. behind him, which he bequeathed to Dr. Hickes for his life, and after his decease to Dr. George Smalridge. The former of these divines carefully performed his request of making it known, that he had died in the faith and communion of the church of England, in an account of his life, prefixed to a tract of our author’s, which he published with the following title “Some Instances of the Defects and Omissions in Mr, Whiston’s Collections of Testimonies, from the Scriptures and the Fathers, against the true Deity of the Holy Ghost, and of misapplying and misinterpreting divers of them, by Dr. Grabe. To which is premised, a discourse, wherein some account is given of the learned doctor, and his Mss. and of this short treatise found among his English Mss. by George Hickes, D. D.” 1712, 8vo. There came out afterwards two more of our author’s posthumous pieces I “Liturgia Grseca Johannis Ernesti Grabii.” This liturgy, drawn up by our author for his own private use, was published by Christopher Matthew Pfaff, at the end of “Irensei Fragmenta Anecdota,” printed at the Hague, 1715, 8vo. 2. “De Forma Consecrationis Eucharistiae, hoc est, Defensio Ecclesia? Griccae,” &c. i. e. “A Discourse concerning the Form of Consecration of the Eucharist, or a defence of the Greek church against that of Rome, in the article of consecrating the Eucharistical Elements; written in Latin, by John Ernest Grabe, and now first published with an English version.” To which is added, from the same author’s Mss. some notes concerning the oblation of the body and blood of Christ, with the form and effect of the eucharistical consecration, and two fragments of a preface designed for a new edition of the first liturgy of Edward VI. with a preface of the editor, shewing what is the opinion of the church of England concerning the use of the fathers, and of its principal members, in regard to the matter defended by Dr. Grabe in this treatise, 1721, 8vo.

, a French lady of literary reputation, was the daughter of a military officer, and born about the year 1694. She was married, or rather sacrificed to Francis Hugot de Grafigny, chamberlain to the duke of Lorraine, a man of violent passions, from which she was often in danger of her life; but after some years of patient suffering, she was at length relieved by a legal separation, and her husband finished his days in confinement, which his improper conduct rendered necessary. Madame de Grafigny now came to Paris, where her merit was soon acknowledged, although her first performance, a Spanish novel, did not pass without some unpleasant criticisms, to which, says our authority, she gave the best of all possible answers, by writing a better, which was her “Lettres d'une Peruvienne,” 2 vols. 12mo. This had great success, being written with spirit, and abounding in those delicate sentiments which are so much admired in the French school, yet an air of metaphysical speculation has been justly objected, as throwing a chill on her descriptions of love. She also wrote some dramatic pieces, of which the comedies of “Cenie” & “La Fille d'Aristide” were most applauded. Having resided for some time at the court of Lorraine, she became known to the emperor, who had read her “Peruvian Letters” with much pleasure, and engaged her to write some dramatic pieces proper to be performed before the empress and the younger branches of the royal family at court. This she complied with, and sent five or six such pieces to Vienna, and in return received a pension of 1500 livres, but with the express condition that she was not to print these dramas, nor give copies to any other theatre. She long retained the esteem and patronage of the court of Vienna, and was chosen an associate of the academy at Florence. She died, much esteemed by all classes, at Paris in 1758. A complete edition of her works was published at Paris in 1738, 4 vols. 12mo; and her “Letters of a Peruvian Princess,” were published in English, by F. Ashworth, 1782, 2 vols. 8vo.

In 1753 he published the result of his experience in some diseases of the army, in a volume written in Latin, entitled “Historia Febris Anomalae Batavre annorum 1746, 1747, 1748,” &c. In this work he appears to advantage as an acute observer of the phenomena of disease, and as a man of general learning, but what accession he had been able to make to the stock of medical knowledge was unfortunately anticipated in sir John Pringle’s recent and very valuable work on the diseases of the army. During his residence in London, “his literary talents introduced him to the acquaintance of many men of genius, particularly of Shenstone, Dr. Percy the late bishop of Dromore, Glover, Dr. Johnson, sir Joshua Reynolds, and others, who by Mr. BoswelPs comprehensive biography, are now known to have composed Dr. Johnson’s society, and it is no small praise that every member of it regarded Dr. Grainger with affection. He was first known as a poet by his” Ode on Solitude,“which has been universally praised, and never beyond its merits; but professional success is seldom promoted by the reputation of genius. Grainger’s practice was insufficient to employ his days or to provide for them, and he is said to have accepted the office of tutor to a young gentleman who settled an annuity upon him; nor did he disdain such literary employment as the booksellers suggested. Smollett, in the course of a controversy which will be noticed hereafter, accuses him of working for bread in the lowest employments of literature, and at the lowest prices. This, if it be not the loose assertion of a calumniator, may perhaps refer to the assistance he gave in preparing the second volume of Maitland’s” History of Scotland," in which he was employed by Andrew Millar, who has seldom been accused of bargaining with authors for the lowest prices. Maitland had left materials for the volume, and as Grainger' s business was to arrange them, and continue the work as nearly as possible in Maitiand’s manner and style, much fame could not result from his best endeavours.

It has been supposed that some personal animosity prompted Smollett to such hostility, but of what nature, or excited by what provocation, is not known. All we can learn from the Letter and the Answer is, that the parties were once upon friendly terms, but that mutual respect had now ceased. One circumstance, indeed, we find, which may account for much of Smollett’s animosity: he supposed Grainger to be one of the Monthly Reviewers, and this was provocation enough to the mind of a man, who from the commencement of the Critical Review took every opportunity, whether in his way or not, of reviling the proprietor and writers of that journal. As the latter seldom deigned to notice these attacks, no better reason, we are afraid, can be assigned for Smollett’s conduct than the jealousy of rival merit and success, in both which respects the Monthly Review had a decided superiority. Whether Grainger was a Monthly Reviewer is not an unimportant question, in collecting the materials of his literary life; yet his biographers have hastily subscribed to Smollett’s assertion, without examining the Review in question. The article of his Tibullus in the Monthly Review may convince any person that Grainger could have little or no interest or influence with the proprietors. Although written with decency and urbanity, it has nothing of partiality or kindness; the reader is left to, judge from the specimens extracted, and what praise we find is bestowed with that faint reluctance, which is more blasting to the hopes of an author than open hostility. Even the opinion of the Monthly Reviewer on Grainger’s letter to Smollett, is expressed with the brevity of one who wishes not to interfere in the contest.

, son of Antony duke of Gramont, served as a volunteer under the prince of Conde, and Turenne, and came into England about two years after the restoration. He was under a necessity of leaving France for having the temerity to pay his addresses to a lady to whom Lewis XIV. was known to have a tender attachment. He possessed in a high degree every qualification that could render him agreeable to the licentious court of Charles II. He was gay, gallant, and perfectly well-bred, had an inexhaustible fund of ready wit, and told a story with extraordinary humour and effect. His vivacity infused life wherever he came, and was generally inoffensive. He had also another qualification very well suited to the company he kept. He had great skiil and success in play; and seems to have been chiefly indebted to it for support. Several of the ladies engaged his attention upon his first coming over; but miss Elizabeth Hamilton, whom he afterwards married, seems to have been his favourite, though some say he endeavoured to break off the connection. She was the daughter of sir George Hamilton, fourth son of James first earl of Abercorn. His “Memoirs” were written from his own information, and probably in much the same language in which they are related, by his brother-in-law, Anthony, who, following the fortunes of James II. entered the French service, and died at St. Germain’s, April 21, 1720. He was generally called Count Hamilton. Count Gramont died Jan. 10, 1707. There have lately been several editions of the “Memoirs” printefd here, both in French and English, and in a splendid form, illustrated with portraits. They contain many curious particulars respecting the intrigues and amusements of the court of Charles II. but present upon the whole a disgusting picture of depraved manners.

, a Franciscan friar, was born at Douay, in the early part of the seventeenth century, and has been styled the abbreviator of Descartes. He was an eminent professor both of philosophy and divinity in the university of Douay, where he associated much' with the English, and was sent by them as a missionary into England. His residence was chiefly in Oxfordshire, where he led a retired life. He is said to have been the first who reduced the Cartesian system to the method of the schools, and his work on this subject, which was frequently printed in England, first in 1671, 12mo, and afterwards, much enlarged in 4to, was also translated and published in folio. He carried on a controversy for some time with a Mr. John Serjeant on metaphysical subjects. He was alive in Oxfordshire in 1695, but no farther particulars of his history are now known. Among his works we find the following mentioned: 1. “L'homme sans passions, selon les sentimens de Seneque,” Hague, 1662, 12mo. 2. “ Scydromedia, seu Sermo quern Alphonsus de la Vida habtiit, coram Comite de Falmouth, de monarchia,” 1669, 16mo. 3. “Apologia Renati des Cartes contra Sam. Parkerum,” London, 1679, 12mo. 4. “Historia naturee variis expe*­rimentis elucidata,” ibid. 1673, 8vo, reprinted there in 1680, and at Norimb. 1678. 5. “Compendium rerum jucundarum, et memorabilium naturae,” Norimb. 1681, 8vo. 6. “Dissertatio de carentia sensus et cognitionis in Brutis,” Ley den, 1675, 8vo. 7. “L'Epicure Spiritual, ou, Pempire de la volupte sur les vertus,” Paris, 8vo, 8. “Historia sacra a mundo condito ad Constantinum magnum,” which is said to be his best performance.

The story of this unhappy person shews how easily an innocent man may be destroyed by the malice of the few, working upon the credulity and superstition of the many: for, Grandier, though certainly a bad man, was as certainly innocent of the crimes for which he suffered. Renaudot, a famous physician, and the first author of the French gazette, wrote Grandier’s eulogium, which was published at Paris in loose sheets. It was taken from Menage, who openly defends the curate of Loudun, and calls the possession of those nuns chimerical. In 1693 was published at Amsterdam “Histoire des Diables de Loudun;” from which very curious account it appears, that the pretended possession of the Ursulines was an horrible conspiracy against Grandier’s life. As an author he is known only for a funeral oration for Scaevola de St. Martha, which is said to be an eloquent performafice.

, deacon of the church of Aix, was born in 1692, at Brignolles in Provence, of a mercantile family. He was educated in his own country, but came young to Paris, where his literary taste and talents procured him many friends, by whose assistance he increased his stores of knowledge, and as his income was very limited, entered upon a course of literary labours. He was a contributor, as far as vol. XIX. to the “Bibliotheque frangotse,” a well-known journal printed in Holland; and when Desfontaines was obliged to discontinue his “Nouvelliste du Parnasse,” (in which Granet had written) and obtained permission to carry it on again under another title, he engaged Granet' s services in this new undertaking called “Observations sur les ecrits modernes.” It began in 1735, and was published weekly until Sept. 1743, whep the King revoked the privilege. Busied as Granet was on this work, he found leisure to undertake in 1738 the continuation of a journal entitled “Reflexions sur les ouvrages de litterature.” This he extended as far as twelve volumes. It contains many extracts and remarks given with taste and judgment, but others that are merely repetitions of what he had written for the “Observations sur les ecrits modernes,” He had also a trick of inserting letters to himself, when he wished to publish satire without being accountable for it, but it is not thought that this disguise was of much avail. It was perhaps his misfortune that he was. obliged by the narrowness of his circumstances to employ himself thus on the labours of others, and in preparing new editions, when he might have executed original works that would have done him credit. Indeed a few months before his death he hinted to his friends that necessity only had forced him to this drudgery, and that he had no consolation but in the hope that he should one clay or othet be at liberty to employ his talents in a more creditable way. He had learned English, and in order to make that a source of profit, translated sir Isaac Newton’s “Chronology,” which he published at Paris in 1728, 4to, with an excellent preface, of which he took care to speak very highly in the 14th vol. of the “Bibliotheque Francoise,” and, probably by way of blind, speaks very differently there of some of his contemporaries, from what he had advanced in his preface. In short he appears to have perfectly understood the trade of reviewing. One of his best editions is that of the works of M, de Launoy, which was published at Geneva, 10 vols. fol. with a valuable preface, a life, and a “Launoiana,” consisting of very curious articles. Moreri gives a numerous list of other editions and publications to which he wrote prefaces and notes. He died at Paris April 2, 1741, and a spirited eloge was written on him by the abbe Desfontaines.

, a French satirist and dramatic poet, was born 1676, in Perigord. He wrote a little comedy in three acts, when but nine years old, which was performed several days successively in the college of Bourdeaux, where he was a scholar; and at sixteen, produced his tragedy of “Jugurtha;” but the work which has made him most known, is a satire against the duke of Orleans, then regent, entitled, “The Philippicks,” in which he accused that nobleman of the most atrocious crimes. To avoid the punishment this work deserved, he fled to Avignon, in which city was a French officer, who had taken refuge there in consequence of having committed a murder, and received a promise of pardon if he could entice the author of the “Philippicks” into the French dominions. His attempt succeeded, and La Grange was conducted to the isle of St. Margaret; but 6nding means to make friends of his keepers, escaped in a boat to Villa Franca, notwithstanding a violent storm. The king of Sardinia gave him a considerable sum of money, and he went from thence into Spain; afterwards into Holland, where he remained till the duke of Orleans was dead. He was then permitted to end his days in France,­where he died in 1758, at the castle of Antoniat, his family seat. His works have been collected in 5 vols. small 12mo, and his tragedies have been as much admired, as his lyric efforts have been depreciated.

, a well-known biographer, but who has been himself left without any memorial, was the son of Mr. William Granger, by Elizabeth Tutt, daughter of Tracy Tutt. Of the condition of his parents, or the place of his education, we have not been able to recover any particulars. He studied, however, for some time at Christ-church, Oxford, which he probably left without taking a degree; and having entered into holy orders, was presented to the vicarage of Shiplake, in Oxfordshire, a living in the gift of the dean and chapter of Windsor. He informs us, in the dedication of his “Biographical History,” that his name and person were known to few at the time of its publication (1769), as he had “the good fortune to retire early to independence, obscurity, and content.” He adds, that “if he has an ambition for any thing, it is to be an honest man and a good parish priest,” and in both those characters he was highly esteemed by all who knew him. To the duties of his sacred office, he attended with the most scrupulous assiduity and zeal, and died in the performance of the most solemn office of the church. Such was his pious regard for the day appointed for religious observances, that he would not read the proofs of his work while going through the press on that day; and with such an impression of what was his duty, found no great difficulty in resisting the arguments of his bookseller, Tom Davies, who endeavoured to persuade him that this was a “work of necessity.” It appears that some time before his death he was anxious to obtain a living within a tenable distance of Shiplake, but did not succeed. In 1773 or 1774 he accompanied lord Mountstuart, now earl of Bute, on a tour to Holland, where his lordship made an extensive collection of portraits. In 1772 he published a sermon entitled “An Apology for the Brute Creation, or Abuse of Animals censured.” This was preached in his parish^church, Oct. 18, 1772, and, as we are informed in a postscript, gave almost universal disgust; “the mention of horses and dogs was censured as a prostitution of the dignity of the pulpit, and considered as a proof of the author’s growing insanity;” but more competent judges, and indeed the public at large, applauded him for exerting his humanity and benevolence in a case which is so often overlooked, the treatment of the brute creation. Mr. Granger, who was a man of some humour, and according to the evidence of his friend and correspondent the rev. Mr. Cole, a frequent retailer of jokes, dedicated this sermon “To T. B. Drayman,” for which he gives as a reason that he had seen this man exercise the lash with greater rage, and heard him at the same time swear more roundly and forcibly, than he ever heard or saw any of his brethren of the whip in London. Mr. Granger appears to have taken some pains with this man, but to little purpose. He was, however, afterwards killed by a kick from one of the horses whom he delighted to torment, which gave Mr. Granger an opportunity of strength-. cning his arguments with his parishioners by a warning like this, which could not fail, for sorneaime at least, to make an impression on their minds. In 1773 he printed another sermon, entitled “The nature and extent of Industry,” preached before his grace Frederic, archbishop of Canterbury, July 4, 1775, in the parish church of Shiplake. This was gravely dedicated, “To the inhabitants of the parish of Shiplake who neglect the service of the church, and spend the Sabbath in the worst kind of idleness, this plain sermon, which they never heard, and probably will never read, is inscribed by their sincere wellwisher and faithful minister J. G.” Both these discourses were favourably received by the public, and many clergymen and others purchased quantities of them for distribution. His memory, however, is best preserved by his “Biographical History of England from Kgbert the Great to the Revolution,” at which he employed himself for many years, and lived to see two editions sold, and a taste created for collections of portraits, which is indeed the principal intention of the author, his biography including only those persons of whom some engraved portrait is extant. It was first published in 4 thin 4to vols. in 1769, but the second and subsequent editions have been printed in 8vo. The preparation of such a work could not fail to yield the author much amusement, and likewise procured him the correspondence of many eminent scholars and gentlemen who were either collectors of portraits, or conversant in English biography. He had amassed considerable materials for a continuation of this work, which was prevented by his sudden and much-lamented death. On Sunday April 14, 1776, he read prayers and preached apparently in good health, but while afterwards at the communion-table, in the act of administering the sacrament, he was seized with an apoplectic fit, and notwithstanding immediate medical assistance, died next morning. This affecting circumstance was happily expressed by a friend in these lines:

, a learned lawyer, was born at Delft in 1600. He wrote various works upon legal and political subjects, by which he acquired a considerable reputation. Among these are “Libertas Veneta, seu Venetorurn in se et suos imperandi Jus.” This was published in 1634, and in 1644 he defended the republic of Venice, in a dispute with the duke of Savoy concerning precedence; for which service, that republic created him a knight of St. Mark. He had also before this, attempted to confute Buchanan’s treatise “De Jure Majestatis,” in a work dedicated to Christina, queen of Sweden, who was known to be a great assertor of regal privileges. Grasswinkel defended the liberty of the seas against Selden, and Burgus, a native of Genoa, in his work “Maris Liberi Vindiciae,” and with so much judgment, in their opinion, that the States of Holland gave him a pension of 500 florins, with the title of Advocate-general of the marine, until an opportunity offered of rewarding his merit with a more honourable employment; which was afterwards that of advocate of the exchequer, and register and secretary of the chambre-mi-partie. He was author, likewise, of a treatise in two volumes, 4to, “On the Sovereignty of the States of Holland.” He died of an apoplexy at Mechlin, Oct. 12, 1666.

The exact time is not known when he first began to collect and consider the Bills of Mortality but he tells us himself that he had turned his thoughts that way several years, before he had any design of publishing the discoveries he had made. As his character must have been eminently distinguished in 1650, when, though not above thirty years of age, his interest was so extensive, as to procure the music professor’s chair at Gresham, for his friend doctor (afterwards sir William) Petty; so it is more than probable, that his acquaintance and friendship with that gentleman, was the consequence of a similarity of pursuits; and that our author had then communicated some of his thoughts upon this subject to sir William, who, on his part, is likewise said to have repaid the generous confidence with some useful hints towards composing his book. This piece, which contained a new and accurate thesis of policy, built upon a more certain reasoning than was before that time known, was first presented to the public in 1661, 4to, and met with such an extraordinary reception, that another edition was called for in the following year; and our author’s fame, and the usefulness of his book, began to be spoken of both at home and abroad. Immediately after the publication of it, Lewis XIV. of France, or his ministers, provided, by a law, for the most exact register of births and burials, that is any where in Europe; and in England Charles II. conceived such a high esteem for his abilities, that at the first institution of the royal society, his majesty recommended him to their choice for a member; with this charge, that if they found any more such tradesmen, they should be ure to admit them all. He had dedicated the work to sir Robert Moray, president of the royal society, and had sent fifty copies to be dispersed among their members, when he was proposed (though a shopkeeper), and admitted into the society, February 26, 1661-2; and an order of council passed, June 20, 1665, for publishing the third edition, which was executed by the society’s printer, and came out that same year. Alter receiving this honour, he did not long continue a shopkeeper, but left off business; and on September 25, 1666, became a trustee for the management of the New-river, for one of the shares belonging to sir William Backhouse, who dying in 1669, his relict, afterwards countess of Clarendon, appointed Mr. Graunt one of her trustees.

The report made by sir Robert Brooke, chairman of that committee, contains abundance of extraordinary relations, but not one word of the cocks being stopped, or any suspicions of Graunt. It is true, indeed, that he changed his religion, and was reconciled to the church of Rome some time before his death; but it is more than probable he was no papist at this juncture, since, in the title-page of his book in 1665, he is styled captain, and Wood informs us, that he had been two or three years a major when he made this change, which therefore could not have happened before 1667 or 1668 at soonest. However, the circumstances of the countess of Clarendon’s saying he was her trustee makes it plain that the story was not invented till some years after the fire, when Graunt was known to be a papist. It was apparently not invented till after his death. The first time of its appearance in public seems to have been in Echard’s “History of England.' 1 And according to bishop Burnet’s account, the story could not be told to him till after 1667, when Graunt was appointed trustee for the countess of Clarendon. The report, however, never reached his ears, and so could not disturb him in the prosecution of his studies, which he carried on after this change in his religion with the same assiduity as before, and made some considerable observations within two years of his death, which happened April 18, 1674, in the vigour of his age, having not quite completed his 54th year. He was interred on the 22d of the same month in St. Dunstan’s church, in Fleet-street, the corpse being at. tended by many of the most ingenious and learned persons of the time, and particularly by sir William Petty, who paid his last tribute with tears to his memory. He left his papers to this friend, who took care to adjust and insert them in a fifth edition of his work, which he published in 1676, 8vo, and that with so much care, and so much improved, that he frequently cites it as his own which probably gave occasion to bishop Burners mistake, who, as we have seen, called it sir William’s book, published under Graunt’s name. It is evident, however, that his observations were the elements of that useful science, which was afterwards styled” Political Arithmetic,“and of which Graunt must have the honour of being the first founder; and whatever merit may be ascribed to sir William Petty, Mr. Daniel King, Dr. Davenant, and others, upon the subject, it is all originally derived from the first author of the” Observations on the Bills of Mortality."

, a French artist, well known in this as well as his own country, was born at Paris March 26, 1699. He does not appear to have had much education in his profession, but soon made some figure as a draughtsman. He accompanied La Rochalard, who was appointed governor-general of St. Domingo, and meeting in that island with the artist Frezier, was employed by him on a map of the country. Gravelot returned to France in 1745, where he applied principally to drawing; but finding himself in the midst of a number of eminent artists, among whom he despaired of distinguishing himself, he came over to London, where he lived thirteen years. He possessed great fertility of invention, and composed, with much judgment, small subjects for vignettes and other book ornaments; he drew also admirably ancient buildings, tombs, and prospects, and was much employed in all these branches by the artists of London. He drew the monuments of the kings for Vertue, and gave the designs, where invention was necessary, for Pine’s plates of the tapestry in the house of lords. He was also for some time employed in Gloucestershire, drawing churches and antiquities. Vertue compares his neat manner to Picart, and owns that in composition and design, he even excelled his favourite Hollar. He sometimes attempted painting small histories and conversations, and he designed as well as engraved some of the prints to sir The* mas Hanmer’s edition of Shakspeare, and those belonging to Theobald’s edition: but the finest specimen of his abilities as an engraver, is his large print of Kirkstall abbey. He returned to France about the beginning of the present reign, and executed for the booksellers of Paris, the beautiful designs with which they ornamented the works of Corneille, Racine, Voltaire, Boccaccio, Ariosto, Marmontel, &c. He died at Paris in 1773. He is said to have been a man of wit and talents, and perfectly acquainted with the history and theory of his art.

In 1738 Mr. Gray removed from Peter-house to London, intending to apply himself to the study of the law in the Inner temple, where his friend Mr. West had begun the same pursuit some months before, but on an umtution which Mr. Walpole gave him to be his companion in his travels, this intention was laid aside for the present, and never after put in execution. From his letters to Mr. West, he seems to have been a very diligent traveller, his attention being directed to every work of art that was curious and instructive. Architecture both of Gothic and Grecian origin, painting and music, were all studied by him, with the manners and customs of the inhabitants. Their tour was the accustomed one through France and Italy. In April 1740 they were at Reggio, where an unfortunate difference took place between them, and they parted. Much has been said of this famous quarrel, but the real cause has never been sufficiently explained. Walpole, however, affected to take the blame on himself, and probably spoke truth; and it is certain that the parties were afterwards reconciled, as to outward respect, which no man knew better than Walpole how to pay in such proportions as suited his convenience, and in such warm and animated language as could not fail to be successful where he was not known. Cole, however, says, that when matters were made up between Gray and Walpole, the latter asked Gray to Strawberry-hill, and when he came, he without any ceremony told Walpole, that he came to wait on him as civility required, but by no means would he ever be there on the terms of his former friendship, which he had totally cancelled. Cole’s narratives are sometimes to be received with caution, and although Gray’s late excellent editor and biographer thinks this worthy of credit, and not inconsisVii 4: with the independence of Gray’s character, yet if he did address Walpole in such language, it is difficult to conceive that there could have ever been any intercourse between them afterwards, which we are certain was the case.

In 1747, Gray appeared first as an author, by the publication of the “Ode to Eton College,” folio, of which, according to Dr. Warton, little notice was taken. Walpole now wished him to print his own poems with those of his deceased friend West, but this he declined, thinking the materials not sufficient; but he complied with another wish of Walpole, in commemorating in an ode the death of his favourite cat. Soon after this he sent to Dr. Wharton a part of his poem “On the alliance of education and government,” which he never pursued much further. It was indeed Gray’s misfortune seldom to execute his plans. In 1749 he finished his “Elegy,” which we have seen he began seven years before, and which being now handed about in manuscript, was read with great applause, and when printed, was, as it continues to be, the most popular of all his works. Mason justly attributes this to the affecting and pensive cast of the subject. That it has not ceased to be admired even by scholars appears from the many translations which it has undergone, into Latin, by Messieurs Anstey, Roberts, and Lloyd, and into Greek by Dr. Cooke, Dr. Norbury, Dr. Coote, and Messieurs Tew and Weston. This elegy was soon after added to a well-known edition of his poems printed in 4to, with den signs by Mr. Bentley. In March 1703 he lost his mother, whom he had so Jong and so affectionately loved, and placed over her remains an inscription which strongly marks his filial piety and sorrow.

In the summer of 1765 he took a journey into Scotland, to improve his health, which was then weak and uncertain, and to gratify his curiosity with the natural beauiies and antiquities of that wild and romantic country. He went through Edinburgh and Perth to Glames-castle, the seat of iord V Strathmore, where he resided some time, and afterwards went to the nortli, where he formed an acquajntance with Dr. Beattie, “whom,” says Dr. Johnson, “he found a poet, a philosopher, and a good man,” but at that time little known beyond the circle of his friends at Aberdeen. Gray’s account of this journey, says Dr. Johnson, “so far as it extends, is curious and elegant; for as his comprehension was ample, his curiosity extended to all the works of art, all the appearances of nature, and all the monuments of past events.” Part of the summer of 1766 and 1767 he passed in journies in England, and had intended a second tour to Scotland, but returned to London without accomplishing his design. At Dr. Beattie’s desire, a new edition of his poems was printed by the Foulis’s of Glasgow, then the most elegant printers in the island; and at the same time Dodsley was also printing them in London. In both these editions, the “Long Story” was omitted, as the plates from Bentley’s designs which illustrated it were worn out, but some pieces of Welch and Norwegian poetry, written in a bold and original manner, were inserted in its place of which the “Descent of Odin” is undoubtedly the most valuable, though in many places it is obscure. This his late biographer attributes to his having translated only that part of it which he found in the Latin version of Bartholinus.

, an Italian scholar and poet of considerable eminence, was born at Florence March 22, 1503, of a noble family, which can be traced as far as the thirteenth century, but was now decayed, as we find that Grazzini in his youth was brought up as an apothecary. He had, however, studied philosophy and the belles lettres, and from the timetliathe acquired some reputation in the literary world, gave up his medical business. In 1540 he became one of the founders of the academy of Florence, which was first called the academy of the Humides, and each member distinguishing himself by some appellation relative to the water, Grazzini adopting that of Lasca, which signifies a roach. From the first establishment of this academy, he was appointed chancellor, and when, some months after, the grand duke changed its name to that of the academy of Florence, he was chosen overseer, or superintendant, an office which he afterwards filled three times. As the number of members, however, increased, the juniors began to make new regulations without consulting the founders, and a schism broke out, attended with so many unpleasant circumstances, that Grazzini withdrew, and became the founder of a new academy, known still by the name of La Crusca. The object of this society was to polish the Italian language, to fix a standard for it, to point out such authors as might be always models for those who chose to improve their style, to oppose the progress of false taste; and to sift the flour from the bran of literature, crusca signifying bran. Grazzini was well qualified to assist an academy instituted for these purposes. He hail enriched the language with several choice phrases and new modes of expression, and the academicians have very justly ranked him among those authors to whom they have been obliged for examples, in correcting their great vocabulary. In the mean time his growing fame induced his friend Leonard Salviati to endeavour his re-introduction into the academy of Florence, which was successfully accomplished in 1566, twenty years after he had left it; in return for which he procured admission for Salviati among the Cruscanti. Grazzini died at Florence in February 1583. He was a man of unquestionable genius, spirit, and humour, and wrote with great elegance, and although there are some indelicate passages in his poems, which was the vice of the times, he was a man of strict morals, and even, says his biographer, very religious. Many of his works are lost, and among these some prose tales, and many pieces of poetry. There remain, however, twentyone tales, six comedies, a great number of capitoli, or satirical chapters, and various poems, of which the best edition is that of Florence, 1741, 2 vols. 8vo. His Tales or Novels were printed at Paris, 1756, 8vo, from which some copies have been printed in 4to, under the title of London. An excellent French translation of them appeared in 1775, 2 vols. 8vo, in which nine histories wanting in the third evening are said to be inserted from an old French translation in ms. He wrote also “La guerra di Mostri, Poema giocoso,” Florence, 1584, 4to. Grazzini published the 2d book of Berni, Florence, 1555, 8vo; and “Tutti i trionfi, carri, mascherate o canti carnasciaj^schi dal tempo di Lorenzo de Medici a questoanno 1559,” 8vo; 100 pages are frequently wanting in this work, page 297 being pasted upon page 398. These pages contained 51 canzoni, by John Baptist dell Ottomaio, which had been inserted without his consent, and which his brother, by authority from the magistrates, had cancelled. They were printed separately by the author, in a similar size, the year following, and must be added to the mutilated copies; but though they consist of 55 songs instead of 51, those found in the original collection are preferred, as the others have been altered. This collection was reprinted in 1750, 2 vols. 8vo, Cosmopoli; but this impression is not valued.

, an empiric, whose wori r derful cures have been attested by some of the most eminent men of the seventeenth century, was the son of William Greatrakes, esq. and born at Affane, co. Waterforcl, in Ireland, Feb. 14, 1628. He was educated a protestant in the free-school of Lismore, until the age of thirteen, when his friends intended to have removed him to Trinity college, Dublin, but the rebellion breaking out, his mother took refuge with him in England, where he was kindly received by his great uncle Edmund Harris, brother to sir Edward Harris, knt. his grandfather by the mother’s side. After his uncle’s death he spent some years in the study of the classics and divinity under a clergyman in Devonshire, and then returned to Ireland, which was at that time in so deplorable a state that he retired to the castle of Caperquin, where he spent a year in contemplation, and seems to have contracted a species of enthusiasm which never altogether left him. In 1649 he entered into the service of the parliament, and continued in the army until 1656, when, a great part of the English being disbanded, he retired to his native country of Aflfane, and by the interest of the governor there, was made clerk cf the peace for the county of Cork, register for transplantation, and justice of the peace. At the Restoration all these places were taken from him, and his mind being disturbed partly with this disappointment, and partly for want of any regular and useful occupation, he felt an impulse, as he calls it, that the gift of curing the king’s evil was bestowed upon him and accordingly he began his operations, which were confined to praying, and stroking the part affected and such wonderful cures were effected, that he determined not to stop here. Three years after, he had another impulse that he could cure all kinds of diseases, and by the same simple remedy, which must be administered by himself. When however he pretended to some supernatural aid, and mentioned the Holy Ghost with irreverent presumption, as his assistant, he was cited to the bishop’s court, and forbid to take such liberties. This probably was the cause of his coming to England in January 1665, where he performed many cures, was invited by the king to Whitehall, and his reputation spread most extensively. Even Dr. Henry Stubbe, an eminent physician, published a pamphlet in praise of his skill. Having failed in one instance, that of a Mr. Cresset in Charterhouse square, there appeared a pamphlet entitled “Wonders no miracles: or Mr. Valentine Greatrakes Gift of Healing examined,” &c. Lond. 1666, 4to. This was written by Mr. David Lloyd, reader to the Charter-house, who treated Greatrakes as a cheat. In answer to this, he published “A brief account of Mr. Valentine Greatrakes, and divers of his strange cures,” &c. ibid. 1666, 4to. This was drawn up in the form of a letter to the right hon. Robert Boyle, who was a patron of our physician, as was also Dr. Henry More, and several other members of the royal society, before whom Greatrakes was examined. To his cures we find the attestations of Mr. Boyle, sir William Smith, Dr. Denton, Dr. Fairclough, Dr. Faber, sir Nathaniel Hobart, sir John Godolphin, Dr. Wilkins, Dr. VVhichcot (a patient), Dr. Cudworth, and many other persons of character and reputation. The truth seems to be, that he performed cures in certain cases of rheumatism, stiff joints, &c. by friction of the hand, and long perseverance in that remedy; in all which there would have been nothing extraordinary, as the same is practised till this day, had be not excited the astonishment and enthusiasm of his patients by pretensions to an extraordinary gift bestowed upon him, as he insinuates in one place, to cure the people of atheism. When he left England or died is not known. Mr. Harris says he was living in Dublin in 168 1.

But upon his return, the ensuing national troubles proved greatly detrimental to his private affairs, and he suffered much for his loyalty to the king and his gratitude to Laud. After a short stay at Gresham college, which was no longer a place of safety for him, he went to Oxford, and set about digesting his papers, and preparing such of them as might be most useful for the press. In this business he was assisted by archbishop Usher, to whom he had been long known; and here he drew a map of Lesser Asia at his grace’s request, who was writing his dissertation of that country, printed in 1641.

Hitherto he had been able, in a considerable degree, to surmount his difficulties, there being still left, some members in the house of commons who had a regard for learning, among whom Selden made the greatest figure. That gentleman was burgess for the university of Oxford; and, being well known to our author before his travels, he dedicated his “Roman Foot” to him, under the character of his noble and learned friend: and his friendship was very serviceable to Greaves, in a prosecution in the parliament, in 1647, occasioned by his executorship to Dr. Bainbridge. This trust had so involved him in law-suits as entirely to frustrate his design of going to Leyden to consult some Persian Mss. necessary for publishing some treatises in that language. Upon the arrival of the parliamentary commissioners at Oxford, several complaints were made to them against him on the same account; which being sent by them to the committee of the house of commons, our author, probably by the interest of Selden (who was a member of that committee), was there acquitted, after which he applied to the court of aldermen and the committee of Camden-house for restitution. But though he evaded this farther difficulty by the assistance of some powerful friends, yet this respite was but short; however,

, an ingenious English poet, was descended from a family in good repute among the dissenters, and had his education in some of the sects into which that body is divided. He was a man of approved probity, and sweetness of temper and manners. His wit abounded in conversation, and was never known to give offence. He had a post in the custom-house, where he discharged his duty with the utmost diligence and ability, and died at the age of forty-one years, at a lodging in Nag’s-head-court, Gracechurch-street, in 1737.

The following anecdotes are given from indisputable authority: Mr. Sylvanus Bevan, a quaker and a friend of Mr. Green, was mentioning, at Batson’s coffee-house, thaty while he was bathing in the river, a waterman saluted him with the usual insult of the lower class of people, by calling out, “A quaker, a quaker, quirl” He at the same expressed his wonder, how his profession could be known while he was without his cloaths. Green immediately replied, that the waterman might discover him by his swimming against the stream. The department in the customhouse to which Mr. Green belonged was under the controul of the duke of Manchester, who used to treat those immediately under him once a year. After one of these entertainments, Mr. Green, seeing a range of servants in the hall, said to the first of them, “Pray, sir, do you give tickets at your turnpike” In a reform which took place in the custom-house, amongst other articles, a few pence, paid weekly for providing the cats with milk, were ordered to be struck off. On this occasion, Mr. Green wrote a humourous petition as from the cats, which prevented the regulation in that particular from taking place. Mr. Green’s conversation was as novel as his writings, which occasioned one of the commissioners of the customs, a very dull man, to observe, that he did not know how it was, but Green always expressed himself in a different manner from other people.

“The author of the following poern had the greatest part of his time taken up in business; but was accustomed at his leisure hours to amuse himself with striking out small sketches of wit or humour for the entertainment of his friends, sometimes in verse, at other times in prose. The greatest part of these alluded to incidents known only within the circle of his acquaintance. The subject of the following poem will be more generally understood. It was at first a very short copy of verses; but at the desire of the person to whom it is addressed, the author enlarged it to its present state. As it was writ without any design of its passing beyond the hands of his acquaintance, so the author’s unexpected death soon ifter disappointed many of his most intimate friends in their design of prevailing on him to review and prepare it for the sight of the public. It therefore now appears under all the disadvantages that can attend a posthumous work. But it is presumed every imperfection of this kind is abundantly overbalanced by the peculiar and unborrowed cast of thought and expression, which manifests itself throughout, and secures to this performance the first and principal character necessary to recommend a work of genius, that of being an original.”

, an English poet and miscellaneous iter of the Elizabethan age, and memorable for his tants and imprudence, was a native of Norwich, and born ubout 1560. His father appears to have been a citizen of Norwich, the fabricator of his own fortune, which it is thought he had accumulated by all the tricks of selfishness and narrow prudence. He educated his son, however, as a scholar, at St. John’s college, Cambridge. Here he took the degree of A. B. in 1578, and for some time travelled into Italy and Spain. Ou his return, he took his master’s degree at Clare-hall, in 1583, and was incorporated in the same at Oxford in 1588, no inconsiderable proof that hiproficiency in his studies had been very conspicuous, and that there was nothing at this time grossly objectionable in his moral demeanour. It is supposed that he took orders after his return from his travels, and that he was the same Robert Greene who was presented to the village of Tollesbury, in Essex, June 19, 1584. If this be the case, it is probable that he did not long reside, or was perhaps driven from Tollesbury, by his irregular life, the greater part of which was spent in London. Here, from some passages cited by Mr. Beloe, it would appear that he gave himself up to writing plays and love pamphlets, and from the date of his “Myrrour of Modestie,” 1584, it is probable that from this time he became an author by profession; but as four years after he was incorporated M. A. at Oxford, we are still willing to believe that his career of folly had not commenced so soon, or been so generally known as it was some time after. It was his fate to fall among dissolute companions, who, though men of genius like himself, probably encouraged each other in every sensual enjoyment. Among these were Christopher Mario w, George Peele, and Thomas Nash; for Dr. Thomas Lodge, another of their associates, is not loaded with the same stigma. “The history of genius,” says one of our authorities, with equal justice and feeling, “is too often a detail of immoral irregularities, followed by indigence and misery. Such, in after times, was the melancholy tale of Otway and Lee, of Savage, Boyse, Smart, Burns, Dermody, and many others. Perhaps the writers of the drama have, of all others, been the most unfortunate in this respect; perhaps there is something which more immediately seizes all the avenues of the fancy in the gorgeous exhibitions of the stage; which leads men away from the real circumstances of their fortune, to the delusions of hope, and to pursue the fairy lights so hostile to sober truth.” In what species of dissipation, and to what degree Greene indulged, it were useless now to inquire his faults were probably exaggerated by the rival wits of his day and his occupation as a playwriter being in itself at that time looked upon as criminal, was barely tolerated. Among his errors, about which we are afraid there is now no doubt, may be mentioned his marrying an amiable lady, whom he deserted and ill-used. His career, however, was short. He died Sept. 5, 1592, at an obscure lodging near Dowgate, not without signs of contrition, nor indeed without leaving behind him written testimonies that he was more frequently conscious of an. ill-spent life than able or willing to amend it. In some of his works also, he made strenuous exertions to warn the unthinking, and expose the tricks, frauds, and devices of his miscreant companions. His works, says one of his biographers, contain the seeds of virtue, while his acts display the tares of folly. From such of his writings as have fallen 'in our way, he appears to possess a rich and glowing fancy, great command of language, and a perfect knowledge of the manners of the times. As a poet he has considerable merit, and few of his contemporaries yield a more pleasant employment to the collectors of specimens. His writings attained great popularity in his day, but until very lately, have been seldom consulted unless by poetical antiquaries. The following list of his works, by Mr. Haslewood, is probably complete: 1. “The Myrrour of Modestie,” 1584. 2. “Monardo the Tritameron of Love,” 1534, 1587. 3. “Planetomachia,” 1585. 4. Translation of a funeral Sermon of P. Gregory XIII. 1585. 5. “Euphues’s censure to Pbilautus,” 1587, 1634. 6. “Arcadia or Menaphon, Camillae’s alarm to slumbering Euphues,” 1587,1589, 1599, 1605, 1610, 1616, 1634. 7. “Pandosto the Triumph of Time,” 1588, 1629. 8. “Perimedes the blackesmith,” 1588. 9. “The pleasant and delightful history of Dorastiis and Favvnia,” 1588, 1607, 1675, 1703, 1723, 1735. 10. “Alcida, Greene’s Metamorphosis,” 1617. 11. “The Spanish Masquerade,” 1589. 12. “Orpharion,” 1599. 13. “The Royal Exchange, contayning sundry aphorisms of Philosophic,” 1590. 14. “Greene’s mourning garment, given him by Repentance at the funerals of Love,” 1590, 1616. 15. “Never too late,” 1590, 1600, 1607, 1616, 1631. 16. “A notable discovery of Coosenage,” 1591, 1592. 17. “The ground work of Conny Catching,” 159U 18. “The second and last part of Conny Catching,” 1591, 1592. 19. “The third and last part of Conny Catching,” 1592. 20. “Disputation, between a hee conny-catcher and a shee conny-catcher,” 1592. 21. “Greene’s Groatsworth of wit bought with a million of repentance,” 1592, L-600,1616, 1617, 1621, 1629, 1637. Of this a beautiful edition was lately printed by sir Egerton Brydges, M. P. at the private press at Lee Priory, (only 61 copies for presents), with a biographical preface, to which this article is essentially indebted: his and Mr. Haslewood’s account of Greene, are compositions dictated by true taste and discrimination, and by just moral feeling. 22. “Philomela, the lady FitzwalterV nightingale,” 1592, 1615, 163h 23. “A quip for an upstart courtier,” r$92, 162O, 1625, 1635, and reprinted in 1 the Harleian Miscellany. 24. “Ciceronis amor, Tullie’s love,” 1592, 1611, 1615, 1616, 1628, 1639. 25. “News both from heaven and hell,” 159-3. 26. “The Black Book’s Messenger, or life and death of Ned Browne,” 1592. 27. “The repentance of Robert Greene,” 1592. 28. “Greene’s vision at the instant of his death,” no date. 29. “Mamillia, or the triumph of Pallas,” 1593. 30. “Mamillia, or the second part of the triumph of Pallas,” 1593. 31. “Card of Fancy,” 1593, 1608. 32. “Greene’s funerals,” 1594; but doubtful whether his. 33. “The honourable history of Fryer Bacon and Fryer Bongay, a comedy,” 1594, 1599, 1630, 1655. 34. “The history of Orlando Furioso, a play,” 1S94, 1599. 35. “The comical historic of Alphonsus king of Arragon, a play,” 1597, 1599. 36. “A looking-glass for London and England,” a comedy, jointly with Lodge, 1594, 1598. 37. “The Scottish Historic of James the Fourthe, si ai ue at Flodden, intermixed with a pleasant comedie,” 1598, 1599. 38. “Penelope’s Webb,” 1601. 39. “Historic of Faire Bellora,” no date, afterwards published, as “A paire of Turtle doves, or the tragical history of Bellora and Fidelio,” 1606. 40. “The debate between Follie and Love, translated out'of French,” 1608. 41. “Thieves falling out, true men come by their goods,” 1615, 1637, and reprinted in the Harleian Miscellany. 42. “Greene’s Farewell to Folie,” 1617. 43. “Arbasto, the history of Arbasto king of Denmarke,” 1617, 1626. 44. “FairEmme, a comedy,” 1631. 45. “The history of lobe,” a play, destroyed, but mentioned in Warburton’s list. A few other things have been ascribed toGreene on doubtful authority.

However that be, it is almost as certain that his reluctance was sincere, as that he at length accepted the dignity, and was enthroned pope, Sept. 3, 590. And it appeared by his conduct, that they could not have elected a person more worthy of this exalted station; for, besides his great learning, and the pains he took to instruct the church, both by preaching and writing, he had a very happy talent to win over princes, in favour of the temporal as well as spiritual interests of religion. It would be tedious to run over all the particulars of his conduct on these occasions; and his converting the English to Christianity, a remarkable fact in our history, is on that account generally known. In this attempt Gregory owed his success to the assistance of queen Ethelburga, who not only prompted the king Ethelbert her consort, to treat the pope’s missionaries kindly, but also to become himself a convert.

It remains to be observed, in justice to this pope, that the charge of his causing the noble monuments of the ancient splendour of the Romans o be destroyed, in order to prevent those who went to Rome from paying more attention to the triumphal arches, &. than to things sacred, is rejected by Platina as a calumny. Nor is the story, though credited by several learned authors, particularly by Brucker, of his reducing to ashes the Palatine library founded by Augustus, and the burning an infinite number of pagan books, particularly Livy, absolutely certain. However, it is undeniable, he had a great aversion to all such books, which he carried to that excess, that he flew in a violent passion with Didier, archbishop of Venice, for no other reason than because he suffered grammar to be taught in his diocese. In this he followed the apostolical constitutions: the compiler whereof seems also to have copied from Gregory Nazianzen, who thought reading pagan books would turn the minds of youth in favour of their idolatry; and we have seen more recently the same practice zealously defended, and upon the same principle too, by Mr. Tillemont. Yet Julian the apostate is charged with using the same prohibition, as a good device to effect the ruin of Christianity, by rendering the professors contemptible on account of their ignorance. Dupin says, that his genius was well suited to morality, and he had acquired an inexhaustible fund of spiritual ideas, which he expressed nobly mough, generally in periods, rather than sentences: his :omposition was laboured, and his language inaccurate, but sy, well connected, and always equally supported. He left more writings behind him than any other pope from the foundation of the see of Rome to the present period. 'hese consist of twelve books of “Letters,” amounting to ipwards of eight hundred in number. “A comment on :he book of Job,” generally known by the name of “Grejry’s Morals on Job.” “A Pastoral,” or a treatise on duties of a pastor. This work was held in such veneration by the Gallican church, that all the bishops were jbiiged, by the canons of that church, to be thoroughly icquainted with it, and punctually to observe the rules contained in it. He was author also of “Homilies” on the prophet Ezekiel; and on the gospels, and of four books of “Dialogues.” His works have been printed over and over again, in almost all forms, and at a number of different places on the continent, as Lyons, Paris, Rouen, Basil, Antwerp, Venice, and Rome. The best edition is that of Paris, in 1705, in 4 vols. folio.

, was the younger brother of St. Basil, and had an equal care taken of his education, being brought up in all the polite and fashionable modes of learning; but, applying himself particularly to rhetoric, he valued himself more upon being accounted an orator than a Christian. On the admonition of his friend Gregory Nazianzen he quitted those studies; and, betaking himself to solitude and a monastic discipline, he turned his attention wholly to the holy scriptures, and the controversies of the age; so that he became as eminent in the knowledge of these as he had before been in the course of more pleasant studies. Thus qualified for the highest dignity in the church, he was placed in the see of Nyssa, a city on the borders of Cappadocia. The exact time of his promotion is not known, though it is certain he was bishop in the year 371. He proved in this station a stout champion for the Nicene faith, and so vigorously opposed the Arian party, that he was soon after banished by the emperor Valens; and, in a synod held at Nyssa by the bishop of Pontus and Galatia, was deposed, and met with very hard usage. He was hurried from place to place, heavily fined, and exposed to the rage and petulance of the populace, which fell heavier upon him, as he was both unused to trouble, and unapt to bear it. In this condition he remained for seven or eight years, during which, however, he went about countermining the stratagems of the Arians, and strengthening those in the orthodox faith; and in the council of Antioch in the year 378, he was, among others, delegated to visit the eastern churches lately harassed by the Arian persecution.

We are assured, that at his death he was in pursuit of a general method of quadrature, by infinite series, like that of sir Isaac. This appeared by his papers, which came into the hands of his nephew, Dr. David Gregory, who published several of them; and he himself assured Mr. Collins, he had found out the method of making sir Isaac’s series; who thereupon concluded he must have written a treatise upon it. This encouraged Mr. Stewart, professor of mathematics in Aberdeen, to take the trouble of examining his papers, then in the hands of Dr. David Gregory, the late dean of Christ church, Oxford; but no such treatise could be found, nor any traces of it, and the same had been declared before by Dr. David Gregory; whence it happens, that it is still unknown what his method was of making those serieses. However, Mr. Stewart affirms, that, in turning over his papers, he saw several curious upon particular subjects, not yet printed. On the contrary, some letters which he saw confirmed Dr. David Gregory’s remark, and made it evident, that our author had never compiled any treatise, containing the foundations of this general method, a very short time before his death; so that all that can be known about his method can only be collected from his letters, published in the short history of his “Mathematical Discoveries,” compiled by Mr. Collins, and his letters to that gentleman in the “Commercium Epistolicum.” From these it appears, that, in the beginning of 1670, when Mr. Collins sent him sir Isaac Newton’s series for squaring the circular zone, it was then so much above every thing he comprehended in this way, that after having endeavoured in vain, by comparing it with several of his own, and combining them together, to discover the method of it, he concluded it to be no legitimate series; till, being assured of his mistake by his friend, he went again to work, and after almost a whole year’s indefatigable pains, as he acknowledges, he discovered, at last, that it might be deduced from one of his own, upon the subject of die logarithms, in which he had given a method for finding the power to any given logarithm, or of turning the root of any pure power into an infinite series; and in the same manner, viz. by comparing and combining his own series together, or else by deduction therefrom, he fell upon several more of sir Isaac’s, as well as others like them, in which he became daily more ready by continual practice; and this seems to have been the utmost he ever actually attained to, in the progress towards the discovering any universal method for those series.

About the beginning of the last century, he removed with his family to Aberdeen, and in the time of queen Anne’s wars employed his thoughts upon an improvement in artillery, in order to make the shot of great guns more destructive to the enemy, and executed a model of the engine he had contrived. The late Dr. Reid, in his additions to the lives of the Gregorys, published in Hutton’s Dictionary, informs us that he conversed with a clockmaker at Aberdeen, who had been employed in making this model; but having made many different pieces by direction without knowing their intention, or how they were to be put together, he could give no account of the whole. After making some experiments with this model, which satisfied him, Mr. Gregory was so sanguine in the hope of being useful to the allies in the war against France, that he set about preparing a field equipage with a view to make a campaign in Flanders, and in the mean time sent his model to his son the Savilian professor, the subject of our next article, that he might have his, and sir Isaac Newton’s opinion of it. His son shewed it to Newton without letting him know that his own father was the inventor of it. Sir Isaac was much displeased with it, saying, that if it had tended as much to the preservation of mankind, as to their destruction, the inventor would have deserved a great reward: but, as it was contrived solely for destruction, and would soon be known by the enemy, he rather deserved to be punished, and urged the professor very strongly to destroy it, and if possible, to suppress the invention. It is probable the professor followed this advice, as he died soon after, and the model was never found. Sir Isaac’s objection, however, appears rather to be fastidious, and might apply with equal force to any improvement in muskeis, &c. or to gunpowder itself. When the rebellion broke out in 1715, Mr. Gregory went a second time to Holland, and returned when it was over to Aberdeen, where he died about 1720, aged ninety-three, leaving behind him a history of his own time and country, which was never published. One of his daughters was mother to the late celebrated Dr. Thomas Reid of Glasgow, by whom the above particulars were first communicated.

, son of the preceding, and nephew to the inventor of the reflecting telescope, was born June 21, 1661, at Aberdeen; where he also received the first grounds of his learning, but was afterwards removed to Edinburgh, and took his degree of M. A. in that university. The great advantage of his uncle’s papers induced his friends to recommend the mathematics to him; and he had a natural subtilty of genius particularly fitted for that study, to which he applied with indefatigable industry, and succeeded so well that he was advanced to the mathematical chair, at Edinburgh, at the age of twenty-three. The same year he published a treatise, entitled “Exercitatio Geometrica de dimensione figurarum,” Edinb. 1684, 4to, in which assuming the doctrine of indivisibility, and the arithmetic of infinites, as already known, he explained a method which not only suited his uncle’s examples, left by him without any way of finding them, but discovered others, by which an infinite number of curve-lines, and the areas contained between them and right lines (such as no other method then known extended to) might be measured. He already seen some bints in his uncle’s papers concerning sir Isaac Newton’s method, of which he made the best use he could *; and the advantage he found thereby raised an ardent desire in him to see that method published. Under this impatient expectation, the “Principia” was no sooner out in 1687, but our author took it in hand, and presently made himself so much master of it as to be able to read his professorial lectures upon the philosophy contained in it, and, causing his scholars to perform their exercises for their degrees upon several branches of it, became its first introducer into the schools.

Our professor’s genius lay chiefly in inventing new and elegant demonstrations of the discoveries made by others. He gave the first demonstration of that curve, which is well known since by the name of catenaria, or the curve that is formed by a chain fastened at each end; and first discovered, that this curve inverted gave the form of a true and legitimate arch, all the parts supporting each other f. There are several other papers of his in the “Philosophical Transactions,” vols. XVIII. XIX. XXI. XXIV. and XXV. He left also in ms. “A short treatise of the nature and arithmetic of Logarithms,” which is printed at the end of KeilTs translation of Commandine’s Euclid; and the “Treatise of Practical Geometry” mentioned in the note, as published by Mr. Maclaurin. His explication of sir Isaac Newton’s

When Dr. David Gregory, the Savilian professor, quitted Edinburgh, he was succeeded in the professorship at that university by his brother James, likewise an eminent mathematician; who held that office for thirty-three years, and, retiring in 1725, was succeeded by the celebrated Maclaurin. A daughter of this professor James Gregory, a young lady of great beauty and accomplishments, was the victim of an unfortunate attachment, that furnished the subject of Mallet’s well-known ballad of “William and Margaret.” Another brother, Charles, was created professor of mathematics at St. Andrew’s by queen Anne, in 1707. This office he held with reputation and ability for thirty-two years; and, resigning in 1739, was succeeded by his son, who eminently inherited the talents of his family, and died in 1763.

During the life of the treasurer Cecil, he obtained no advancement in the court or state; but, in 1615, some time after his death, was made under-treasurer and chancellor of the exchequer; in consequence of which he was called to the board of privy-council. In 1617 he obtained from the king a special charter, confirming all such liberties as had been granted to any of his ancestors in behalf of the town of Alcester, upon a new reserved rent of ten shillings a year; and, in 1620, was created lord Brooke of Beau* champ-court. He obtained this dignity as well by his merit and fidelity in the discharge of his offices as by his noble descent from theNevils, Willoughbys de Brook, and Beauchamps. In September 1621, he was made one of the lords of the king’s bed-chamber; and on this, resigning his post in the exchequer, he was succeeded therein by Richard Weston, afterwards earl of Portland. After the demise of king James, he continued in the privy-council of Charles I. in the beginning of whose reign he founded a historylecture in the university of Cambridge, and endowed it with a salary of lOOl. per annum. He did not long survive this last act of generosity; for, though he was a munificent patron of learning and learned men, he at last fell a sacrifice to the extraordinary outrage of a discontented domestic. The account we have of this fatal event is, that his lordship, neglecting to reward one Ralph Heywood, who had spent the greatest part of his life in his service, this attendant expostulated thereupon with his lordship in his bed-chamber, at Brook-house in Holborn; and, being severely reproved for it, presently gave his lordship a mortal stab in the back with a knife or sword; after which he withdrew into another room, and, locking the door, murdered himself with the same weapon. He died September 30, 1628, and his corpse being wrapt in lead, was conveyed from Brook-house, Holborn, to Warwick; where it was interred on the north side of the choir of St. Mary’s church, there, in his own vault, which had formerly been a chapter-house of the church; and where, upon his monument, there is this inscription: “Fulke Greville, servant to queen Elizabeth, counsellor to king James, and friend to sir Philip Sidney. Tropheum peccati.” He made that dear friend the great exemplar of his life in every thing; and Sidney being often celebrated as the patron of the muses in general, and of Spenser in particular, so we are told, lord Brooke desired to be known to posterity under no other character than that of Shakspeare’s and Ben Jonson’s master, lord-chancellor Egerton and bishop Overal’s patron. His lordship also obtained the office of clarencieux at arms for Mr. Camden, who very gratefulty acknowledged it in his life-time, and at his death left him a piece of plate in his will. He also raised John Speed from a mechanic to be an historiographer.

, an ingenious and learned English divine, the son of John Grey of Newcastle, was born there in 1694, and in 1712 was entered of Lincoln college, Oxford, where he took the degree of B. A. May 15, 1716, and that of M. 4- January 16, 1718-19. May 1, he was ordained deacon, and priest April 10, 172Q, by Crew bishop of Durham, to whom he was chaplain and secretary, and who gave him, in 1721, the rectory of Hinton, near Brackley, in Northamptonshire; and obtained for him, from lord Willoughby de Broke, the rectory of Kimcote in Leicestershire. ' He was alsp a prebendary of St. Paul’s. In 1746, he was official and commissary of the archdeaconry of Leicester. In 1730, he published at Oxford a “Visitation-Sermon” and, the same year, '< Memoria Technica or a new Method of artificial Memory“a fourth edition of which came out in 1756. At this time also appeared his” System of English Ecclesiastical Law, extracted from the Codex Juris Ecclesiastic! Anglican!“of bishop Gibson, 8vo. This was for the use of young students designed for orders; and for this the university gave him the degree of D. D. May 28, 1731. He printed an assize sermon in 1732, called” The great Tribunal,“and in 1736, was the author of a large anonymous pamphlet, under the title of” The miserable and distracted State of Religion in England, upon the Downfall of the Church established,“8vo and, the same year, printed another Visitation- Sermon. He also published” A new and easy Method of learning Hebrew without points, 1738;“” Historia Josephi,“and” Paradigmata Verborum, 1719;“” Liber Jobi, 1742;“”Answer to Warburton’s Remarks,“1744;” The last Words of David,“1749;” Nova Methodus Hebraice discendi diligentius recognita & acl Usum Scholarum accornmodata, &c.“1751;” A Sermon at the opening of Steane chapel, Northampt.“1752; and, lastly, an English translation of Mr. Hawkins Browne’s poem” De Animi Immortalitate,“1753. He died Feb. 28, 1771, in his 77th year. He married Joyce, youngest daughter of the rev. John Thicknesse of Brazen-nose-college, Oxford, and sister of the late Philip Thicknesse, esq. by whom he left three daughters, the eldest of whom married Dr. Philip Lloyd, dean of Norwich, and was well-known for her genius in working in worsted, and for her painted windows in that cathedral. Dr. Grey was buried at Hinton, as is his widow, who died Jan. 12, 1794, aged eighty-nine. His” Memoria Technica" was at one time a very popular book, and the system has lately in part been revived by a foreigner, which has been the means of again directing the public attention to Dr. Grey’s book; but it seems agreed that such helps are of very little substantial efficacy, and that attention and exercise are the only means to assist or prolong memory. Dr. Grey was a man of piety and liberality, as appears by his frequent correspondence with Dr. Doddndge.

, a very extraordinary woman, (whose maiden name is nowhere mentioned), was born in the county of Kilkenny in Ireland, and married to Mr. George Grierson, printer in Dublin. She died in 1733, at the age of twenty-seven; and was allowed to be an excellent scholar, not only in Greek and Roman literature, but in history, divinity, philosophy, and mathematics. She gave a proof of her knowledge in the Latin tongue by her dedication of the Dublin edition of Tacitus to lord Carteret; and by that of Terence to his son, to whom she likewise wrote a Greek epigram. Dr. Harwood esteems her Tacitus one of the best edited books ever published. Among the editions of her husband’s press, is a very fine one of Dupin’s Ecclesiastical History, 1724, 3 vols. folio, a rare book in this country. Mrs. Grierson composed some poems in English, several of which are inserted by Mrs. Barber amongst her own. When lord Carteret was lordlieutenant of Ireland, he obtained a patent for Mr. Grierson, her husband, to be the king’s printer; and, to distinguish and reward her uncommon merit, had her life inserted in it. Besides her parts and learning, she was also a woman of great virtue and piety. Mrs. Pilkington has recorded some particulars of her, and tells us, that, “when about eighteen years of age, she was brought to her father, to be instructed in midwifery; that she was mistress of Hebrew, Greek, Latin, and French, and understood the mathematics as well as most men: and what,” says Mrs. Pilkington, “made these extraordinary talents yet more surprising was, that her parents were poor illiterate country people; so that her learning appeared like the gife poured out on the apostles, of speaking all the languages without the pains of study.” Mrs. Pilkington inquired of her, where she had gained this prodigious knowledge: to which Mrs. Grierson sail, that “she had received some little instruction from the minister of the parish, when she, could spare time from her needle-work, to which she was closely kept by her mother.” Mrs. Pilkington adds, that “she wrote elegantly both in verse and prose; that her turn was chiefly to philosophical or divine subjects; that her piety was not inferior to her learning; and that some of the most delightful hours she herself had ever passed were in the conversation of this female philosopher.” Her son, who was also his majesty’s printer at Dublin, and instructed by her, was a man of uncommon learning, great wit, and vivacity. He died in Germany, at the age of twenty-seven. Dr. Johnson highly respected his abilities, and often observed, that he possessed more extensive knowledge than any man of his years he had ever known. His industry was equal to his talents, he particularly excelled in every species of philological learning, and was perhaps the best critic of his time.

, a landscape painter, born at Amsterdam in 1645, was a pupil of Roland Roghman, whose manner he relinquished after he became acquainted with the more perfect one of A. Vandervelde and Lingelbach. He settled in England, and made views of many of the principal places, which are highly wrought, but with rather an artificial tone of colouring. His execution was minute and laboured, but his pictures are very well completed in that style. He likewise employed his talents in imitations of Rembrandt, Rysdael, Polemburg, and Teniers; and so successfully, that his productions are often taken for originals. He died in the seventy-third year of his age, in 1718. He was known by the appellation of the old Griffier.-^-His son, Robert Griffier, or the young Griffier, practised the same profession as his father, and in the same style. He resided chierly upon the continent, and produced a great number of elaborate pictures of views on the Rhine, &c. with many figures in them. He was alive in 1713.

, a lady once of some note a a writer of novels and plays, whose maiden name was Griffith, was of Welch descent, and early in life married Richard Griffith, a gentleman of a good family, but reduced fortune, in Ireland. The first performance by which she became known was entitled “The Letters of Henry and Frances,” which are said to contain the genuine correspondence between her and her husband before their marriage, and for some years after. They were published at the particular request of Margaret countess of Cork, who was one of her friends, and privy to her connexion with Mr. Griffith, which was at first kept secret. From these letters, a few particulars of the private history of the parties may be collected. Mr. Griffith appears to have received no regular education, although in his youth he had evinced some talents for poetry; he introduced himself, however, by degrees into “the genteelest and most reputable company;” but tired of a city life, passed several years with a relation in the country of Ireland, where he read, learned French, and “studied husbandry philosophically.” He then engaged in a farm and the linen manufacture; and about 1760 appears to have received a place from the duke of Bedford, at that time lord lieutenant of Ireland. His acquaintance with Mrs. Griffith was accidental, and commenced on his parr, to use his own phrase, “as an act of gallantry” but rinding “no probability of success,” a strange declaration and being enafrioured with her writings, conversation, and character, became, at last, a real and honourable lover, but declined matrimony for several years, as she had no fortune, and his expectations from his father were much larger than they were likely to turn out. At length, however, they married, about the year 1752; and their first publication was this correspondence, published by subscription, and not very successful with any class of readers, not even the sentimentalists, for whom it was chiefly calculated. Some of the letters, however, are of a superior cast, and contain many sensible remarks on books, men, and manners. Their next publication, which was also written in conjunction, was “Two Novels, in Letters, 4 vols. the first and second, entitled Delicate Distress, by Frances the third and fourth, entitled the Gordian Knot, by Henry,” 1769, 12mo. Both these are of a strict moral tendency; but, like the correspondence of the authors, too much tinged with the pedantry of quotation and philosophizing, instead of natural description and feeling. Previously to this, Mr. Griffith had published in 1764, “The Triumvirate; or the authentic Memoirs of A. B. and C.” 2 vols. 12mo, a novel of so Joose a kind, that even his wife could not venture to recommend it to the fair sex, and yet adds her opinion that “every gentleman will read it with pleasure, and I trust without any injury to his morals.” Of Mr. Griffith’s performances we hear no more, nor have been able to ascertain the time of his death. Mrs. Griffith’s other novels were “Lady Barton,” and “Juliana HarJey.” She also wrote some dramas which had various success, but none of them have preserved their station on the stage. One of her most agreeable publications svas “The Morality of Shakspeare’s Drama illustrated,” 1775, 8vo. She published also some translations, “The Adventures of Pierre Viaud,” and the “Letters of Ninon de L'Enclos,” c. She died Jan. 3, 1793, at Millecenr, in the county of Kildare. She was unquestionably a woman of considerable literary talents, but does not appear to have found in her lover and husband the judgment which could give them a proper direction. Nor did he contribute much to bar happiness in his latter days. He had long accustomed himself to the cant of sentiment, which is too frequently mistaken for genuine moral feeling. When in his grand climacteric, he seduced a girl of fortune and consequence, with whom he lived the reminder of his days. The libehine notions in his “ Triumvirate” appear to have been more predominant sense he affected to entertain of pure morals in his “Letters.”

, called Bolognese, was born at Bologna in 1606, and studied under A. Caracci, to whom he was related. He was a good designer of figures, but became chiefly distinguished for his landscapes. When he arrived at Rome, Innocent X. did justice to his merit, employed him to paint in the Vatican and the Q,uirinal, and even in churches. This pope used to visit him when at work, and talk familiarly with him. His reputation reached cardinal Mazarine at Paris, who sent for him, settled a large pension on him, and employed him for three years in embellishing hi? palace and the Louvre, by the order of Lewis XIII. The troubles of the state, and the clamours raised against the cardinal, whose party he warmly espoused, put him so much in danger, that his friends advised him to retire among the Jesuits, for whom he painted a decoration for the exposition of the sacrament during the holy days, according to the custom of Rome. This piece was much relished at Paris: the king honoured it with two visits, and commanded him to paint a similar piece for his chapel at the Louvre. Grimaldi after that returned to Italy, and at his arrival at Rome found his great patron Innocent X. dead; but his two successors Alexander VII, and Clement IX. honoured him equally with their friendship, and found him variety of employment. His chief power lay in landscape, though he designed figures well, and his pencil equalled his design, light, and flowing with great depth of colour, bolder in the masses and the dash of bushy foliage than Caracci’s, but perhaps tc-o green. The gallery Colon n a, at Rome, has many of his views, which remained chiefly in Italy, less known on this side of the Alps than those of Poussin and Claude. He understood architecture, and has engraved in aqita fortis forty-two landscapes in an excellent manner, five of which are after Titian. Grimaldi was amiable in his manners, as well as skilful in his profession: he was generous without profusion, respectful to the great without meanness, and charitable to the poor. The following instance of his benevolence may serve to characterise the man. A Sicilian gentleman, who had retired from Messina with his daughter, during the troubles of that country, was reduced to the misery of wanting bread. As he lived over-against him, Grimaldi was soon informed of it; and in the dusk of the evening, knocking at the Sicilian’s door, without making himself known, tossed in money and retired. The thing happening more than once, raised the Sicilian’s curiosity to know his benefactor; who, finding him out, by hiding himself behind the door, fell down on his knees to thank the hand that had relieved him: Grimaldi remained confused, offered him his house, and continued his friend till his death. He died of a dropsy at Rome in 1G60, and left a considerable fortune among six children; of which the youngest, named Alexander, was a pretty good painter.

, a poet of considerable rank in his time, was a native of Huntingdonshire, and received the first part of his academical education at Christ’s college in Cambridge, where he became B. A. in 1539 or 1540. Removing to Oxford in 1542, he was elected fellow of Merton college; but, about 1547, having opened a rhetorical lecture in the refectory of Christ church, then newly founded, he was transplanted to that society, which gave the greatest encouragement to such students as were distinguished for their proficiency in criticism and philology. The same year he wrote a Latin tragedy, which probably was acted in the college, entitled “Archipropheta, sive Joannes Baptista,” dedicated to the dean, Richard Cox, and printed Colon. 1548, 8vo. In 1548, he explained all the four books of Virgil’s Georgics in a regular prose Latin paraphrase, in the public hall of his college, which was printed at London in 1591, 8vo. He wrote also explanatory commentaries, or lectures, on the <c Andria“of Terence, the Epistles of Horace, and many pieces of Cicero, perhaps for the same auditory. He translated Tully’s Offices into English, which he dedicated to the learned Thirlby, bishop of Ely, printed at London, 1553, 8vo, and reprinted in 1574 and 1596. He also made translations from some of the Greek classics; but these, Mr. Warton thinks, were never published; among others was the” Cyropaedia.“Bale mentions some plays and poems, but not with sufficient precision to enable us to know whether they were in Latin or English. It is allowed, however, that he was the second English poet after lord Surrey who wrote in blank verse, and added to Surrey’s style new strength, elegance, and modulation. In the disposition and conduct of his cadences, says our poetical historian, he often approaches to the legitimate structure of the improved blank verse, although he is not quite free from those dissonancies and asperities, which in his time adhered to the general character and state of English diction. Both Mr. Warton and Mr. Ellis have given specimens of his poetry from” The Songes written by N. G.“annexed to the” Songes and Soanettes of uncertain Auctours“in TottelPs edition of lord Surrey’s Poems (reprinted in the late edition of the English poets). As a writer of verses in rhyme, Mr. Warton thinks that Grimbold yields to none of his contemporaries, for a masterly choice of chaste expression, and the concise elegancies of didactic versification; and adds that some of the couplets in his” Praise of Measure-keeping,“or moderation, have all the smartness which mark the modern style of sententious poetry, and would have done honour to Pope’s ethic epistles. It is supposed that he died about 1563. Wood and Tanner, and after them, Warton, are decidedly of opinion that he is the same person, called by Strype” one Grimbold," who was chaplain to bishop Ridley, and who was employed by that prelate while in prison, to translate into English Laurentius Valla’s book against the fiction of Constantine’s Donation, with some other popular Latin pieces against the papists. In Mary’s reign, it is said that he was imprisoned for heresy, and saved his life by recantation. This may be true of the Grimbold mentioned by Strype, but we doubt whether he be the same with our poet, who is mentioned in high terms by Bale, on account of his zeal for the reformed doctrines, without a syllable of his apostacy, which Bale must have known, and would not have concealed.

, a celebrated lawyer, and master of the rolls in the seventeenth century, descended from a very ancient family, was born at Brad fieldball, near Manningtree, in Essex, about 1594. Where he had his early education is not known, but he studied law in Lincoln’s-inn, and practised with considerable success. In August 1638 he was chosen recorder of Colchester, and representative for that place in the parliament which met at Westminster April 13, 1640, and again in the parliament which met Nov. 3 of the same year. The measures he at first supported were those of the party which finally overthrew the government, and although he argued chiefly against such abuses as might have been reformed by a better understanding between the conflicting parties, yet his violence against the court, and particularly a bitter speech he made against archbishop Laud, seem to prove that he was too much swayed by the popular clamour of the times, and too readily became one of the committees for the redress of grievances, real or imaginary, as well as for bringing those to punishment who were most obnoxious to the people. In 1642 he was made one of the lieutenants of the county of Essex, in pursuance of the parliament’s ordinance for the militia, and in August the same year, came down to Colchester and proclaimed sir John Lucas a traitor, for intending to assist the king. When he came, however, to penetrate more deeply into the designs of the reformers, he began to withdraw his countenance from them, and when in 1647 he was appointed one of the commissioners to treat with the king at Newport, in the isle of Wight, his majesty had every reason to be pleased with his candour and moderation. On his return to parliament, he argued for accepting the king’s concessions, and being at the same time one of the commissioners for disbanding the army, was, among others, forcibly excluded from the house by a party of soldiers. After the murder of the king, he went abroad for some time, but in 1656 we find him elected to Cromwell’s parliament as one of the sixteen, representatives for the county of Essex, but not approved by the council, against whose decision he signed a spirited re* monstrance. In February 1659-60 he was chosen one of the new council of state, in whom the executive power was lodged by the remains of the long parliament that restored Charles II.; and a few months after, he was also chosen speaker of the house of commons in what was called the “Healing parliament” which met April 25, 1660. In May following, he waited on the king at Breda, and on his majesty’s arrival, and the settlement of the government, was appointed master of the roils Nov. 3, 1660, which office he filled for nearly twenty-four years with great ability and integrity. He was aiso appointed in the same year chief steward of the borough or St. AlbanV, and recorder of Harwich, and from the restoration to the time or his death, continued to represent Colchester in parliament. For several years he entertained Dr. Gilbert Burntt, afterwards bishop of Salisbury, as his chaplain, or preacher at the rolls; and much assisted him in his “History of the Reformation.” Burnet in his “Own Times” has given an affectionate and probably faithful character of sir Harbottle, who appears to have been a man of real worth, piety, and moderation in his latter days. Sir Harbottle died Dec. 31, 1683, aged about ninety, and was buried in the chancel of St. Michael’s church, St. Alban’s. He was twice married, first to Mary, daughter of sir George Croke, an edition of whose “Reports” he published, 3 vols. folio; and secondly to Anne, daughter of sir Nathaniel Bacon, of Culford-hall, in Suffolk. Other particulars of his family may be seen in our authorities.

Thus distinguished in the university, his merit was observed by Hid ley, bishop of London, who made him his chaplain in 1550; perhaps by the recommendation of Bucer, the king’s professor of divinity at Cambridge, who soon after his removal to London, in a letter to that prelate, styles our divine “a person eminent for his learning and piety.” And thus a door being opened to him into church -preferments, he rose by quick advances. tiis patron the bishop was so much pleased with him, that he designed for him the prebend of Cantrilles, in St. Paul’s church, and wrote to the council (some of whom had procured it for furnishing the king’s stables) for leave to give this living, as he says, “to his well deserving chaplain, who was without preferment, and to whom he would grant it with all his heart, that so he might have him continually with him and in his diocese to preach,” adding, that “he was known to be both of virtue, honesty, discretion, wisdom, and learning.” What effect this application had does not appear, but the praecentor’s place becoming vacant soon after, his lordship on August 24, 1551, collated him to that office, which was of much greater value, and likewise procured him to be made one of his majesty’s chaplains, with the usual salary of 40l. in December of the same year. On July 2, 1552, he obtained a stall in Westminster-abbey; which, however, he resigned to Dr. Bonner, whom he afterwards succeeded in the bishopric of London. In the mean time, there being a design on the death of Dr. Tonstall, to divide the rich see of Durham into two, Grindal was nominated lor one of these, and would have obtained it, had not one of the courtiers got the whole bishopric dissolved, and settled as a temporal estate upon himself.

Strype has ably vindicated his memory from the misrepresentations of Fuller and Heylin, who consider him as too much inclined to puritanism; and observes, that in the times in which he lived, when he was better known, his episcopal abilities, and admirable endowments for spiritual government, as well as his great learning, were much celebrated. He was a man, says Strype, of great firmness and resolution, though of a mild and affable temper, and friendly disposition; in his deportment courteous and engaging, not easily provoked, well spoken, and easy of access; and in his elation not at all affecting grandeur or state, always obliging in his carriage, as well as kind and grateful to his servants, and of a free and generous spirit. Strype allows, what indeed is obvious, that he used great moderation towards the puritans, to whose interest in the cabinet, joined to his own merits, his preferment was in a great measure owing; and had they repaid this moderation by a corresponding behaviour, he would have less seldom incurred the displeasure of the court , who thought his favours ill-bestowed on men of restless and turbulent dispositions. He had a great respect for the eminent reformers abroad, Calvin, Luther, Melancthon, Bucer, Peter Martyr, Bullinger, Zanchius, and others, with whom he had contracted a friendship during his exile, and always carried on a correspondence; and he was very instrumental in obtaining a settlement for the French protestants in their own way of worship, approaching to the Genevan, who were allowed to assemble in the Walloon church in Threadneedle-street, which has ever since been a French church.

, a. physician, astronomer, and mathematician, and like his countryman, friar Bacon, violently suspected of magic, lived in the fourteenth century, He studied at Merton college, Oxford; and, probably to escape the disagreeable consequences of such suspicions, went into France, where he devoted himself entirely to the study of medicine, first at Montpelier, and then at Marseilles. In this eity he fixed his residence, and lived by the practice of his profession, in which he acquired much skill and eminence. There is no greater proof of his genius, besides the imputations he laboured under in his youth, than his assiduously pursuing the method instituted by the Greek physicians, of investigating the nature and cause of the disease and the constitution of the patient. The time of his death is not known; but we are told that he was an old man in 1350, and that he had a son, who was first an abbot of canons regular at Marseilles, and at length arrived at the pontificate under the name of Urban V. Bale and Pits both give lists of his works, none of which are known to be extant.

, a man eminently learned in his day> and one of the revivers of literature, was born at Bristol in 1442, and educated at Winchester-school. He was elected thence to New college, Oxford, in 1467; and in 1479, presented by the warden and fellows to the rectory of Newton-Longville, in Buckinghamshire. But his residence being mostly at Oxford, the society of Magdalen college made him their divinity reader, about the beginning of Richard the Illd’s reign; and that king corning soon after to Oxford, he had the honour to hold a disputation before him, with which his majesty was so pleased, that he rewarded him graciously. In 1485 he was made a prebendary of Lincoln, and in 1488 he quitted his reader’s place at Magdalen college, in order to travel into foreign countries; for though he might be reckoned a great master of the Greek and Lati languages in England, where the former especially was then scarcely understood at all, yet he well knew that a more perfect knowledge of it might be attained; and accordingly he went into Italy, and studied there some time under Demetrius Chalcondyles and Politian. He returned to England, and fixed himself in Exeter college, at Oxford, in 1491, where he took the degree of B. D. Here too he publicly taught the Greek language, and was the first who introduced a better pronunciation of it than had been known in this island before. But the introduction of this language alarming many, as a most dangerous innovation, the university divided itself into two factions/distinguished by the appellation of Greeks and Trojans, who bore each other a violent animosity, and proceeded to open hostilities. Anthony Wood says, “I cannot but wonder when I think upon it, to what a strange ignorance were the scholars arrived, when, as they would by no means receive it, but rather scoff and laugh at it; some against the new pronunciation of it, which was endeavoured to be settled; others at the language itself, having not at all read any thing thereof. It is said that there were lately a company of good fellows (Cambridge men as 'tis reported) who, either out of hatred to the Greek tongue, or good letters, or merely to laugh and sport, joined together and called themselves Trojans: one, who was the senior, and wiser than the rest, called himself Priam, another Hector, a third Parys, and the rest by some ancient Trojan names who, after a jocular way, did oppose aa Grecians, the students of the Greek tongue.” In this situation Grocyn was, when Erasmus came ta Oxford; and if he was not this great man’s tutor, yet he certainly assisted him in attaining a more perfect knowledge of the Greek. He was, however, very friendly toErasmus, and did him many kind offices, as introducing him to archbishop Warham, &c. He also boarded him gratis in his house, although he was by no means in affluent circumstances. We cannot be surprized therefore that Erasmus speaks of him often in a strain which shews that he entertained the most sincere regard for him, as well as the highest opinion of his abilities, learning, and integrity. About 1590 he resigned his living, being then made master of Allhallows college, at Maidstone,in Kent, though he continued still to live mostly at Oxford. Grocyn had no esteem for Plato, but applied himself intensely to Aristotle, whose whole works he had formed a design of translating, in conjunction with William Latimer, Linacre, and More, but did not pursue it. While his friend Cotet was dean of St. Paul’s, Grocyn gave a remarkable evidence of the candour and ingenuousness of his temper. He read in St. Paul’s cathedral a public lecture upon the book of Dionysius Areopagita, commonly called “Hierarchia Ecclesiastica;” it being customary at that time for the public lecturers, both in the universities, and in the cathedral thurches, to read upon any book, rather than upon the scriptures, till dean Colet reformed that practice. Grocyn, in the preface to his lecture, declaimed with great warmth against those who either denied or doubted of the authority of the book on which he was reading. But after he had continued to read a few weeks, and had more thoroughly examined the matter, he entirely changed hi sentiments; and openly and candidly declared that he had been in an error; and that the said book, in his judgment, was spurious, and never written by him who, in the Acts of the Apostles, is called Dionysius the Areopagite. But when dean Colet had introduced the custom of reading lectures upon some part of the scriptures at his cathedral, he engaged Grocyn, according to Dr. Knight, as one of the most learned and able men he could meet with, in that useful employment.

Bishop Grosseteste was a severe student to the very end of life. He was a master of languages, of some that were not jhen generally known, and also of every branch of learning, both human and divine, as they were then usually studied and professed; and he improved many of them by the productions of his own pen. His erudition was truly multifarious, so that he may justly be said, both in respect of himself and his own acquirements, and of that general patronage and encouragement which he afforded the literati of his time, to stand at the head in this country at least, of all the learning of the age. His forte seems to have been logic, philosophy, and theology, and his knowledge of the scriptures was very intimate.

Amsterdam, almost as powerful singly as all Holland, favoured the Gomarists, and disapproved the toleration which the States wanted to introduce. These resolved therefore to send a deputation to that city, in order to reconcile them to their sentiments. Grotius was one of. these deputies: they received their instructions April 21, 1616; and, arriving at Amsterdam next day, met the town-council on the 23d, when Grotius was their spokesman. But neither his speech nor all his other endeavours could avail any thing. The burgomasters declared their pinion for a synod, and that they could not receive the cachet of 1614 without endangering the church, and risquing the ruin of their trade. The deputies wished to answer, but were not allowed. Grotius presented to the States on his return an account in writing of all that had passed at this deputation, and he flattered himself for some time with the hopes of good effects from it; hut his disappointment chagrined him so much, that he was seized with a violent fever, which had almost proved fatal. He was removed to Delft, where he recovered, but, being forbid to do any thing which required application, he wrote to Vossius, desiring his company, as the best restorative of his health. The time of his recovery he employed in examining the part he had acted in the present" disputes; and, the more he reflected on it, the less reason he had for altering his sentiments; and although he foresaw the danger he incurred, his resolution was, not to change his conduct, but to refer the event to Providence. The States of Holland, wholly employed in endeavouring to compound matters, came to a resolution, February 21, 1617, to make a rule or formula, to which both parties should be obliged to conform; and such an instrument was accordingly drawn up at their request by Grotius, who presented it to prince Maurice. But the project did not please him; he wanted a national synod, which was at length determined by the States General, and to be convoked in Holland at Dort. In the mean time the prince, who saw with the utmost displeasure several cities, agreeably to the permission given them by the particular States, levy a new militia, under the title of attendant soldiers, without his consent, engaged the States General to write to the provinces and magistrates of those cities, enjoining them to disband the new levies. This injunction not being complied with, he considered the refusal as a rebellion; concerted with the States General, that he should march in. person with the troops under his command, to get the attendant soldiers disbanded, depose the Arminian magistrates, and turn out the ministers of their party. He accordingly set out, accompanied by the deputies of the States^General, in 1618; and, having reduced the province of Gueldres, he was proceeding to Utrecht, when the States of Holland sent thither Grotius, with Hoogerbetz, pensionary of Leyden, to put that city into a posture of defence against him. But, their endeavours proving ineffectual, the prince reduced the place; and soon aftervyards sent Grotius and Hoogerbetz to prison in the castle at the Hague, where Barnevelt also was confined, August 29th this year. After this the States of Holland consented to the national synod, which was opened at Dort, Nov. 15, 1618, which, as is well known, ended in a sentence, condemning the five articles of the Arminians, and in imprisoning and banishing their ministers. This sentence was approved by the States General, July 2, 1619.

After the rising of that synod, our three prisoners were brought in order to their trial, the issue of which was the execution of Barnevelt, May 13, 1619. Five days after came on the trial of Grotius. He had been treated, as well as his fellow-prisoner, with inconceivable rigour during their imprisonment, and also while their cause was depending. He tells us himself, that, when they were known to be ill, it was concerted to examine them that they had not liberty to defend themselves that they were threatened and teazed to give immediate answers and not suffered to have their examinations read over to them. Grotius, having asked leave to write his defence, was allowed only five hours, and one sheet of paper; he was also told, that if he would own he had transgressed, and ask pardon, he might obtain his liberty; but, as he had nothing to reproach himself with, he would never take any step that might imply consciousness of guilt. His wife, his father, brother, and friends, all approved this resolution. His, sentence, after reciting the several reasons thereof, concludes thus: " For these causes, the judges, appointed to try this affair, administering justice in the name of the States General, condemn the said Hugo Groiius to perpetual imprisonment, and to be carried to the place appointed by the States General, there to be guarded with all precaution, and confined the rest of his days; and de-s clare his estate confiscated. Hague, May 18, 1619. In pursuance of this sentence he was carried from the Hague to the fortress of Louvestein near Gorcuni in South Holland, June 6, 1619, and 24 sols per day assigned for his maintenance, and as much for Hoogerbetz; but their respective wives declared they had enough to support their husbands, and that they chose to be without an allowance, which was considered as an affront. Grotius’s father asked leave to see his son, but was denied; they consented to admit his wife into Louvestein, but, if she came out, not to be suffered to return. However, in the sequel, it was granted that she might go abroad twice a week.

He had been above 18 months shut up at Louvesteih, when, January 11, 1620, Muys van-Halli, his declared enemy, who had been one of his judges, informed the States general, that he had advice from good authority, that their prisoner was seeking to make his escape. Some persons were sent to examine into this matter; but, notivithstanding all the inquiry that could be made, they found no reason to believe that he had contrived any means to escape. H s wife, however, was very industriously and ingeniously employed in contriving it, which she effected in the following manner. He had been permitted to borrow books of his friends, and when he had done with them they were carried back in a chest with his foul linen, which was sent to Gorcum to be washed. The first year his guards were very exact in examining the chest; but, being used to find nothing in it besides books and linen, they grew tired of searching, and even did not take the trouble to open it. His wife, observing their negligence, proposed to take advantage of it. She represented to her husband, that it was in his power to get out of prison when he pleased, if he would put himself into this chest; and not to endanger his health, she caused holes to be bored opposite where his face was to be, to breathe at, persuading him to try if he could continue shut up in that confined posture, as long as it would require to go from Louvestein to Gorcum. Finding it might be done, she resolved to seize the first favourable opportunity; which very soon offered. The commandant of Louvestein going to Heusden to raise recruits, she paid a visit to his lady, and told her in the course of conversation, that she was desirous of sending away a chest of books; for, her husband was so weak, that it gave her great uneasiness to see him study with such application. Having thus prepared the commandant’s wife, she returned to her husband’s apartment, and in concert with a valet and a maid who were in the secret, shut him up in the chest; and at the same time, that the people might not be surprised at not seeing him, she spread a report of his being ill. Two soldiers carried the chest; one of them, finding it was heavier than usual, said there must be “an Arminian in it.” Grotius’s wife, who was present, said with great coolness, “There are indeed Arminian books in it.” The chest was brought down on a ladder with great difficulty; the soldier insisted on its being opened, to see wiiat was in it; he even went and informed the commandant’s wife, that the weight of the chest gave him reason to suspect the contents, and that it would be proper to have it opened. She told him that Grotius’ s wife had said there was nothing but books in and that they might carry it to the boat. It is even said that a soldier’s wife, who was present, reminded them there was more than one example of prisoners making their escape in boxes. In this way, however, eiither by negligence, or connivance, which there seems no reason to suspect, the chest was brought down, and put into the boat; and Grotius’s maid, who was in the secret, had orders to go to Gorcum with it, and put it into a house there. When it came to Gorcum, they wanted to put it on a sledge; but the maid telling the boatman that there were some brittle things in it, and begging of him to take care how it was carried, it was put on a horse, and carried by two chairmen to David Dazelaor’s, a friend of Grotius, and brother-in-law to Erpenius; and, when every body was gone, the maid opened the chest. Grotius had felt no inconvenience in it, though its length was not above three feet and a half. He got out, dressed himself like a mason with a rule and a trowel; and was secretly conveyed in this disguise to Valvic in Brabant. Here he made himself known to some Arminians, and hired a carriage to Antwerp; and, at Antwerp, he alighted at the house of Nicolas Grevincovius, who had been formerly a minister at Amsterdam., but did not make himself known to any other person. It was on March 22, 1621, that he thus recovered his liberty.

As soon as he could thtis depend upon an establishment, he resolved to renounce his country, and to make it known by some public act, that he considered himself as no longer a Dutchman. In this spirit he sent his brother letters for the prince of Orange and the Dutch to that purport, July 13 of this year: he likewise wrote to Rotterdam, whick had deferred nominating a pensionary after the sentence passed against him, that they might proceed to an election, since they must no longer look upon him as a Dutchman. He set out from Mentz on his embassy to France in the beginning of 1636, and made his public entry into Paris, March 2, and was introduced to Louis XIII. on the sixth. The great business of this embassy was to obtain the French king’s assistance to Sweden against the imperialists, in transacting which, he always supported with great firmness the rights and honours belonging to the rank of an ambassador. He continued in that character in -France till 1644, when he was recalled at his own request. In order to his return, having obtained a passport through Holland, he embarked at Dieppe, and arrived at Amsterdam in 1645, where he was extremely well received, and entertained at the public expence. That city fitted out a vessel to carry him to Hamburgh, where he was, May 16, this year. He went next day to Lubeck, and thence to Wismar, where count Wrangle, admiral of the Swedish fleet, gave him a splendid entertainment, and afterwards sent a man of war with him to Calmar, whither the chancellor sent a gentleman with his coach to bring him to Suderacher. He continued there about a fortnight with the chancellor and other ambassadors, who treated him with great honours. Returning to Calmar, he went by land to Stockholm, whither queen Christina came from Upsal to see him.

The late bishop Kurd’s mode of accounting for the apparent inconsistencies in the religious principles of Grotius, is the most favourable we have yet seen, and not improbable. “Grotius,” says that learned prelate, " is justly esteemed among the ablest and most learned men of an age that abounded in ability and learning. Besides his other shining talents, his acquaintance with history was extensive; and his knowledge of Scripture profound. And yet with two such requisites for unlocking the true sense of the prophetic writings, this excellent man undertook to prove in form, that the pope was not antichrist. The account of this mischance is as extraordinary as the mischance itself. The moral qualities of Grotius were still more admirable than his intellectual; and its these qualities we shall find the true spring of his unhappy and misapplied pains on the subject before us. He was in his own nature just, candid, benevolent, to a supreme degree; and the experience of an active turbulent life had but fortified him the more in a love of those pacific virtues. He was, on principle, a sincere and zealous Christian; and consequently impressed With a clue sense of that exalted charity which is the characteristic of that religion but he had seen and felt much of the mischiefs which proceed from theological quarrels and thus every thing concurred to make him a friend to peace, and above all, to peace among Christians. An union of the catholic and protestant churches seemed necessary to this end; and the apparent candour, whether real or affected, of some learned persons, whom he had long known and valued in the church of Rome, drew him into the belief that such a project was not impracticable. Henceforth it became the ruling object of his life; and permitting himself too easily to conclude that the protestant doctrine of antichrist was the sole or principal obstruction to the union desired, he bent all the efforts of his wit and learning to discredit and overthrow that doctrine. Thus was this virtuous man betrayed by the wisdom and equity of his own character; and I know not if the observation of the moral poet can be so justly applied to any other:

, a learned divine among the disseners, was descended from the Groves of Wiltshire, and the Jlowes of Devonshire. His grandfather Grove was ejected from a living in Devonshire for nonconformity in 1662; his father suffered much in the same cause for lay-nonconformity under Charles and James II. The eminent piety of Mr. Rowe, his grandfather by the mother’s side, may be known by the account of his life by Mr. Theophilus Gale. His father, in particular, filled a life of eighty years honourably and usefully, and died universally esteemed and lamented. From such parents our author was born at Taunton, in Somersetshire, January 4, 1683, and at fourteen years of age, being possessed with a sufficient stock of classical literature, he went through a course of jacademical learning under the rev. Mr. Warren, of Taunton, who was for many years at the head of a flourishing academy. Having finished here his course of philosophy and divinity, he removed to London, and studied some time under the rev. Mr. Rowe, to whom he was nearly related. At this time he contracted a friendship with several person^ of merit, and particularly with Dr. Watts, which continued till his death, though they differed in their judgment upon several points.

In 1725 he lost his partner in the academy, the rev. Mr. James; and was now obliged to take the students in, divinity under his direction. In the execution of this, task he confined himself to no system in divinity, but directed his pupils to the best writers on natural and revealed religion, and an impartial consideration of the chief controversies. He likewise succeeded Mr. James in his pastoral charge at Fullwood^ near Taunton, in which he continued till his death. In 1730 he published “The Evidence of our Saviour’s Resurrection considered,” and the same year, “Some Thoughts concerning the Proof of a future State from Reason,” in answer to the rev. Mr. Hallet, junior, which drew him into a dispute on the point with that divine. In this controversy he was thought to disparage the necessity of revelation in regard to that proof. In 1732 he printed “A Discourse concerning the Nature and Design of the Lord’s Supper,” where he set that institution in the same light with bishop Hoadly. In 173-1he published, without his name, “Wisdom the first Spring of Action in the Deity,” which was animadverted on, as to some particulars, by Mr. Balguy, who, however, allowed the discourse in general to abound in solid remarks and sound reasonings. In 1736 he published “A Discourse on saving Faith.” The same year he met with a heavy affliction, in the death of his wife; and a little more than a year after this, he died himself; for, having preached on February 19, 1737-8, and with such an uncommon flow of spirits as he said he could hardly govern, he was violentlyseized at night with a fever, which carried him off upon the 27th. His friends erected a handsome monument over his grave, on which is a Latin inscription composed by the late Dr. Ward, rhetoric-professor at Gresham-college, who has also obliged the world with an English version of it. Besides the works already mentioned, he published many sermons upon several occasions, and also a volume of (i Miscellanies in prose and verse.“After his death came out by subscription his” Posthumous Works,“1740, in 4 vols. 8vo. Gruchius, or Grouciii (Nicholas), an eminent antiquary in the sixteenth century, descended from a noble family of Rouen, was the first who explained Aristotle in Greek. He taught with reputation at Paris, Bourdeaux, and Coimbra, and, on his return to France, went to Rochelle, where a college was intended to be established, and where he died in January 1572, leaving many works. The most known are, a translation of F. L. de Castagneda’s” History of the Indies,“Paris, 1554, 4to; a treatise” De Comitiis Romanorum," 1555, fol.; and some pieces against Sigonius, fol. which Sigonius did not answer till he heard of the author’s death.

After taking his degree, he went to Antwerp, to his fa ther, who had returned thither as soon as the States had possessed themselves of it; but, when the city was threatened with a siege by the duke of Parma in 15S4-, was sent to France, where he resided some years, and then visited other countries. The particular route and circumstances of his travels afterwards are not known; but it appears that he read public lectures upon the Classics at Rostock, particularly on Suetonius. He was in Prussia, when Christian, duke of Saxony, offered him the chair of hi story -professor in the university of Wittemburg; which place he enjoyed but a few months: for, upon the death of that prince, his successors desiring the professors to subscribe the act of concord on pain of forfeiting their places, Gruterus chose rather to resign than subscribe a confession of faith which he could not reconcile to his conscience. He was treated with particular seventy on this occasion for, while two others who were deprived on the same account, had half a year’s salary allowed them by way of gratification, according to the custom of those countries, with regard to persons honourably discharged; yet in the case of Gruterus, they did not defray even the expences of his journey. Where he went immediately after this does not appear; but we are told, that, being at Padua at the time of Riccoboni’s death, that professor’s place was offered to him, together with liberty of conscience: the salary too was very considerable, yet he refused all these advantages. He was apprehensive that so profitable and honourable an employment would expose him to the attacks of envy, and he would not submit to the bare exercise of his religion in private. He was therefore much better pleased with an invitation to Heidelberg, where he filled the professor’s chair with great reputation for many years; and, in 1602, had the direction of that famous library, which was afterwards carried to Rome.

, surnamed Veronese, the first branch of a family celebrated in the republic of letters, and one of the revivers of literature, was born at Verona in 1370. After being taught Latin by John of Ravenna, he went to Constantinople, with the sole view of learning Greek in the school of Emanuel Chrysoloras, who had not then come to Italy. Pontico Virunio, in his life of Chrysoloras, says that Guarino was of an advanced age when he set out for Constantinople, and that he returned to Italy with a large collection of Greek manuscripts, the loss of which by shipwreck so affected him, that his hair turned white in one night; but Maffei and Apostolo Zeno have justly considered this as a fable. It appears, on the other hand, on comparing various circumstances, that Guarino was very young when he went into Greece, and was only twenty years of age when he returned. After this return he first kept school at Florence, and afterwards successively at Verona, Padua, Bologna, Venice, and Ferrara, in which last city he resided longest. Nicolas III. of Este had invited him thither in 1429 to superintend the education of his son Lionel. Six or seven years after, he was appointed professor of Greek and Latin in the university of Ferrara. This office he filled until the assembling of the grand council, to which the emperor John Paleologus came, accompanied with several Greeks, who found Guarino. sufficient employment, as he mentions in his letters, and on the council being removed to Florence, he accompanied them thither as interpreter between the Latins and Greeks. He returned again to Ferrara, where he held his professorship until his death in 1460. His principal works consist of Latin translations from Greek authors; particularly of many of Plutarch’s lives, part of Plutarch’s morals, and Strabo’s geography. Of this author he at first translated only ten books, by order of pope Nicholas V.; the other seven were translated by Gregory of Typhernuin, and in this state the work was first printed at Rome in 1470, folio. But, at the request of the Venetian senator Marcello, Guarino made a translation of these seven books, of which there are manuscript copies at Venice, Modena, &c. Maffei, in his “Verona Illustrata,” mentions also a translation of the whole seventeen in the hand-writing of Guarino, which was at one time in the library of the senator Soranzo at Venice. To his translation of Plutarch’s lives, he added those of Aristotle and Plato. He also compiled a Greek grammar, “Em. Chrysolorae erotemata lingusc Graecse, in compendium redacta, a Guarino Veronesi,” Ferrar. 1509, 8vo and a Latin grammar, “Grammatical institutiones,” without date or place, but printed at Verona, 1487, and reprinted in 1540, the model, says Maffei, from which all others have been taken. Annexed are some lesser treatises, “Carmina ditiferentialia,” “Liber de Diphtongis,” &c. Guarino also wrote commentaries or notes on various authors, both Greek and Latin, among the latter on Cicero’s orations and Persius’s satires, and was the author of various Latin orations delivered at Verona, Ferrara, and other places, and of some Latin poems, and a great number of letters which have not been printed. He was the first who recovered the poems of Catullus, a manuscript which was mouldering in a garret, and almost destroyed, and rendered the whole legible, with the exception of a very few verses. If it be thought that even all this is insufficient to justify the high reputation which Guarino enjoyed in his lifetime, and for ages afterwards, we must add that, independently of rendering these services to the cause of learning, which were of great importance at its revival, Guarino derived no small share of fame from the vast number of scholars whom he formed, with a like taste for classical literature, which they dispersed throughout all Europe. Guarino, likewise, was one of the most indefatigable student* of his time. Even in old age his memory was extraordinary, and his application incessant. He took little nourishment and little sleep, and rarely went abroad, yet he preserved his strength and faculties to the last. By his wife he had at least twelve children, two of whom followed his steps Jerome became secretary to Alphonso, king of Naples and Baptist, or Battista, rather better known, was professor of Greek and Latin at Ferrara, like his fathev, and like him educated some eminent scholars, among whom were Giraldi and Aldus Manutius. He left a collection of Latin poetry, “Baptists Guarini Veronensis poemata Latina,” Modena, 1496; a treatise on study, “De ordine docendi ac studendi,” without place or date; but there is a subsequent edition of Heidelberg, 1489. He wrote also other treatises, translations from the Greek, discourses, and letters, which latter remain in manuscript. It is to him we owe the first edition of the Commentaries of Servius on Virgil; and he assisted his father in recovering and making legible the manuscript of Catullus above mentioned.

, a learned Benedictine, was born in 1641, at Rouen. While he was assisting Delfau in the revisal of St. Augustine’s works, he was accused of being concerned in a book entitled “L'abbé Commandataire,” and confined at Ambournay in Bugey. He took advantage of this exile to make a diligent search for ancient Mss. and discovered a great number; among others, St. Augustine’s book against Julian, entitled “Opus imperfectum,” of which only two copies were at that time known, and sent an exact copy of it to his brethren at Paris. Guerard was afterwards sent to Fescamp, and then to Rouen, where he died, Jan. 2, 1715. He left “Abrege* de la Bible, en forme de Questions et de Re*ponses familieres,” 2 vols. If mo. This work is esteemed, and has gone through several editions.

, whose proper name was John Francis Barbieri, an eminent artist, was born at Cento, a village subject to Ferrara, in 1590, and learnt the principles of the art from his countrymen Cremonirii and Benedetto Gennari. Tradition classes him with the disciples of the Carracci but neither his age, his habits, nor his style, make it probable that he ever belonged to that school for of three manners which he successively adopted, it is difficult to say which differs most from its precepts. The first, and least known, is an imitation of Caravagio, abrupt with vivid lights, and deep shades, without much study in faces or extremities; flesh of a yellow cast, and little amenity of colour. From this he passed to the second, his best and most valued manner, gradually improving it by observation, and the help of the Venetian, Bolognese, and Roman schools, by connexion with the best scholars of the Carracci, and the friendship of Caravagio, whose style still forms its basis in bold contrasts of light and shade, but sweetly united, and magically relieved; like Caravagio, he obliterates the outline, but leaves him far behind in elegance and dignity of feature. His females, insidiously charming, dart a sting from their veiled eyes, though his men generally exhibit little more than what the model could afford; youthful vulgarity, emaciated age.

, a Spanish writer, was born in the province of Alaba, towards the end of the fifteenth century, and was brought up at court. After the death of Isabella, queen of Castile, he turned Franciscan monk, but afterwards having made himself known at court, became preacher and historiographer to Charles V. He was much admired for his politeness, eloquence, and great parts, but his preaching and conversation proved very superior to his writing. His style was found to be extravagantly figurative, and full of antitheses, but this was trifling, compared with his notions of writing history, and the liberty he took to, falsify whatever he pleased, and to advance as matter of fact the inventions of his own brain, and when censured for it, alleged by way of excuse, that no history, excepting the Holy Scripture, is certain enough to be credited. Being in the emperor’s retinue he had an opportunity of visiting a great part of Europe, an4 was made bishop of Guadix, in the kingdom of Granada, and then bishop of Mondonedo, in Galicia. He died in 1544, or 1548. He was the author of several works in Spanish, the most famous of which is his “Dial of Princes, or Life of Marcus Aurelius Antoninus,” which has been translated into all the languages of Europe. Vossius says it “has nothing in it of Antoninus, but is all a fiction, and the genuine offspring of Guevara himself, who scandalously imposes upon the reader, plainly against the duty of an honest man, but especially of a bishop. In the mean time he has many things not unuseful nor unpleasant, especially to a prince, whence it is entitled The Dial of Princes’.” Those who may be supposed to have spoken of Guevara in the most indulgent manner, have yet been forced to set him in a most scandalous light. “It deserves our pity rather than our censure,” says Nicolas Antonio, “that a writer of such fame should think himself at liberty to forge ancient facts, and to play with the history of the world, as with Æsop’s Fables or Lucian’s Monstrous Stories.” Among Guevara’s works must be ranked his “Epistles,” with which some have been so charmed, that they have not scrupled to call them Golden Epistles; but Montaigne says, “Whoever gave them this title, had a very different opinion of them from what I have, and perhaps saw more in them than I do.” Bayle had such a contempt for Guevara as an author, as to speak with surprize of “the eagerness of foreigners in translating some of his works into several languages.” Mr. Hay ley, however, remarks, that if we may judge of his personal character from his “Letters,” he appears to have been an amiable man. In one he reproves a female relation, with good nature, for intemperate sorrow on the death of a little dog and in another he draws the character of a true friend, with great energy of sentiment and expression. One of Guevara’s sayings, that heaven is filled with those that have done good works, and hell with those that have resolved to do them," has been, under a different form of expression, ascribed to other writers.

, a French writer on military affairs, was born at Montauban, Nov. 12, 1743. His father, who was a very intelligent officer, ook great pains in forming his son for the army, in which, Design he so perfectly succeeded, that at the school at which young Guibert was placed, his name was honourably quoted as an example to others, long after he left it. At the age of thirteen he followed his father to the field, and served six campaigns in the German war; three as a captain in the regiment d'Auvergne, and the three other upon the staff, where he gave frequent proofs of his judgment and spirit. After the peace in 1763, he assiduously devoted himself to the study of the theory of his profession till the expedition to Corsica took place, where he obtained the rank of colonel for his services in the action of Ponte Nuovo, and at the end of the campaign was rewarded with the cross of St. Louis. In 1770, two years after his return to France, he published his celebrated “Essai general de Tactique,” a work which though known and admired over all Europe, drew upon its author the envy too often attendant on merit, which embittered a great part of his days. But his pride disdaining to answer his enemies, as much as his mild spirit disliked controversy, he therefore determined to travel, and leave his work to answer for itself. So says his panegyrist, without informing us that his unsparing censures and conceited style had proyoked the hostilities of those enemies.

, an Italian poet, was born at Pavia^ in Milan, 1650, and sent to Parma at sixteen years of age. His uncommon talents for poetry recommended him so powerfully at court, that he received great encouragement from the duke. He composed some pieces at that time, which, though they savoured of the bad taste thei> prevailing, yet shewed genius, and a capacity for better things. He had afterwards a desire to see Rome, and, in 1683, going thither by the permission of the duke of Parma, and being already known by his poems y found no difficulty in being introduced to persons of the first distinctiort. Among others, Christina queen of Sweden wished to see him; and was so pleased with a poem, which he composed at her request, that she had a great desire to retain him at her court. The term allowed him by the duke being expired, he returned to Parma; but the queen having signified her desire to that prince’s resident at Rome, and the duke being acquainted with it, Guidi was sent back to Rome in May 1685.

The life of Dr. Guild, suitably to its benevolent progress, terminated with acts of charity. By his last will, written in 1657, he bequeathed seven thousand marks to be secured on land, and the yearly profit applied to the maintenance of poor orphans. His library he left to the unU versity of St. Andrew’s, except one valuable manuscript, supposed to be the original of the memorable letter from the states of Bohemia and Moravia, to the council of Constance, 1415, relative to John Huss and Jerome of Prague. This Dr. Guild bequeathed to the university of Edinburgh, He died in August 1657. His widow so far followed his benevolent example, that by her munificence are still maintained, six students of philosophy, four scholars at the public school, two students of divinity, six poor widows, and six poor men’s children. Before her death she sent up to Dr. John Owen a manuscript of her husband’s, who had intended to have published it with a dedication to that celebrated nonconformist, although not personally known to him. Dr. Owen accordingly published it, under the title ft The Throne of David, or an exposition of the Second (Book) of Samuel," Oxford, 1659, 4to; with a recommendatory preface, which shews how little there was of difference in religious opinion between Dr. Guild and the party that thought him unworthy to continue his ministerial labours.

, a French historian, was born about 1625, at Thiers in Auvergne, and became the first historiographer of the academy of painting and sculpture to which office he was elected in 1682. H& died at Paris, April 6, 1705. He was author of many works of considerable reputation, as “Athene Ancienne et Nouvelle;” “Lacedemone Ancienne et Nouvelle,” both printed in 1675, 12mo, and known to be his own productions, though he pretended to have taken them from the papers of his younger brother, who had travelled in that country. He published also “A History of the grand viziers’ Caprogji,” c. “The Life of Mahomet II.;” “The History of Castrucio Castracani,” translated from the Italian of Machiavel; “Les Arts de l‘homme d’Epee, ou Dietionnaire du Genlilhomme,” 1670, in two volumes. His “Ancient and modern Athens” involved him in a serious dispute with Spon, in which he was said to have gained the victory, as far as style and mannerly writing were concerned.

, an English divine, was born at Ablond’s or Abbey-load’s court, near Gloucester, in 1653, and entered in 1669 a commoner of Oriel-college, Oxford, which he changed for All souls, where he was chosen fellow a little before he took his first degree in arts, April 4, 1674. He commenced M. A. in 1677, and entered into orders; but marrying in 1680, he resigned his fellowship. However, he still continued at Oxford, and took a house in St. Michael’s parish, resolving not to leave the university, on account of his studies, which he prosecuted with indefatigable industry, and soon became a great master of the oriental learning and languages. He translated into English, and illustrated with a commentary, Dr. Bernard’s work entitled “Misnae pars ordinis prim”! Zeraim Tituli septem,“1690, 4to, and a tract” De Victimis humanis,“8vo, and was preparing an edition of Abulfeda’s Geography, when he was seized with the small-pox, which carried him off' Sept. 3, 1684, aged only thirty-one. Thomas Smith gives him the title of” Vir longe eruditissimus,“and observes, that his death was a prodigious loss to the republic of letters; and the editors of the” Acta Eruditorum“style him a” person of great learning, and the immortal ornament of the university of Oxford." He was buried at St. Michael’s church in that city, where a monument was erected to his memory by his widow, with a Latin inscription. He left issue a son John, who, being bred to the army, raised himself to the highest posts there, and was well known in the military world, by the title of General Guise. He died in 1765, and bequeathed his large collection of paintings to Christ-church Oxford, where he was educated, and where they are now placed in the lower library.

, an Italian poet of the thirteenth century, was usually called Fra Guittone, as belonging to a religious and military order, now extinct, called the cavalieri gaudenti, established in 1208, during the barbarous crusade carried on against the Albigenses. This abominable massacre, however, was over before Guittone became a member. Little else is known of his history, except that he founded the monastery of St. Mary at Florence, and died in the same year, 1293. The Florence “Collection of the ancient Italian poets,” 1527, contain his poetical works, amounting to about thirty sonnets and canzoni, partly on subjects of love, and partly of devotion, or of both mixed. In most of these is a harmony, taste, and turn of sentiment, more polished than is to be found among his predecessors, and which Petrarch has evidently studied, and sometimes imitated. His letters, published by Bottari, “Lettere de fra Guittone d'Arezzo con note,” Rome, 1745, are curious, not perhaps for intrinsic merit, but as the first specimens of Italian letter-writing.

, a German lawyer and historian, was born February 25, 1671, near Nuremberg, and was the son of a clergyman, who died 1689. He was successively professor of philosophy, rhetoric, and the law of nature and nations, at Halle; and frequently consulted on public affairs at Berlin, where his talents were so well known, that he obtained the title of privy-counsellor for his services on various occasions. Gundling was indefatigable, had an excellent memory, great wit, vivacity, and eloquence; but his warmest admirers wished that his numerous writings had contained less satire, and more moderation and politeness. He died rector of the university of Halle, December 16, 1729, leaving several valuable works on literature, history, law, and politics: the principal are, 1.“Historia Philosophic moralis,” 8vo. 2. “Otia,” or a collection of dissertations on various physical, moral, political, and historical subjects, 3 vols. 8vo. 3. “De jure oppignorati Territorii,” 4to. 4. “Status naturalis Hobbesii in corpore juris civilis defensus et defendendus,” 4to. 5. “De statu Reipublicae Germanicse sub Conrado I.” 4to. Ludwig has refuted this work in his “Germania Princeps.” 6. “Gundlingiana,” in German. 7. “Commentaria de Henrico Aucupe,” 4to. 8. “Via ad veritatem,” or a course of philosophy, 3 vols. 8vo. Gundling had a great share in the “Observationes Hallenses,” an excellent collection in 11 vols. 8vo.

, an English mathematician, was of Welsh extraction, from a family at Gunter’s-town, in Brecknockshire but his father being settled in the county of Hereford, had this son born to him there in 1581. As he was a gentleman possessed of a handsome fortune, he thought proper to give him a liberal education, to which end he was placed by Dr. Busby at Westminster-school, where he was admitted a scholar on the foundation, and elected student of Christ-church, Oxford, in 1599. Having taken both his degrees in arts at the regular times, he entered into orders, and became a preacher in 1614, and proceeded B. D. November 23, 1615. But genius and inclination leading him chiefly to mathematics, he applied early to that study; and about 1606, merited the title of an inventor by the new projection of his sector, which he then described, together with its use, in a Latin treatise; and several of the instruments were actually made according to his directions. These being greatly approved, as being more extensively useful than any that had appeared before, on account of the greater number of lines upon them, and those better contrived, spread our author’s fame universally their uses also were more largely and clearly shewn than had been done by others and though he did not print them, yet many copies being transcribed and dispersed abroad, carried his reputation along with them, recommended him to the patronage of the earl of Bridgewater, brought him into the acquaintance of the celebrated Mr. Oughtred, and Mr. Henry Briggs, professor of geometry at Gresham; and thus, his fame daily increasing the more he became known, he was preferred to the astronomy-chair at Gresham-college, on March 6, 1619.

, a miscellaneous writer and compiler, whose name is now chiefly preserved by a geographical grammar, which it is said he did not write, was a gentleman descended from an ancient family, being the representative of the Guthries of Haukerton, in the county of Angus, Scotland. He was born at Brichen in that county in 1708, and educated at King’s college, Aberdeen, where he took his degrees, and followed the profession of a schoolmaster. He is said to have removed to London, in consequence of a love-affair, which created some disturbance in his family; others report that having but a small patrimony, and being an adherent of the unfortunate house of Stuart, he could not accept of any office in the state; he came therefore to London, and employed his talents and learning as, what he himself calls, “an author by profession.” His talents and learning were not of the inferior kind, when he chose to employ them leisurely; but he wrote hastily, and often in need, and seems to have cared little for his reputation, by lending his name frequently where he did not contribute with his pen. Among his first employments was that of compiling the parliamentary debates for the Gentleman’s Magazine, before Dr, Johnson had undertook that business; for this purpose Guthrie sometimes attended the house, but more frequently had to depend on very slight information. Connecting himself terwards with the booksellers, he compiled a variety of work among which are “A History of the English Peerage,” “History of the World,” 12 vols. 8vo, “A History of England,” “History of Scotland,” 10 vols. 8vo, and the well-known “Geographical Grammar,” said to have been really compiled by Knox the bookseller. Besides these, he translated “Quintilian,” 3 vols. 8vo, “Cicero’s Offices,” 8vo, and “Cicero’s Epistles to Atticus,” 2 vols. 12mo. Of his original compositions we have heard only of a beautiful poem, “The Eagle and Robin Red-breast,” in the collection of poems called the “Union,” where, however, it is said to be written by Archibald Scott, before 1600; “The Friends, a sentimental history,” 1754, 2 vols. 12mo; and “Remarks on English Tragedy,” a pamphlet. He was engaged, however, in many political papers and pamphlets, to which his name did not appear; and in 1745-6, received a pension of 200l. from government, for the services of his pen, which was continued during his life. In 1762 he renewed the offer of his services to the minister of the day, and they probably were accepted. He had the pen of a ready writer, and his periodical essays were perhaps his best. Much was expected from his “Peerage,” in which he was assisted by Mr. Ralph Bigland, each individual article being submitted to the inspection of the representative of the noble family treated of; yet, notwithstanding all this care, the work abounds with errors, contradictions, and absurdities His “History of England” merits greater praise, and had at least the honour of irritating Horace Wai pole to a gross abuse of Guthrie, because he had anticipated some of Walpole’s opinions concerning Richard III. Guthrie wrote at that time in the Critical Review, and pointed out his own discoveries. Boswell informs us, that Dr. Johnson esteemed Guthrie enough to wish that his life should be written. This, however, was neglected when the means of information were attainable. He died March I', 177O, and was interred in Marybone burial-ground, with a monument and inscription against the east wall.

, called also Gænsfleisch de Sulgeloch, the reputed inventor of the art of printing, was born at Mentz, of noble and wealthy parents, about 1400. In 1427 he came to reside at Strasburgh a merchant, but appears to have returned to Mentz in 1430, and to have been a man of property in 1434. Between this and the year 1439 he had conceived and perhaps made some trials of the art of printing with metal types. In the archives of the city of Mentz, Schoepflin discovered a document of a process carried on by Guttenberg against one George Dritzehen, from which we learn that the former had promised to make the latter acquainted with a secret art that he had recently discovered. In the same document mention is made of four forms kept together by two screws, or press-spindles, and of letters and pages being cut up and destroyed, to prevent any person from discovering the art. The ablest writers have, however, differed upon the subject of the materials with which Guttenberg at first printed. Schoepflin supposed them to have been metal; Fournier, Meerman, and Fischer, were of opinion that they were composed of wood. In the years 1441-2 Guttenberg lived at Strasburg, as a wealthy man, and continued in the same place till 1446, when he returned again to Mentz, and seems to have opened his mind fully tc Fust, a goldsmith of the same place (See Fust), and prevailed on him to advance large sums of money in order to make more complete trials of the art. Between 1450 and 1455, the celebrated Bible of 637 leaves, the first important specimen of printing with metal types, was executed between Guttenberg and Fust. Exclusively of the Bible, Guttenberg is supposed to have printed some other works, but there is no book whatever extant with his name subscribed. He died about the latter end of 1467. More ample information and discussion on the invention of this noble art, and the claims of Guttenberg, may be found in Oberlin’s “Essai sur les annales de la vie de Jean Gutenberg,” 1801; Fischer’s “Essai sur les monumens Typographiques de Gutenberg,” 1802, 4to Danou’s “Analyse des opinions diverses sur l'origine de Plmprimerie,” 1803, Svojand the better known works of Schoepflin, Meerman, Fournier, Heinecken, and Lambinet.

, the Ovid of Wales, and one of the most famous Welsh bards, was born in 1340 at Brogydin, in the county of Cardigan. He was brought up in the family of Llewelyn ap Guilym Fychan, styled lord of Cardigan, at Emlyn, until he was fifteen years of age; at which period he removed, after a short stay with his parents, and settled as steward and private tutor in the family of Ivor Hael. Like other itinerant bards of that age, he often visited different parts of the principality, and was so universally admired, that he has been claimed by the men of Anglesea as their countryman; and was generally known by the name of David of Glamorgan, and the nightingale of Teivi vale, in Cardiganshire. He died about 1400. Excepting music and a few Latin words, which he might pick up at mass, it cannot be ascertained from his works, that he had any acquaintance with the sciences or learned languages; for his poems consist chiefly of lively descriptions of nature, written in pure unadulterated Welsh. His “Poems” were published in 1792, 8vo, by Mr. Owen Jones and Mr. William Owen, who think that in invention, harmony, perspicuity, and elegance of language, Gwilym has not been excelled by any of his successors. A translation, however, is yet wanting to enable the English reader to appreciate his merits.

, a pious and learned doctor of the society of the Sorbonne, was born at Blois, in 1636. He was successively grand vicar of Lu^on, Auxerre, Verdun, and Chalons-sur-Marne; in all which dioceses he was universally esteemed for his virtue, learning, and zealous support of ecclesiastical discipline. He afterwards retired to the Sorbonne, and employed the rest of his life in deciding cases of conscience, and died there April 7, 1718. M. Habert left a complete System of Divinity, 7 vols. 12mo, much valued for accuracy and solidity; but the additions made to it since his death were not acceptable to his church, and were complained of by Feneion, as inclining to Jansenianism. He published in his life-time a defence of this system, and “La Pratique de la Penitence,” 12mo, best known by the title of “Pratique de Verdun,” of which there have been many additions.

When rector of St. Andrew’s, having soon after the restoration, received notice of the interment of a dissenter belonging to his parish, he got the burial-office by heart. As he was a great master of elocution, and was himself always affected with the propriety and excellence of the composition of that service, he delivered it with such emphasis and grace as touched the hearts of every one present, and especially of the friends of the deceased, who unanimously declared they had never heard a finer discourse. But their astonishment was great, when they were told that it was taken from our liturgy, a book which, though they had never read, they had been taught to regard with contempt and detestation. This story, but without the name of Dr. Hacket, for which we are indebted to Mr. Granger, is circumstantially told in bishop Sprat’s excellent “Discourse to his Clergy,” 1695. The worthy bishop Bull, when a parish priest, is known to have practised the same honest art with like success, in using other offices of the liturgy.

, a learned English divine, was the son of a merchant in Exeter, and born there in 1579. After a proper education in classical literature, he was admitted of St. Alban’s-hall, in Oxford, in 1595, where he became so noted a disputant and orator, that he was unanimously elected fellow of Exeter college at two years standing. He then studied philosophy and divinity, and having received holy orders, travelled abroad. In 1610 he was admitted to the reading of the sentences, and in 1611 took his degrees in divinity. He was afterwards made chaplain to prince Charles, and archdeacon of Surrey, in 1616; but never rose to any higher dignity, on account of the zealous opposition he made to the match of the infanta of Spain with the prince his master. Wood relates the story thus: After Hakewill had written a small tract against that match, not without reflecting on the Spaniard, he caused it to be transcribed in a fair hand, and then presented it to the prince. The prince perused it, and shewed it to the king; who, being highly offended at it, caused the author to be imprisoned, in August 1621; soon after which, being released, he was dismissed from his attendance on the prince. He was afterwards elected rector of Exeter college, but resided very little there, although he proved a liberal benefactor to the college; for, the civil war breaking out, he retired to his rectory of Heanton near Barnstaple in Devonshire, and there continued to the time of his death in 1649. He wrote several things, enumerated by Wood; but his principal work, and that for which he is most known, is “An Apology or Declaration of the Power and Providence of God in the Government of the World, proving that it doth not decay, &c.” in four books, 1627. To which were added two more in the third edition, 1635, in folio.

, an eminent naval historian, was descended from an ancient family at Eyton or Yetton, in Herefordshire, and born about 1553. He was trained up at Westminster school; and, in 1570, removed to Christ church college in Oxford. While he was at school, he used to visit his cousin Richard Hakluyt, of Eyton, esq. at his chambers in the Middle Temple, a gentleman well known and esteemed, not only by some principal ministers of state, but also by the most noted persons among the mercantile and maritime part of the kingdom, as a great encourager of navigation, and the improvement of trade, arts, and manufactures. At this gentleman’s chambers young Hakluyt met with books or' cosmography, voyages, travels, and maps; and was so pleased with them, that he resolved to direct his studies that way, to which he was not a little encouraged by his cousin. For this purpose, as soon as he got to Oxford, he made himself master of the modern as well as ancient languages; and then read over whatever printed or written discourses of voyages and discoveries, naval enterprizes, and adventures of all kinds, he found either extant in Greek^ Latin, Italian, Spanish, Portuguese, French, or English. By such means he became so conspicuous in this new branch of science, that he was chosen to read public lectures on naval matters at Oxford, and was the first who introduced maps, globes, spheres, and other instruments of the art, into the common schools. The: zeal and knowledge he displayed made him acquainted with and respected by the principal sea-commanders, merchants, and manners of our nation; and^ though it was but a few years after that he went beyond sea, yet his fame travelled thither long before him. He held a correspondence with the learned in these matters abroad, as with Ortelius, the king of Spain’s cosmographer, Mercator, &c.

the historian of China, was born at Paris, Feb. 1, 1674, and entered into the society of the Jesuits. In 1708 he was removed to one of their houses in Paris, where he was employed in collecting and publishing the letters received from their missionaries abroad. He was also secretary to father Tellier, the king’s confessor, and director of the corporation of artisans. In the latter part of his life he was much afflicted with the ague, but bore it with great resignation. He was a man of an amiable temper, and of great zeal in his profession. He died at Paris, Aug. 18, 1743. He published various complimentary Latin poems, and some pious works; but was principally known for his share in the *' Lettres edifiantes et curieuses,“or correspondence from the Jesuit missionaries, which he published from collection 9th to the 26th; and for his” Description geographique, historiqae, chronologique, et physique de Tempire de la Chine, et de la Tartarie Chinoise," Paris, 1735, 4 vols. fol. which has been often reprinted, and considered as the most ample history we have of the Chinese empire. It was translated into English soon after its appearance, by persons employed by Cave, the printer, and another translation having been attempted at the same time, occasioned a controversy, the particulars of which may amuse the reader.

Mr. Faringdon had collected materials with a view to the life of Mr. Hales, which, Mr. Zouch informs us, were on his demise consigned to the care of Isaac Walton, by Mr. Fulman of Corpus Christi college, Oxford, who had proposed to finish the work, and on that occasion had applied for the assistance of Mr. Walton. Mr. Zouch adds, that “the result of this application is not known.” Having, however, by the kindness of Henry Ellis, esq. of the British museum, had access to a transcript of Mr. Fulman’s Mss. in Corpus college, as far as they regard the project of writing Hales’s life, we are enabled to say that it was a Mr. Milington, and not Mr. Fulman, who sent Faringdon’s materials to Mr. Walton, and that the latter gave Fulman every information in his power. By the same Mss. we have been enabled to correct many mistakes in Des Maizeaux’s life of Haiti, as well as in those in the General Dictionary, and Biographia Britannica.

, a learned English divine, was born in London in 1716. Of his parents little is known. His father is said to have occasionally resided at an old house at Poplar, which had a large hanging garden and a building at the bottom, and this, tradition reported, had been the laboratory of sir Richard Steele. The subject of this memoir was sent early to Eton, admitted on the foundation in 1729; and elected to King’s college, Cambridge, in 1735, where of course he became a fellow in 1738, and took the degrees in arts. Being recommended by Dr. Chapman to archbishop Potter, his grace appointed him his librarian at Lambeth in 1748, on the resignation of Mr. Jones. In that station he continued till the death of his patron in 1749; when archbishop Herring, who succeeded to the primacy, being sensible of his merit, not only continued him in that office, but, on his taking orders, appointed him one of his chaplains; and, in April 1750, collated him to the rectory of Harbledown (vacant by the promotion of Mr, Thomas Herring to the rectory of Chevening); in November 1752, the archbishop collated him also to the vicarage of Herne, which he held by dispensation; to which his grace afterwards added the sinecure rectory of Orpington, in the deanery of Shoreham, one of his peculiars. In 1756, Mr. Hall vacated Herne, on being presented to the vicarage of East Peckham by the dean and chapter of Canterbury, by whom he was much esteemed, having greatly assisted their auditor in digesting many of the records, charters, &c. preserved in their registry. In return, the late Dr. Walwyn (one of the prebendaries, who vacated that vicarage) was called by the archbishop to the rectory of Great Mongeham, void by the death of Mr. Byrch. On the death of archbishop Herring in 1757, he resigned the librarianship of Lambeth, and from that time resided chiefly at Harbledown, in a large house, which he hired, afterwards the seat of Robert Mead Wilmot, esq. Soon after the death of archbishop Herring, Mr. Hall was presented by his executors to the treasurership of the cathedral of Wells, one of his grace’s options. He was also at first a competitor for the precentorship of Lincoln, an option of archbishop Potter (which Dr. Richardson gained in 1760 by a decree of the house of lords); but soon withdrew his claim, well grounded as it seemed. His learning and abilities were great, but not superior to his modesty; and by his singular affability he obtained the love and esteem of all who knew him. His charitable attention to his poor parishioners, especially when they were ill, was constant and exemplary. At archbishop Seeker’s primary visitation at Canterbury, in 1758, Mr. Hall was “pitched upon” (his grace’s official expression) to preach before him at St. Margaret’s church, which he did from Acts xvii. 21. He died a bachelor, at Harbledown, Nov. 2, 1763, in the fortyseventh year of his age, after a short illness, occasioned by a violent swelling in the neck, which could not be accounted for by the eminent physicians who attended him. He was buried under the communion-table, at Harbledown -church, without any epitaph.

ter known than the prelate or the pole-Hist, of Poetry, and the Life of Hall in

“The sequestrators sent certain men appointed by them (whereof one had been burned in the hand) to appraise all the goods that were in my house; which they accordingly executed with all diligent severity, not leaving so much as a dozen of trenchers, or my children’s pictures out of their curious inventory: yea, they would have apprized our very wearing-apparel, had not some of them declared their opinion to the contrary. These goods, both library and household-stuff of all kinds, were appointed to be exposed to public sale; but in the mean time, Mrs. Goodwin, a religious good gentlewoman, whom yet we had never known or seen, being moved with compassion, very kindly offered to lay down to the sequestrators the whole sum at which the goods were valued; and was pleased to leave them in our hands, for our use, till we might be able to re-purchase them. As for the books, several stationers looked on them, but were not forward to buy. At last Mr. Cooke, a worthy divine of this diocese, gave bond to the sequestrators, to pay them the whole sum whereat they were set; which was afterwards satisfied out of that poor pittance which was allowed me for my maintenance.”

In person Haller was tall and majestic, and of a serious and expressive countenance; he had at times an open smile, always a pleasing tone of voice, usually low, and seldom elevated, even when he was most agitated. He was fond of unbending himself in society, and was on those occasions remarkably cheerful, polite, and attentive; he would converse with the ladies on fashions, modes of dress, and other trifles, with as much ease as if he had never secluded himself from the world. Mr. Bonnet informed Mr. Coxe that Haller wrote with equal facility the German, French, and Latin tongues; that he was so well acquainted with all the European languages, except the Russian, Polish, and Hungarian, as to speak with the natives in their respective idioms. When he conversed on any science or subject of literature, his knowledge was so extensive, that he seemed to have made that his particular study. His profound erudition in every branch of science is well known to all who are conversant with his works: but the variety of his information, and the versatility of his talents, are thus delineated by Tscharner Lobrede, who was his particular friend “He possessed a fundamental knowledge of natural history was well read in history, both ancient and modern, universal and particular; and uncommonly versed in the state of agriculture, manufactures, trade, population, literature, and languages of the respective nations of Europe he had read with attention the most remarkable voyages and travels and was particularly conversantin the late discoveries which tend to illustrate the geography of the globe. He had even perused many thousand novels and plays; and possessed such an astonishing memory, that he could detail their contents with the utmost precision. As it was his custom to make extracts, and to give his opinion of every book which came into his hands, as well for his own private use, as for the Gottingen Review (in which his department embraced history, medicine, anatomy, natural history, and several miscellaneous works, especially those which appeared in Italy), he read most new publications; and so eager was he usually in the perusal, that he laid them upon the table even when he was at dinner, occasionally looking into them, and marking those parts with a pencil which he afterward extracted or commented upon. He was accustomed to make his remarks on small pieces of paper, of different sizes, which he placed in order and fastened together; a method he learned from Leibnitz.” It may be added, as one weakness in this great character, that he was always impatient under sickness, as well from his extreme susceptibility of pain, as because he was precluded in that situation from his literary occupations. He was fond, therefore, of taking violent remedies, more calculated to remove the immediate effects of pain, and to check his disorder, than to cure it radically. In his latter years he accustomed himself to opium, which, Zimmerman informs us, he took in so large a dose as eight grains, and which operated as a temporary palliative, but increased his natural impatience. This restlessness of temper, which occasionally disturbed his tranquillity even in his younger clays, and in the full flow of his health and spirits, was considerably heightened by the advances of age, and the disorders which shattered his frame toward the close of his days.

, a pious Scotch divine, and professor of divinity in the university of St. Andrew’s, was born at Duplin in the parish of Aberdalgy, near Perth, Dec. 25, 1674. His father had been minister of that parish, from which he was ejected after the restoration, for nonconformity. He died in 1682, and as the country was still unsafe for those who professed the presbyterian religion, his mother went over to Holland with her son, then about eight years old. During their stay there, he was educated at Erasmus’s school, and made great proficiency in classical literature. On his return to Scotland in 1687, he resumed his studies, and was also sent to the university. When he had finished his philosophical course there, he entered upon the study of divinity; and being, in June 1699, licensed to preach, he was in May 1700, appointed minister of the parish of Ceres, in which he performed the part of a zealous and pious pastor; but his labours proving too many for his health, the latter became gradually impaired. In April 1710, he was appointed by patent from queen Anne, professor of divinity in the college of St. Leonard at St. Andrew’s, through the mediation of the synod of Fife. On this occasion he entered on his office an inaugural oration, in qua, post exhibitam rationem suscepti muneris, examinatur schedula nupera, cui titulus ' Epistola Archimedis ad Regem Gelonem Albae Graecae reperta anno serae Christianas 1688, A. Pitcarnio, M. D. ut vulgo creditur, auctoreV Pitcairn’s reputation as a deist was at that time very common in Scotland, however justly he may have deserved it; and Mr. Halyburton’s attention had been much called to the subject of deism as revived in the preceding century. He did not, however, enjoy his professorship long, dying Sept. 23, 1712, aged only thirty-eight. It does not appear that he published any thing in his life-time; but soon after his death two works were published, which still preserve his memory in Scotland. 1. “The Great Concern of Salvation,” 1721, 8vo. 2. “Ten Sermons preached before and after the celebration of the Lord’s Supper,” 1722. But the work which proves his ability as a controversial writer, and the great extent of his reading, although it is less known than the preceding, is his “Natural Religion insufficient; and Revealed necessary to man’s happiness,” Edinburgh, 1714, 4to. This was written in confutation of the deism of lord Herbert and Mr. Blount. In this elaborate performance he largely and distinctly shews that the light of nature is greatly defective, even with respect to the discoveries of a Deity, and the worship that is to be rendered to him with respect to the inquiry concerning man’s true happiness with respect to the rule of duty, and the motives for enforcing obedience, &c. Dr. Leland says that “whosoever carefully examines what this learned and pious author has offered on these several heads, will find many excellent things; though the narrowness of his notions in some points has prejudiced some persons against his work, and hindered them from regarding and considering it so much as it deserves.”

A more splendid and extensive work of our author was published in 1755, making 2 vols. 4to, entitled “Traité des Arbres et Arbustes qui se cultiventen France en pleine terre.” Having been made inspector of the marine, he undertook to investigate all that concerned the cultivation and preservation of timber, and in this work extended his views to the treatment and botanical discrimination of all trees and shrubs capable of bearing the climate of France. Hence a number of American species became first known to his countrymen, and even to other nations by his means. Haller reckons that this work treats of a thousand species and varieties. They are arranged alphabetically, according to their Latin generic names, and he took for the basis of the work the nomenclature of Tournefort. It is to be regretted that he did not regularly adopt the Linnaean nomenclature as to species, which had appeared two years before in the “Species Plautarum,” a work he occasionally cites; but he was not enough of a practical botanist to feel its transcendant utility. His most eminent and important work, the “Physique des Arbres,” came out in 1758, in 2 vols. 4to, with numerous copper-plates; and on this his merit as a physiologist securely rests. In it he has collected and revised all that had been done before him, especially by Malpighi, Grew, Hales, and Bonnet, as well as his own preceding experiments and remarks. The great merit of this work consists in its details respecting the structure and anatomy of plants, and the physiology of their different organs.

In his defence he maintained the first seven of these articles to be undoubtedly true, and sound doctrine, and as such they appear to have been afterwards adopted by Calvin, and, in substance, make part of that system known by his name, and incorporated in the national creed of Scotland. The rest of the articles, Mr. Hamilton allowed, were disputable points, but such as he could not condemn, unless he saw better reasons than had been offered. They were all condemned, however, as heretical, and on the 1st of March, 1527, sentence was pronounced against him, declaring him a heretic, and giving him over to the secular power, to suffer the punishment due to heretics, which was burning alive. On the same day the secular power pronounced its sentence, which was immediately executed with every circumstance of savage barbarity, which, all historians agree, he bore with firmness and invincible constancy to the principles he had professed. The place of execution was the gate of St. Salvador’s college.

Some of Hamilton’s poems were first published at Glasgow in 1748, and afterwards reprinted, not only without the author’s name, but without his consent, and even without his knowledge. He corrected, however, many errors of that copy, and enlarged some of the poems, though he did not live to make a new and complete publication. The improvements he made were carefully inserted in the edition published at Edinburgh in 1760, with the addition of many pieces taken from his original manuscripts. Since that time, although they have been inserted in the new edition of the English Poets, there has been no demand for a separate edition. It would be of importance, but it is seldom easy, to account for the various fates of poets. Hamilton, if not of the first class, and in whom we find only those secondary qualities which professor Richardson has so ably pointed out in the “Lounger,” surely excels some whose works are better known and more current. The neglect which he has experienced naay be partly attributed to his political principles, and partly to the local interest which his effusions excited, and to which they were long confined. Verses of compliment and personal addresses tnust have extraordinary merit, if they attract the notice of distant strangers. Prejudice, however, is now at an end, and the friends of Scottish genius, who have lately called the attention of the puhlic to this writer, have proved that he deserves a higher rank than has yet been assigned to him. He is perhaps very unequal, and the blemishes in his verse and diction to which professor Richardson has alluded are frequent, yet it is no inconsiderable merit to have been one of the first of his countrymen who cultivated the purity and harmony of the English language, and exhibited a variety of composition and fertility of sentiment that are rarely to be found in the writings of those whose poetical genius is of the second degree.

Part of the vases which gave rise to D'Hancarville’s work, is that precious collection which is now seen in one of the rooms of the British Museum, and which formerly belonged to the senatorial house of Porcinari, in Naples. Mr. Hamilton purchased it from the proprietors in. 1765, and it still is a matter of surprise with the greatest of our artists, that it was ever suffered to go out of its native land. In Naples, however, it never occasioned any surprise; as it is there known, that full rive years before the purchase, the same valuable property, through the means of the famous Theatin lather Paciaudi, had been offered to the count of Caylus; and, in fact, the best-informed Neapolitans were fully convinced that it was much better that such precious monuments should be in the power of some active nation, in which they might be put to the best use, than to remain in their own country, where they would have been forever useless. About the same time (in 1767), the British Museum received from Mr. Hamilton two other valuable presents: 1st. A complete collection of every sort of matter produced by Mount Vesuvius, by which he thought it might be proved that “many variegated marbles and many precious stones are the produce of volcanos, and that there have been volcanos in many parts of the world, where at present there are no traces of them visible.” 2. Two very scarce and interesting books, respecting the formation of the celebrated new mountain at Pozzuolt, published at Naples, a few months after the event, in 1538: the one written by Marc Antony delli Falconi; and the other by Peter James di Toledo.

His most truly meritorious labours, however, at the close of the above mentioned period, were those which had in view the unrivalled museum of Portici; an object which lad not yet been accessible to his researches. The history of the discovery of Herculaneum, and of the Royal museum to which it gave rise, is too well known to require any detailed notice in this place: it is equally alien to our purpose to relate the several tardy and unsuccessful measures which the government took to illustrate that unrivalled establishment; and we shall only notice the ancient manuscripts in the Museum, which are immediately connected with our subject. It is known that about eight hundred objects of this kind had been found in the several excavations of Herculaneum; and that on application being made to Mr. Assemanni of the Vatican, on the subject, this learned man had recommended an able, industrious, and indefatigable Piarist monk, named Father Anthony Piaggi, who possessed the art of completely unfolding the'deca3ed manuscripts. Some successful trials were made: a work on the philosophy of Epicurus, another on morals, a third on rhetoric, and a fourth on music, were brought to light: and of the last, the author of which was a Greek named Philodemus, thirty-eight full columns were happily copied. Father Anthony’s services were still more beneficial; he instructed in his art a pupil named Merli, afterwards as able as himself. Neither of them, however, persevered in their tasks: they complained of the supineness of the ministry, and of their own scanty allowance.

, an historical painter, the son of a Scotch gentleman who resided many years at Chelsea, as deputy to Mr. Robert Adams, the celebrated architect, when clerk of the works to that college, was born in 1750, and sent to Italy, when very young, under the patronage of Mr. Adams. He was there some time under the tuition of Zucchi, the painter of arabesque ornaments at Rome, and although Mr. Edwards thinks he was then too young to receive any material benefit from this tour, it served at least to increase his early taste for the art, and he caught a pleasant manner of painting, much in the style of his master. When he returned to England he became a pupil in the royal academy, and by attention to his studies, acquired considerable employment. He practised in many different ways, mostly history, and frequently arabesque, of which latter kind he executed some decorations at the seat of the late earl of Bute at High Cliff, Hampshire. He sometimes painted portraits, but his manner was not well adapted to that branch, yet his portrait of Mrs. Siddons in the character of lady Randolph (now in the possession of Samuel Whitbread, esq.) was allowed to have great merit. He was much employed by the late alderman Boydell, for his Shakspeare, and by Macklin for his edition of the Bible and of the Poets. In the former his “Woman of Samaria 7 ' deserves much praise. One of his most capital works was a picture of the” Queen of Sheba entertained at a banquet by Solomon," a design for a window in Arundel castle. His manner of painting was light, airy, and pleasant, and he excelled in ornaments to which he gave a propriety, richness, and a classic air. His coloured drawings imitate the fulness of his oil-paintings with more freshness, and, without much labour, are finished with taste. He was elected associate of the royal academy Nov. 8, 1784, and royal academician, February 10, 1789. He died in the vigour though not in the bloom of life, Dec. 2, 1801, of a violent fever of only three days 1 duration, deeply lamented by his friends, and regretted by the public. He was a man of great affability and gentle manners; his politeness covered no insincerity, nor his emulation envy. He was one of the few artists we have personally known who spoke with high respect of his brethren, and was equally respected by them for his amiable temper.

, of Hamden, in Buckinghamshire, a celebrated political character in the reign of Charles I. was born at London in 1594. He was of as ancient (Whitlocke says the ancientest) extraction as any gentleman in his county; and cousin-german to Oliver Cromwell, his father having married the protector’s aunt. In 1609 he was sent to Magdalen college in Oxford whence, without taking any degree, be removed to the inns of court, and made a considerable progress in the study of the law. Sir Philip Warwick observes, that “he had great knowledge both in scholarship and the law.” In his entrance into the world, he is said to have indulged himself in all the licence of sports, and exercises, and company, such as were used by men of the most jovial conversation; but afterwards to have retired to a more reserved and austere society, preserving, however, his natural cheerfulness and vivacity. In the second parliament of king Charles, which met at Westminster, February 1625-6, he obtained a seat in the house of commons, as he also did in two succeeding parliaments; but made no figure till 1636, when he became universally known, by a solemn trial at the king’s bench, on his refusing to pay the ship-money. He carried himself, as Clarendon tells us, through this whole suit with such singular temper and modesty, that he obtained more credit and advantage by losing it, than the king did service by gaining it. From this time he soon grew to be one of the most popular men in the nation, and a leading member in the long parliament. “The eyes of all men,” says the same writer, “were fixed upon him as their pater patrite, and the pilot that must steer the vessel through the tempests and rocks which threatened it.” After he had held the chief direction of his party in the house of commons against the king, he took up arms in the same cause, and was one of the first who opened the war by an action at a place called Brill, a garrison of the king’s, on the edge of Buckinghamshire, about five miles from Oxford. He took the command of a regiment of foot under the earl of Essex, and shewed such skill and bravery, that, had he lived, he would; probably, soon have been raised to the post of a general. But he was cut off early by a mortal wound, which he received in a skirmish with prince Rupert, at Chalgrove-field, in Oxfordshire, where, it is generally reported, he was shot in the shoulder with a brace of bullets, which broke the bone, June 18, 1643; and, after suffering much pain and misery, he died the 24th, an event which affected his party nearly as much as if their whole army had been defeated . “Many men observed,” says Clarendon, “that the field in which this skirmish was, and upon which Hampden received his deathwound, namely, Chalgrove-field, was the same place in which he had first executed the ordinance of the militia, and engaged that county, in which his reputation was very great, in this rebellion: and it was confessed by the prisoners that were taken that day, and acknowledged by all, that upon the alarm that morning, after their quarters were beaten up, he was exceeding solicitous to draw forces together to pursue the enemy; and, being a colonel of foot, put himself amongst those horse as a volunteer, who were first ready, and that, when the prince made a stand, all the officers were of opinion to stay till their body came up, and he alone persuaded and prevailed with them to advance: so violently did his fate carry him to pay the mulct in the place where he had committed the transgression about a year before. This was an observation made at that time;” but lord Clarendon does not adopt it as an opinion of his own.

The first thing his father did at his return to Halle, was to place him under one Zackau, organist to the cathedral church, a person of great abilities in his profession, and not more qualified than inclined to do justice to any pupil of promising hopes. Handel pleased him so much, that he never thought he could do enough for him. He was proud of a pupil who already began to attract the attention of the public; and glad of an assistant who by his extraordinary talents was capable of supplying his place whenever he had a mind to be absent. If it seem strange to talk of an assistant at seven years of age, it will appear stranger that at nine Handel began to compose the church service for voices and instruments, and from that time was accustomed to compose a service every week for three years successively. Having far surpassed his master, the master himself confessing it, and made all the improvement he could at Halle, it was agreed he should go to Berlin in 1698, where the opera was in a flourishing condition under the encouragement of the elector of Brandenburg, afterwards king of Prussia. Handel had not been long at this court before his abilities became known to the sovereign, who frequently sent for him, and made him large presents. He farther offered to send him to Italy, where he might be formed under the best masters, and have opportunities of hearing and seeing all that was excellent in the kind; but his father refused this offer from a spirit of independence. During his stay at Berlin, he became acquainted with two Italian composers, Buononcini and Attilio; the same who afterwards came to England while Handel was here, and were at the head of a formidable opposition against him.

From conducting the performance he became composer to the Chouse; and “Almeria,” his first opera, was composed when he was not much above fourteen years of age. The success of it was so great, that it ran for thirty nights without interruption; and this encouraged him to compose others, as he did also a considerable number of sonatas during his stay at Hamburgh, which was about four or five years. He contracted an acquaintance at this place with many persons of note, among whom was the prince of Tuscany, brother to the grand duke. The prince, who was a great lover of the art for which his country was famous, would often lament Handel’s not being acquainted with the Italian music; shewed him a large collection of it,; and was very desirous he should return with him to Florence. Handel plainly answered, that he could see nothing in the music answerable to the prince’s character of it; but, on the contrary, thought it so very indifferent, that the singers, he said, must be angels to recommend it. The prince smiled at the severity of his censure, yet pressed him to return with him, and intimated that no convenience should be wanting. Handel thanked him for the offer of a favour which he did not chuse to accept; for he resolved to go to Italy on a speculation of his own, as soon as he could raise a sum sufficient for the purpose. He had in him from his childhood a strong spirit of independence, which was never known to forsake him in the most distressful seasons of his life; and it is remarkable that he refused the greatest offers from persons of the first distinction, because he would not be cramped or confined by particular attachments.

Soon after, he went to Italy, and Florence was his first destination; where at the age of eighteen, he composed the opera of “Rodrigo,” for which he was presented with 100 sequins, and a service of plate. This may serve to shew what a reception he met with at a place where the highest notions were conceived of him before he arrived. Vittoria, a celebrated actress and singer, bore a principal part in this opera. She was a fine woman, and had been some time in the good graces of his serene highness; yet Handel’s youth and comeliness, joined with his fame and abilities in music, had raised emotions in her heart, which, however, we do not find that Handel in the least encouraged. After about a year’s stay at Florence, he went to Venice, where he was first discovered at a masquerade, while he was playing on a harpsichord in his vizor. Scarlatti happened to be there, and affirmed it could be no one but the famous Saxon or the devil. Being earnestly importuned to compose an opera, he finished his “Agripjpina” in three weeks; which was performed twenty-seven nights successively, and with which the audience were enraptured. From Venice he went to Rome, where his arrival was no sooner known than he received polite messages from persons of the first distinction. Among his greatest admirers was the cardinal Ottoboni, a man of reiined taste and princely magnificence; at whose court he met with the famous Corelli, with whom he became well acquainted. Attempts were made at Rome to convert him to Popery; but he declared himself resolved to die a member of that communion, whether true or false, in which he had been born and bred. From Rome he went to Naples; and after he quitted Naples, made a second visit to Florence, Rome, and Venice. The whole time of his abode in Italy was six years; during which he had composed a great deal of music, and some in almost every species of composition. These early fruits of his studies would doubtless be great curiosities, could they be met with.

The academy being now firmly established, and Handel appointed principal composer, all things went on prosperously for a course of ten years. Handel maintained an absolute authority over the singers and the band, or rather kept them in total subjection. What, however, they regarded for some time as legal government, at length appeared to be downright tyranny; on which a rebellion commenced, with Senesino at the head of it, and all became tumult and civil war. Handel perceiving that Senesino was grown less tractable and obsequious, resolved to subdue him. To manage him by gentle means he disdained; yet to controul him by force he could not, Senesino’s interest and party being too powerful. The one, therefore, was quite refractory, the other quite outrageous. The merits of the quarrel are not known; but, whatever they were, the nobility would not consent to his design of parting with Senesino, and Handel had resolved to have no farther concerns with him. And thus the academy, after it had gone on in a flourishing state for above nine years, was at once dissolved.

, a benevolent and amiable character, was born at Portsmouth in 1712. He was at a very early age bound apprentice to a merchant at Lisbon, and afterwards connected himself with a mercantile house at Petersburgh, in consequence of which he was induced to travel into Persia. On leaving Russia with an independent fortune, he returned to his own country, and passed the remainder of his life as a private gentleman, honourably to himself and useful to the world. In 1753, he published an account of his travels through Russia into Persia, and back again through Russia, Germany, and Holland. To this work also was added an account of the revolutions of Persia during the present century. His other publications are very numerous; most of them were well received, and all of them calculated to prove him an excellent citizen and liberal-minded man. The institution of the Marine Society, justly attributed to his activity and benevolence, was the favourite object of Mr. Han way’s care; and in 1758, he was also particularly instrumental in the establishment of the Magdalen charity. His public spirit, and, above all, his disinterestedness, were so conspicuous, that a deputation of the principal merchants in London waited upon the earl of Bute, when prime minister, and represented to him that an individual like Mr. Hanway, who had done so much public good to the injury of his private fortune, was deserving of some signal mark of the public esteem. He was accordingly made a commissioner of the navy, a situation which he held more than twenty years, and, when he resigned, he was allowed to retain the salary for life, on account of his known exertions in the cause of universal chanty. To enumerate the various instances in which the benevolent character of his heart was successfully exerted, would be no easy task. Sunday-schools in a great measure may look upon' Mr. Hanway as their father; the chimney-sweepers’ boys are much indebted to his humanity; and perhaps there never was any public calamity in any part of the British empire which he did not endeavour to alleviate. So greatly and so universally was he respected, that when he died, in 1786, a subscription of many hundred pounds was raised to erect a monument to his memory. The great character of his numerous works is a strong masculine spirit of good sense, and a very chaste simplicity. In his private life he was remarkable for the strictest integrity of conduct, and for a frankness and candour which naturally inspired confidence. The number of his publications amounted to almost seventy, a catalogue of which is annexed to his Life by Mr. Pugh, a work highly edifying and entertaining.

, one of our old English historians, descended from a reputable northern family, was born in 1373, and at the age of twelve was admitted into the family of sir Henry Percy, eldest son to the earl of Northumberland, familiarly known by the name of Harry Hotspur, on account of his impatient spirit. He was one of the most esteemed warriors of his time, active and enterprising, had a large vassalry, numerous partizans, and unlimited authority. His household, as lord of the east march of England, was constantly held at Berwick^ upon-Tweed. Harding, it appears, was with his patron, as a volunteer, in the battles of Homildon and Cokelawe. After the death of Percy, he enlisted under the banners of sir Robert Umfravile, with whom he had fought at Horoildon, and who was connected with the Percies by the ties of affinity as well as those of arms. In 1405, when king Henry IV. reduced the fortresses of lord Bardolph and the earl of Northumberland, sir Robert Umfravile’s services in the expedition were rewarded with the castle of Warkworth, under whom Harding became the constable. How long he remained at Warkworth does not appear, but his knowledge of Scottish geography seems soon to have engaged him in the secret service of his country, In 1415 we find him attendant on the king at Harfleur, and his journal of the march which preceded the memorable battle of Agincourt forms one of the most curious passages among the additions to the late reprint of his Chronicle. In 1416 he appears to have accompanied the duke of Bedford to the sea-fight at the mouth of the Seine. In 1424 he was at Rome, and employed partly in inspecting “the great Chronicle of Trogus Pompeius;” but soon after he was again employed in collecting documents for ascertaining the fealty due from the Scottish kings, which seems to have been attended with some personal danger. He has even been accused of forging deeds to answer his royal master’s purpose; but the truth of this charge cannot now be ascertained.

Notwithstanding the multiplicity of his labours, La Harpe was much in company, and his visits were eagerly courted. Doubtless he owed the favour in which he was with polite circles to his early and brilliant success in letters, which at once balanced the prejudices created by the resentment often excited by the severity of his criticisms. From the first essay of his talents he was patronized by Voltaire and D'Alembert, who were at the head of literature and sciences; and it is well known what influence those two celebrated men possessed over the public opinion. VoUaire accorded him the title of his favourite pupil. Married while yet very young, to a woman of wit and beauty, madame de la Harpe and he mutually shone with unusual brilliancy in the most fashionable assemblies. They had been formed in the art of speaking and declamation under the eyes of Voltaire during a long stay they made at Ferney, where they were accustomed to perform the principal parts in the tragedies of that great poet, got up by his direction at his own theatre. This practice was also of great importance to M. de la Harpe in the art of reading, which he possessed in a very superior manner. The mode was still at the height of attending in crowds at the readings given by authors of their works previous to publication; and M. de Ja Harpe, whose various productions succeeded each other so rapidly, was invited to make his readings in so many circles, that he was soon compelled to be select in his choice of the circles he honoured with this gratification.

After having thus seen Italy, France, the Low Countries, Denmark, and some parts of Germany, he returned home to England, and in the beginning of the civil war, 1642, he took a decided part with the parliament, and endeavoured to get a seat in the house, but could not. His in, clmation to letters kept him from seeking public employments, so that we hear no more of him till 1646; when attending out of curiosity the commissioners appointed by parliament to Charles I. from Newcastle nearer to London, he was by some of them named to wait on his majesty, as a person known to him before, and engaged to no party or faction. The king approved the proposal, and Harrington, entered on the station of a domestic; but would never presume to come into his presence, except in public, till he was particularly commanded by the king, and made one of the grooms of the bed-chamber in May 1647. He had the good fortune to please the king much: “His majesty loved his company,” says Wood, “and, finding him to be an ingenious man, chose rather to converse with him than, with others of his chamber. They had often;” says he, “discourses concerning government; but, when they happened to talk of a commonwealth, the king seemed not to endure it.” Harrington conceived a high notion of the king, finding him to be a different person from what he had been represented, as to parts, morals, religion, &c. and therefore, after the king was removed out of the Isle of Wight to Hurst-castle, in Hampshire, was forcibly turned out of his service, because he vindicated some of his majesty’s arguments against the parliament commissioners at Newport, and thought his concessions more satisfactory than they did. There is no ground to imagine that he saw the king any more till the day he was brought to the scaffold; whither Harrington found means to accompany him, and where, or a little before, he received a token of hifcmajesty’s affection. The king’s execution affected him extremely. He often said, ft nothing ever went nearer him; and that his grief on that account was so great as to bring a disorder upon him."

After the king’s death, he was observed to keep much in his library, and more retired than usual, which his friends attributed to discontent and melancholy. But, to convince them that this was not the cause of his retirement, he produced a copy of his “Oceana;” which “he had been writing,” he said, “not only because it was agreeable to the studies which he pursued, but because, if ever it should be the fate of England to be, like Italy of old, overrun by a barbarous people, or to have its government and records destroyed by some merciless conqueror, they might not be then left to their own invention in, framing a new government.” This “Oceana” is a kind of political romance, in imitation of Plato’s “Atlantic Story,” where, by Oceana, Harrington means England; exhibiting a plan of republican government, which he would have had erected here, in case these kingdoms had formed themselves into a genuine commonwealth. This work, however, pleased no party, and as it reflected severely upon Oliver’s usurpation, met with many difficulties in the publishing; for, it being known to some of the courtiers that it was printing, they hunted it from one press to another, till at last they found it, and carried it to Whitehall. Ah the solicitations he could make were not able to retrieve his papers, till he bethought himself of applying to lady Claypole, who was a good-natured woman, and Oliver’s favourite daughter; and who, upon his declaring that they contained nothing prejudicial to her father’s government, got them restored to him. He printed it in 1656, and dedicated it, as he promised lady Claypole, to her father; who, it is said, perused it, but declared, agreeable to his principles of policy, that “the gentleman must not think to cheat him of his power and authority; for that what he had won by the sword, he would not suffer himself to be scribbled out of.”

This work was no sooner published, than many undertook a refutation of it. This occasioned him to reply, and to explain his scheme, in several successive pieces, which may be easily seen in the collection of his works. In the mean time, he not only endeavoured to propagate his republican' notions by writing, but, for the more effectually advancing a cause, of which he was enthusiastically enamoured, he formed a society of gentlemen, agreeing with him in principles, who met nightly at Miles’s coffee-house, in New Palace-yard, Westminster, and were called the Rota. Wood has given a very particular account of this association, or gang, as he calls them. “Their discourses about government,” says he, “and of ordering a commonwealth, were the most ingenious and smart that ever were heard; for the arguments in the parliament-house were but flat to those. This gang had a balloting-box, and balloted how things should be carried by way of essay, which not being used, or known in England before on this account, the room was every evening very full. The doctrine there inculcated was very taking; and the more, because as to human foresight there was no possibility of the king’s return. The greatest part of the parliament-men hated this rotation and balloting, as being against their power: eight or ten were for it, who proposed it to the house, and made it out to the members, that, except they embraced that sort of government, they must be ruined. The model of it was, that the third part of the senate or house should rote out by ballot every year, not capable of being elected again for three years to come; so that every ninth year the senate would be wholly altered. No magistrate was to continue above three years, and all to be chosen by the ballot, than which nothing could be invented more fair and impartial, as it was then thought, though opposed by many for several reasons. This club of commonwealthsmen, which began about Michaelmas 1659, lasted till about Feb. 21 following; at which time, the secluded members being restored by general Monk, all their models vanished .”

, an ingenious English poet, was the son of John Harrington, esq. who was imprisoned in the Tower, under queen Mary, for holding a correspondence with the lady Elizabeth, with whom he continued in great favour to the time of his death. He also was somewhat of a poet and a translator. Sir John was born at Kelston, near Bath, in Somersetshire, in 1561, and had queen Elizabeth for his godmother. He was instructed in classical learning at Eton-school, and from thence removed to Cambridge, where he took the degree of M. A. In his thirtieth year, 159J, he published a translation of Ariosto’s “Orlando Furioso,” by which he gained a considerable reputation, and for which he is now principally known. Warton says, that although executed without spirit or accuracy, unanimated and incorrect, it enriched our poetryby a communication of new stores of fiction and imagination, both of the romantic and comic species, of gothic machinery and familiar manners. Mr. Harrington was knighted in the field by the earl of Essex, which gave much offence to the queen, who was sparing of such honours, and chose to confer them herself. In the reign of James, he was created knight of the Bath; and, being a courtier, presented a ms. to prince Henry, levelled chiefly against the married bishops, which was intended only for the private use of his royal highness; but, being published afterwards, created great clamour, and made several of the clergy say, that his conduct was of a piece with his doctrines; since he, together with Robert earl of Leicester, supported sir Walter Raleigh in his suit to queen Elizabeth for the manor of Banwell, belonging to the bishopric of Bath and Wells; on a presumption that the right rev. incumbent bad incurred a pr&munire, by marrying a second wife. Wood’s account of it is this "That sir John Harrington, being minded to obtain the favour of prince Henry, wrote a discourse for his private use, entitled * A brief View of the State of the Church of England, as it stood in queen Elizabeth’s and king James’s reign, to the year 1608.' This book is no more than a character and history of the bishops of those times, and was written to the said prince Henry, as an additional supply to the catalogue of bishops of Dr. Francis Godwin, upon occasion of that proverb,

, an eminent mathematician, was born at Oxford, or, as Anthony Wood expresses it, “turn-; bled out of his mother’s womb in the lap of the Oxonian Muses,” in 1560. Having been instructed in grammarlearning in that city, he became a commoner of St. Maryhall, where he took the degree of B. A. in 1579. He had then so distinguished himself, by his uncommon skill in mathematics, as to be recommended soon after to sir Walter Raleigh as a proper preceptor to him in that science. Accordingly, that noble knight became his first patron, took him into his family, and allowed him a handsome pension. In 1585 he was sent over by sir Walter with his first colony to Virginia; where, being settled, he was employed in discovering and surveying that country, in observing what commodities it produced, together with the manners and customs of its inhabitants. He published an account of it under this title, “A brief and true Report of the Newfoundland of Virginia;” which was reprinted in the third voyage of Hakluyt’s “Voyages.” Upon his return to England, he was introduced by his patron to the acquaintance of Henry earl of Northumberland who, “finding him,” says Wood, “to be a gentleman of an affable and peaceable nature, and well read in the obscure pan of learning,” allowed him a yearly pension of 120l. About the same time, Robert Hues, well known by his ' Treatise upon the Globes,“and Walter Warner, who is said to have communicated to the famous Harvey the first hint concerning the circulation of the blood, being both of them mathematicians, received pensions from him of less value, ^o that in 1606, when the earl was committed to the Tower for life, Harriot, Hues, and Warner, were his constant companions, and were usually called the earl of Northumberland’s Magi. They had a table at the earl’s charge, who did constantly converse with them, to divert the melancholy of his confinement; as did also sir Walter Raleigh, who was then in the Tower. Harriot lived for some time at Sion-college, and died in London, July 2, 1621, of a cancer in his lip. He was universally esteemed on account of his learning. When he was but a young man, he was styled by Mr. Hakluyt” Juvenis in disciplinis mathematicis excellens;“and by Camden,” Mathematicus insignis.“A ms. of his, entitled” Ephemeris Chryrometrica,“is preserved in Sion-college library and his” Artis Analytic* Praxis“was printed after his death, in a thin folio, and dedicated to Henry earl of Northumberland. Des Cartes is said to have been obliged to this book for a great many improvements in algebra, which he published to the world as his own, a fact that has been amply proved, in the astronomical ephemeris for 17vS8, by Dr. Zach, astronomer to the duke of Saxe Gotha, from manuscripts which he found in 1784 at the seat of the earl of Egremont at Petworth, a descendant of the above-mentioned earl of Northumberland. These papers also show that Mr. Harriot was an astronomer as well as an algebraist, As to his religion, Wood says, that,” notwithstanding his great skill in mathematics, he had strange thoughts of the Scripture, always undervalued the old story of the Creation of the World, and could never believe that trite position, * Ex nihilo nihil fit.‘ He made a Philosophical Theology, wherein he cast off the Old Testament, so that consequently the New would have uo foundation. He was a deist; and his doctrine he did impart to the earl, and to sir Walter Raleigh, when he was compiling the ’ History of the World,' and would controvert the matter with eminent divines of those times: who, therefore, having no good opinion of him, did look on the manner of his death, as a judgment upon him for those matters, and for nullify, ing the Scripture.“Wood borrowed all this from Aubrey, without mentioning his authority; and it has been answered, that Harriot assures us himself, that when he was with the first colony settled in Virginia, in every town where he came,” he explained to them the contents of the Bible, &c. And though I told them,“says he,” the book materially and of itself was not of such virtue as I thought they did conceive, but only the doctrine therein contained; yet would many be glad to touch it, to embrace it, to kiss it, to hold it to their breasts and heads, and stroke over all their bodies with it, to shew their hungry desires of that knowledge which was spoken of." To which we may add, that, if Harriot was reputed a deist, it is by no means probable that Dr. Corbet, an orthodox divine* and successively bishop of Oxford and Norwich, sending a poem, dated December 9, 1618, to sir Thomas Aylesbury, when the comet appeared, should speak of

, esq. an English gentleman of very uncommon parts and learning, was the eldest son of James Harris, esq. of the Close of Salisbury, by his second wife the lady Elizabeth Ashley, who was third daughter of Anthony earl of Shaftesbury, and sister to the celebrated author of the Characteristics, as well as to the Hon. Maurice Ashley Cooper, the elegant translator of Xenophon’s Cyropaedia. He was born July 20, 1709. The early part of his education was received at Salisbury, under the rev. Mr. Hele, master of the grammar-school, in the Close, who was long known and respected in the West of England as an instructor of youth. From Mr. Hele’s school, at the age of sixteen, he was removed to Oxford, where he passed the usual number of years as a gentleman commoner of Wadham college. His father, as soon as he had finished his academical studies, entered him at Lincoln’s-Inn, not intending him for the bar, but, as was then a common practice, meaning to make the study of the law a part of his education.

"The distinction by which he was most generally known, and by which he is likely to survive to posterity, is that of a Man of Learning. His profound knowledge of Greek, which he applied more successfully, perhaps, than any modern writer has done, to the study and explanation of ancient philosophy, arose from an early and intimate acquaintance with the excellent poets and historians in that language. They, and the best writers in the Augustan age, were his constant and never-failing recreation. By his familiarity with them, he was enabled to enliven and to illustrate his deeper and more abstruse speculations, as every page almost (of his works) will abundantly testify. But his attainments were not confined to ancient philosophy and classical learning. He possessed likewise a general knowledge of modern history, with a very distinguishing taste in the line arts, in one of which, as before observed, he was an eminent, proficient. His singular industry empowered him to make these various acquisitions, without neglecting any of the duties which he owed to his family, his friends, or his country. I am in possession of such proofs, besides those already given to the public, of my father’s laborious study and reflection, as I apprehend, are very rarely to be met with. Not only was he accustomed, through a long series of years, to make copious excts from the different books which he read, and to write critical remarks and conjectures on many of the passages extracted, but he was also in the habit of regularly cammuting to writing such reBections as arose out of his study, which evince a mind carefully disciplined, and anxiously bent on the attainment of self-knowledge and self-government. And yet, though habituated to deep thinking and laborious reading, he was generally cheerful even to playfulness. There was no pedantry in his manners or conversation, nor was he ever seen either to display his learning with ostentation, or to treat with slight or superciliousness those less informed than himself. He rather sought to make them appear partakers of what he knew, than to mortify tnern by a parade of his own superiority. Nor had he any of that miserable fastidiousness about him which too often disgraces men of learning, and prevents their being amused or interested, at least their choosing to appear so, by common performances and common events.

, a young gentleman high in esteem, and (as Swift expresses it) “a little pretty fellow, With a great deal of wit, good sense, and good nature,” was educated at Winchester, and was afterwards of New college, Oxford, of which he became a fellow. He appears to have been employed in private tuition, which was not a very profitable employment. He had no other income than 40l. a year as tutor to one of the duke of Queensbury’s sons. In this employment he fortunately attracted the favour of Dr. Swift, whose generous solicitations with Mr. St. John obtained for him the reputable employment of secretary to lord Raby, ambassador at the Hague, and afterwards earl of Stafford. A letter of his, whilst at Utrecht, dated December 16, 1712, printed inthedean’s works, informs us that his office was attended with much vexation and little advantage. Even in Jan. 13, 1713, when he brought over the barrier treaty, and, as Swift says, was the queen’s minister, entrusted in affairs of the greatest importance, he had not a shilling in his pocket to pay his hackney coach. He died soon after this, Feb. 14,1712-13. See the “Journal to Stella” of that and the following day, where Dr. Swift laments his loss with the most unaffected sincerity. Mr. Tickell has mentioned him with respect, in his “Prospect of Peace;” and Dr. Young, in the beautiful close of an “Epistle to lord Lansdown,” most pathetically bewails his loss. Dr. Birch, who has given a curious note on Mr. Harrison’s “Letter to Swift,” has confounded him with Thomas Harrison, M. A. of Queen’s college. In the “Select Collection,” by Nichols, are some pleasing specimens of his poetry; which, with “Woodstock-Park” in Dodsley’s “Collection,” and an “Ode to the duke of Marlborough, 1707,” in Duncombe’s “Horace,” are all the poetical writings that are known of this excellent young man, who figured both as an humourist and a politician in the fifth volume of the “Tatler,” of which (under the patronage of Bolingbroke, Henley, and Swift) he was professedly the editor. There was another William Harrison, author of “The Pilgrim, or the happy Convert, a pastoral tragedy,” 1709.

In the course of his expensive journeys and his illness, this unfortunate young man had unavoidably incurred debts beyond what his casual supplies from home could liquidate; and the collections and manuscript notes, which still remained at Smyrna, were seized by his creditors, for a sum amounting to 14,000 dollars of copper-money, or about 350l. sterling. This circumstance was no sooner made known, through Linnæus and his friend Bteck, to the accomplished queen of Sweden, Louisa Ulrica, the worthy sister of the great Frederick of Prussia, than she immediately redeemed these treasures out of her own purse, gave Linnæus all the duplicates, and commissioned him to arrange and publish the manuscript journal and remarks of his deceased pupil; a task which he undertook with alacrity, and executed with care and judgment. These papers were given to the public in 1757, in Swedish, except several Latin descriptions, under the title of “Iter Palaestinum,” or a Journey to the Holy Land, in one volume, 8vo, with a biographical preface by Linnseus, who subjoined to the work the very interesting letters of Hasselquist to himself. This book has been translated into several languages, and appeared in English, at London, in 1766; but this translation is in many parts defective, especially with regard to the natural history and the scientific names. In 1758 the above-mentioned Dr. Baeck, physician to the queen, published, at Stockholm, an oration in praise of Hasselquist, in 8vo.

In 1773 he became deservedly popular, from his incessant zeal in calling the attention of the public to the resuscitation of persons apparently dead, principally by drowning. In this laudable attempt he encountered much opposition, and some ridicule. The practicability of resuscitation was denied. He ascertained its practicability by advertising rewards to persons, who, between Westminster and London bridges, should, within a certain time after the accident, rescue drowned persons from the water, and bring them ashore to places appointed for their reception, where means might be used for their recovery, and give immediate notice to him. The public mind being thus awakened to the subject, greater exertions were made by individuals than had ever before been known; and many lives were saved by himself and other medical men, which would otherwise have certainly been lost; and Mr. Hawes, at his own expence, paid the rewards in these cases for twelve months, which amounted to a considerable sum. His excellent friend, Dr. Cogan (then somewhat known to the public, and since much better known, by several valuable publications), who had long turned his thoughts to this subject, remonstrated with him on the injury which his private fortune would sustain from a perseverancein these expences and he at last consented to share them with the public. Dr. Coganancl he agreed to join their strength; and each of them bringing forward fifteen friends to a meeting at the Chapter coftee-house in 1774, the Humane Society was instantly formed. From this period the weight and organization of the infant institution devolved in great measure on Mr. Hawes, whose undeviating labours have, it is hoped, established it for ever; and without which, there would very probably not have been at this time a similar establishment in Europe, America, or India; where Humane societies have now multiplied with every great stream that fructifies the soil of those different regions.

Soon after the publication of this ill-fated book, he became known to a lady who had great property and interest in the East India company; and through her means was chosen a director of that body, at the general election, in April 1773. The affairs of the company were at this time in a confused state, and the public mind greatly agitated by the frequent debates both in parliament and at the Indiahouse. Dr. Hawkesworth (who in the list is styled John Hawkesworth, esq.) probably attended the meetings, but took no active share: his health was indeed now declining and he expired at the house of his friend Dr. Grant, of Lime-street, Nov. 17, 1773. He was interred at Bromley, in Kent, where a monument was erected to his memory.

Of his personal character the following friendly sketch appeared in the Annual Register for 1773, and was no doubt intended to counteract some disadvantageous reports respecting his principles, which were circulated about the time of his death. “Nature had endowed him with an uncommonly fine understanding, which had been improved not only by long study, but by converse with mankind. His fertile mind teemed with ideas> which he delivered in so clear, and yet concise a manner, that no one could be at a loss perfectly to comprehend his meaning, or ever tired by hearing him speak; especially as his diction was so unaffectedly pure, and his language so simply elegant, that the learned and unlearned attended with equal pleasure to that unstudied flow of eloquence, which, without seeming to look for them, always adopted those words which were most suitable to the subject, as well as most pleasing to his hearers. It has been objected to him, that he suffered his passions to hold too strong a dominion over him; and it must be confessed a too keen sensibility seemed to him, as indeed it ever is to all who possess it, a pleasing but unfortunate gift. Alive to every tender sentiment of friendship, his heart dilated with joy whenever heaven put it in his power to be beneficial to those he loved; but this feeling disposition was the means of leading him into such frequent, though transient gusts of passion, as were too much for his delicate constitution to bear, without feeling the effects of them. Yet with all these quick sensations, he was incapable of lasting resentment or revenge; and had he never found an enemy till he had done an injury, he would, we may venture to pronounce, have left the world without having known one.”

, a recent English writer, the son of a man, who, though descended from the preceding sir John Hawkins, followed at first the occupation of a house-carpenter, which he afterwards exchanged for the profession of a surveyor and huijder. He had married Elizabeth, daughter of Thomas Gwatkin of Tou nhope, co. Hereford, gentleman; and the issue of this marriage were several children. Of these the present object of this article was the youngest, and was born in the city of London, on the 30th day of March, 1719. After fcaving been sent first to one school, and afterwards to a second, where he acquired a tolerable knowledge of Latin, he was placed under the tuition of Mr. Hoppus, the author of a well-known and useful architectural compendium, published in 1733, 8vo, and entitled “Proportional Architecture, or the Five Orders regulated by equal Farts.” Under this person he went through a regular course of architecture and perspective, in order to fit him for his father’s profession of a surveyor, for which he was at first intended; but his first cousin, Mr. Thomas Gwatkin, being clerk to Mr. John Scott of Devonshire-street, Bishopsgate, an attorney and solicitor in full practice, persuaded him *to alter his resolution, and embrace that of the law, which he did, and was accordingly articled as a clerk to Mr. Scott. In this situation his time was too fully employed in the actual dispatch of business, to permit him without some extraordinary means to acquire the necessary knowledge of his profession by reading and study; besides that, his master is said to have been more artxious to render him a good copying-clerk, by scrupulous attention to his hand-writing, than to qualify him by instruction to conduct business. To remedy this inconvenience, therefore, he abridged himself of his rest, and rising at four in the morning, found opportunity of reading all the necessary and most eminent law-writers, and the works of our mos% celebrated authors. By these means, before the expiration of his clerkship, he had already rendered himself a very able lawyer, and had possessed himself of a taste for literature in general, but particularly for poetry and the polite arts; and the better to facilitate his improvement, he from time to time furnished to “The Universal Spectator,” “The Westminster Journal,” The Gentleman’s Magazine,“and other periodical publications of the time, essays and disquisitions on several subjects. The first of these is believed to have been an” Essay on Swearing;“but the exact time of its appearance, and the paper in which it was inserted, are both equally unknown. It was, however, re-published some years since (without his knowledge till he saw it in print) in one of the newspapers. His next production was an” Essay on Honesty," inserted in the Gentleman’s Magazine for March, 1739; and which occasioned a controversy, continued through the magazines for several succeeding months, between him and a Mr. Calamy, a descendant of the celebrated Dr. Edmund Calamy, then a fellow-clerk with him.

About 1741, a club having been instituted by Mr. Immyns, an attorney, a musical man, (but better known as the amanuensis of Dr. Pepusch), and some other musical persons, under the name of “The Madrigal Society,” to meet every Wednesday evening, he became a member of it, and continued so many years. Pursuing his inclination for music still farther, he became also a member of “The Academy of Ancient Music,” which used to meet every Thursday evening at the Crown and Anchor in the Strand, but afterwards removed to Freemasons’ -hall; and of this he continued a member till a few years before its removal.

Impelled by his own taste for poetry, and excited to it by his friend Foster Webb’s example, who had contributed to “The Gentleman’s Magazine” many very elegant poetical compositions, he had, before this time, himself become an occasional contributor in the same kind, as well to that as to some other publications. The earliest of hi? productions of this species, now known, is supposed to be a copy of verses “To Mr. John Stanley, occasioned by looking over some compositions of his, lately published,” which bears date 19th February, 1740, and was inserted in “The Daily Advertiser” for February 21, 1741; but, about 1742, he proposed to Mr. Stanley the project of publishing, in conjunction with him, six cantatas for a Voice and instruments, the words to be furnished by himself, and the iriusic by Mr. Stanley. The proposal was accepted, the publication was to be at their joint expence, and for their mutual benefit; and accordingly, in 1742, six cantatas were thus published, the five first written by Mr. Hawkins, the sixth and last by Foster Webb; and, these having succeeded beyond the most sanguine expectations, a second set of six more, written wholly by himself, were in like manner published a few months after, and succeeded equally well.

From a very early period of his life he had entertained a strong love for the amusement of angling; and being long acquainted with Walton’s. “Complete Angler,” had, by observation and experience, himself become a very able proficient in the art. Hearing, about this time, that Mr. Moses Browne proposed to publish a new edition of that work, and being himself in possession of some material particulars respecting Walton, he, by letter, made Mr. Browne an offer of writing, for his intended edition,-Walton’s Life. To this proposal no answer was returned, at least for some time, from which circumstance Mr. Hawkins concluded, as any one reasonably would, that his offer was not accepted; and, therefore, having also learnt in the mean time that Mr. B. meant not to publish the text as the author left it, but to modernize it in order to file off die rust, as he called it, wrote again to tell Mr. Browne that he so understood it; and that, as Mr. B.'s intention was to sophisticate the text in the manner above mentioned, he, Mr. Hawkins, would himself publish a correct edition. Such an edition, in 1760, he accordingly published in octavo with notes, adding to it a “Life of Walton” by himself, a “Life of Cotton,” the author of the second part, by the well-known Mr. Oldys; and ‘a set’ of cuts designed by Wale, and engraved by Ryland.

At the recommendation of the well-known Paul Whitehead, esq his neighbour in the country, who, conceiving him a fit person for a magistrate, had mentioned him as such to the duke of Newcastle, then lord lieutenant for. Middlesex, his name was, in 1761, inserted in the commission of the peace for that county; and having, besides a due attention to the great work in which he was engaged, by the proper studies, and a sedulous attendance at the sessions, qualified himself for the office, he became an active and useful magistrate in the countyt. Observing, as he had frequent occasion to do in the course of his duty, the bad state of highways, and the great defect in the laws for amending and keeping them in repair, he set himself to revise the former statutes, and drew an act of parliament consolidating ajl the former ones, and adding such other regulations as were necessary. His sentiments on this subject he published in octavo, in 1763, under the title of “Observations on the State of Highways, and on, the Laws for amending and keeping them in Repair,” subjoining to them the draught of the act before mentioned, which bill, being afterwards introduced into parliament, passed into a law, and is that under which all the highways in the kingdom are at this time kept repaired. Of this

Johnson, and sir Joshua (then Mr.) Reynolds, had, in, the winter of this year 1763, projected the establishment of a club to meet every Monday evening at the Turk’s Head in Gerrard street, and, at Johnson’s solicitation, he, Mr. H. became one of the first members. This club, since known by the appellation of “The Literary Club,” was at first intended, like the former in Ivy-lane, to have consisted of no more than nine persons, and that was the number of the first members; but the rule was broken through to admit one who had been a member of that in Ivy-lane, Till this admission, Johnson and Mr. Hawkins were the only persons that had been members of both.

When this circumstance became known to sir J. H. he represented this act to him (as it really was) as a mere nullity; and Johnson was prevailed upon, on the 27th of November, 1784, at Mr. Strahan’s, at Islington, to give him the necessary instructions, which he, sir J. on the spot converted into proper legal form, by dictating, conformably to. them, a will to Mr. Hoole, who, with some other friends, had there called in upon Johnson, and which being coinpleted, was executed by Johnson and properly attested. In the codicil, which Johnson afterwards made, sir J. assisted in the same manner, as to legal phraseology, and directing the proper mode of execution and attestation.

Peace being now re-established abroad, the city of Florence was, in 1393, distracted with civil feuds, which were not terminated by the execution and exile of some principal citizens. But at the close of this year they sustained a greater loss in sir John Hawkwood, who died March 6, advanced in years, at his house in the street called PulveYosa, near Florence. His funeral was celebrated with -reat magnificence, and the general lamentation of the whole city. His bier, adorned with gold and jewels, was supported by the first persons of the republic, followed by horses in gilded trappings, banners, and other military ensigns, and the whole body of the citizens. His remains were deposited in the church of St. Repar.ita, where a statue (as Poggio and Rossi call it, though it is well known to be a portrait) of him on horseback was put np by a public decree. If the Florentine historians did not distinguish between a statue and a portrait, no wonder our countryman Stowe talks of an “image as great as a mighty pillar,” erecteci to the memory of sir John Hawkwood at Florence or that Weever, copying him, calls it “a statue.”

About this time he resided in the house with Metastasio three years, as music-master to mademoiselle Martinetz, and during this time had the great advantage of hearing the Italian language spoken with purity, and of receiving the imperial laureat’s counsel, as to cloathing the finest lyric compositions with the most appropriate and expressive jnelodies. In 1759 he was received into the service of count Marzin, as director of his music, whence, in 1761, he passed to the palace of prince Esterhazi, to whose service he was afterwards constantly attached. He arrived in England in 1791, and contributed to the advancement of his art, and to his own fame, by his numerous productions in this country; while his natural, unassuming, and pleasing character, exclusive of his productions, endeared him to his acquaintance and to the nation at large. It ought to be recorded, that twelve of his noble and matchless symphonies were composed here expressly for Salomon’s concerts, and that it was from his spirit of enterprize, and enthusiastic admiration of Haydn, and love of his art, that we were indebted for his visit to this country: besides tht>e sublime symphonies, his piano-forte sonatas, his quartets and songs, were sufficient to establish his reputation as a great and original composer, upon a lasting foundation, ii only what he produced during the few years which he remained among us was known. He returned to Germany in 1796.

, esq. a very singular person, whose great erudition was so concealed by his modesty, that his name is known to very few, though his publications are many. He was born in 1678, and became distinguished in 1704 by a “Treatise of Fluxions,” in folio, which was, we believe, the first treatise on that science ever published in the English language; and the only work to which he ever set his name. In 1710 came out a small 4to pamphlet in 19 pages, entitled “A new and easy Method to find out the Longitude from observing the Altitudes of the Celestial bodies.” Also in 1723, he published “The Moon, a Philosophical Dialogue,” tending to shew that the moon is not an opaque body, but has native light of her own.

He was a studious and active professor; a great collector of curious and old compositions, and possessed of considerable genius and abilities for producing new. He published while at Shrewsbury, a collection of English ballads, his maiden composition. But at Oxford his ecclesiastical compositions for different colleges were innumerable; yet, being local, they were never printed, and but little known out of Oxford. Those productions which gained him the most general celebrity, were his canons, catches, and glees for the catch-club, in London, during the first years of its institution; several of which were justly crowned. His canon of “Let’s drink and let’s sing together,” is perhaps the most pleasant of all those laboured compositions which go under the name of canons. He had a true sense of Handel’s superior merit, over all contemporary composers and on the publication of Mr. Avison’s well-written “Essay on Musical Expression,” in which it is perpetually insinuated that Geminiani, Rameau, and Marcello, were greatly his superiors, Dr. Hayes produced a pamphlet entitled “Remarks on the Essay of Musical Expression,” written with much more knowledge of the subject than temper: he felt so indignant at Avison’s treatment of Handel, that he riot only points out the false reasoning in his essay, but false composition in his own works.

, an English artist, much celebrated in his day, was born in 1708, at Exeter, and was the scholar of Brown. He appears to have come to London in the early part of his life, and was much employed by Fleetwood, the proprietor of Drury-lane theatre, for whom he painted many scenes. In the pursuit of his profession, he was not extremely assiduous, being more convivial than studious; yet he acquired a very considerable degree of power in his art, and was the best historical painter in the kingdom, before the arrival of Cipriani. It was this superiority of talent that introduced him to the notice of Mr. Jonathan Tyers, the founder and proprietor of Vauxhall, by whom he was employed in decorating those well-known gardens, and where some of his best historical pictures are still to be seen. He also painted four pictures from subjects taken from Sbakspeare, for what is called the prince’s pavilion in Vauxhall, but Mr. Tyers had such an high opinion of them, as to remove them to his own residence, and place copies in their room. His reputation procured him much employment from the booksellers, whom he furnished with drawings for their editions of Moore’s Fables, Congreve’s Works, Newton’s Milton, Hammer’s Shakspeare, Smcllet’s Don Quixote, Pope’s Works, &c. These drawings have in general great merit.

, a strenuous advocate for Socinianism, was born in 1672, and became assay-master of the mint, and principal tally-writer of the exchequer. In defence of the independence and prerogatives of his office, he printed and privately dispersed a tract entitled “A hriel enquiry relating to the right of his majesty’s Chapel Royal, and the privileges of his servants within the Tower, in a Memorial addressed to the rignt hon. the lord viscount Lonsdale, constable of his majesty’s Tower of London,” 1728, folio. His principal effort in favour of Socicianism was entitled “The Scripture account of the attributes and worship of God, and of the character and offices of Jesus Christ, by a candid Enquirer after Truth.” This he left for the press, and it was accordingly printed by his son, in obedience to his father’s injunctions, but probably against his own inclinations, nor was it generally known as a publication until reprinted in 1790 by the late rev. Theophilus Lindsey. Mr. Haynesdied November 19, 1749. His son Samuel Haynes was educated at King’s college, Cambridge, where he took his degrees of A. B in 1723, A. M. 1727, and D. D. in 1748. He was tutor to the earl of Salisbury, with whom he travelled, and who, in 1737, presented him to the valuable rectory of Hatfield in Hertfordshire. In March 1743, he succeeded to a canonry of Windsor; and in May 1747, he was presented by his noble patron to the rectory of Clothal, which he held by dispensation with Hatfield. He died June 9, 1752. He published “A Collection of State-papers, relating to affairs in the reigns of Henry VIII. Edward VI. Mary and Elizabeth, from 1542 to 1570,” transcribed from the Cecil Mss. in Hatfield-house, 1740, fol.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Henley lectured, in this style, on Sundays upon theological matters, and on Wednesdays upon all other sciences. He declaimed some years against the greatest persons, and occasionally, says Warburton, did Pope that honour. The poet retorts upon him in the well-known lines:

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

His labours both in the ministerial office and in his study were pursued by him as long as possible; but his constitution, originally weak, and greatly injured by his late illness, soon exhibited the usual symptoms and concomitants of rapid decay, attended with a hectic cough, which proved fatal on Christmas-day, 1758, in the forty-fourth year of his age. His death, throughout the district over which he extended his services, was deemed a public loss. By the poor it was felt to be so in every sense. In the exercise of his charity he was unbounded, but he was alsa judicious. He chose to clothe the poor rather than to give them money, and intrusted some friend to buy linen, coarse cloth, stockings, shoes, &c. for them at the best hand, alleging that the poor could not purchase on such good terms what they wanted at the little shops and with small sums of money. But when money promised to be serviceable to a family distressed by sickness or misfortune, he would frequently give five or more guineas at a time, taking care that it should not be known whence the money came. It would be endless to enumerate the personal virtues of Mr. Hervey. He was the father, the instructor, the guide, and the friend of all to whom kindness or instruction was necessary. His piety was constant, ardent, and sincere. It appears in all his writings, but not in them more than in his life and conversation. He viewed every object of art or nature only as it made part of the great Creator’s works, and was ever ready to give such a turn to common incidents or appearances as might suggest some pious reflection or useful hint

His writings aiv, 1. “Meditations and Contemplations; containing Meditations among the Tombs Reflections on a Flower-garden; and a Descant on Creation,” 1716, 8vo. He sold the copy, after it had passed through several editions; which sale, and the profits of the former impressions, amounted to about 700l. The whole of this he gave in charity; savin/, that as Providence had blessed Ins attempt, he thought himself bound to relieve his fellowcreatures with it. 2. “Contemplations on the Night and Starry Heavens; and a Winter Piece,” 1747, 8vo. Both these have been turned into blank verse, in imitation of Dr. Young’s “Night Thoughts,” by Mr. Newcomb. 3. “Remarks on Lord BolingbrokeV Letters on the Study and Use of History, so far as they relate to the History of the Old Testament, &c. in a letter to a lady of quality,” 1753, 8vo. 4. “Theron and Aspasio or, a Series of Dialogues and Letters on the most important subjects,” 1755, 3 vols. 8vo. Some of the principal points which he endeavours to illustrate in this work, are the beauty and excellence of the Scriptures; the ruin and depravity of human nature; its happy recovery founded on the atonement, and effected by the Spirit of Christ. But the grand article is, the imputed righteousness of Christ his notion of which has been attacked by several writers. He introduces most of his dialogues with descriptions of some of the most delightful scenes of the creation. To diversify the work, short sketches of philosophy are also occasionally introduced, easy to be understood, and calculated to entertain the imagination, as well as improve the heart. 5. Some “Sermons,” the third edition published after his death, 1759. 6. An edition of “Jenks’s Meditations,” 1757, with a strong recommendatory preface. 7. A recommendatory preface to “Burntiam’s pious Memorials,” published in 1753, 8vo. 8. “Eleven Letters to Wesley.” 9. “Letters to Lady Frances Shirley,” 1782, 8vo. All these are included in the genuine edition of his works, 6 vols. 8vo, printed for Messrs. Rivington, whose predecessor published all Mr. Hervey’s works. In 1311 appeared, for the first time, what may be considered as a seventh volume, entitled “Letters elegant, interesting, and evangelical, illustrative of the author’s amiable character, and many circumstances of his early history not generally known.” It is somewhat singular that they were dedicated by the editor colonel Burgess to Paul Orchard, esq. the same gentleman to whom sixty-four years before Mr. Hervey had dedicated his “Meditations.”

"The detail of the merits of such a man cannot be uninteresting, either to the profession he adorned, or the country which he served; and the remembrance of his virtues must be pleasing to those who were honoured with his esteem; as every hour and every situation of his life afforded fresh opportunities for the exercise of such virtues, they were best known to those who saw him most. But however strong and perfect their impression, they can be but inadequately described by one who long enjoyed the happiness of his friendship, and advantage of his example, and must ever lament the privation of his society.

In 1761, on the marriage of his daughter to the Rev. Mr. Buncombe, son to one of his oldest friends, he took a resolution of retiring from business, and disposing of his collection of pictures, which he did by auction, in March 1762; and soon after removed to the house of his son-inlaw at Canterbury, where he passed the remainder of his life, without ever re-visiting the metropolis. But though he had laid down the pencil, he never wanted employment: so active; and vigorous was his mind, that, with a constitutional flow of spirits, and a relish for instructive society, he was “never less alone than when alone;” and, besides his professional pursuits (abovementioned), to philosophy, both natural and moral, and also divinity, he laudably dedicated his time and attention. No man lud more clearness and precision of ideas, or a more ardent desire to know the truth; and, when known, conscientiously to pursue it. With strong passions, ever guided by the strictest virtue, he had a tender, susceptible heart, always open to the distresses of his fellow-creatures, and always ready to relieve them. His capital work of the literary kind was his “Practice of Perspective, 9” the Principles of Dr. Brook

, or Hilary, an ancient father of the Christian church, who flourished in the fourth century, was born, as St. Jerom tells us, at Poictiers in France; but in what year, is not known. His parents, persons of rank and substance, had him liberally educated in the pagan religion, which they themselves professed, and which Hilary did not forsake till many years after he was grown-up; when reflecting upon the gross errors of paganism, he was gradually led to the truth, and confirmed in it by reading the holy Scriptures. He was then baptized, together with his wife and daughter, who were also converted with bin). He was advanced to the bishopric of Poictiers in the year 3 5 5, according to Baronius though Cave thinks he was bishop of that place some years before. As soon however as he was raised to this dignity, he became a most zealous champion of the orthodox faith, and distinguished himself particularly against the Arians, whose doctrines were at that time gaining ground in France. In 356, he was sent by Constantinus to support the party of Athanasius at the synod of Beterra, or Beziers, against Saturninusbishop of'Arles, who had just before been excommunicated by the bishops of France but Saturninus had so much influence with the emperor, who was then at Milan, as to induce that monarch to order him to be banished to Phrygia, where Hilary continued continued four years, and applied himself during that time to the composing of several works. He wrote his twelve books upon the Trinity, which Cave calls “a noble work,” and which has been much admired in all ages. He wrote also “A Treatise Concerning Synods,” addressed to the bishops of France in which he explains to them the sense of the Eastern churches upon the doctrine of the Trinity, and their man tier of holding councils. This was drawn up by Hilary, ‘after the council of Ancyra in 358, whose canons are contained in it; and before the councils of Rimini and Seleucia, which were called in the beginning of 359. ’ Some time after he was sent to the council of Seleucia, where he defended the Galiican bishops from the imputation of Sabellianism, which the Arians had fixed upun them; and boldly asserted the sound and orthodox faith of the Western bishops. He was so favourably received, and so much respected by this council, that they admitted him as one who should give in his opinion, and assist in a determination among their bishops. Hilary, however, finding the greater part of them to be Arian, would not act, although he continued at Seleucia till the council was over; and thinking the orthodox faith in the Utmost peril, followed the deputies of the council to Constantinople, when he petitioned the emperor for leave to dispute publicly with the Arians. The Arians, from a dread of his talents, contrived to have him sent to France, in which he arrived in 360, and after the catholic bishops had recovered their usual liberty and authority under Julian the Apostate, Hilary assembled several councils to reestablish the ancient orthodox faith, and to condemn the determinations of the synods of Rimini and Seleucia. He condemned Saturninus bishop of Aries, but pardoned those who acknowledged their error; and, in every respect, exerted himself so zealously, that France was in a great measure freed from Arianism by his single influence and endeavours. He extended a similar care over Italy and some foreign churches, and was particularly qualified to recover men from the error of their ways, being a man of a mild candid turn, very learned, and accomplished in the arts of persuasion, and in these respects, says the candid Dupin, “affords a very proper lesson of instruction to all who are employed in the conversion of heretics.”

Mr. Hildersham was born at Stechworth in Cambridgeshire, Oct. 6, 1563, and educated at Christ’s college, Cambridge. His parents were zealous papists, but during his abode at the university, he embraced the doctrines of the reformed church with a cordiality and decision which nothing could shake, and when his father found him so resolute, he disinherited him. He soon, however, obtained a liberal patron in his relation Henry earl of Huntingdon, lord president of the north, who sent him to the university, which he had been obliged to leave, and generously supported him. Being disappointed of a fellowship of Christ’s college, owing to the partiality of Dr. Barwell, the master, for another candidate, he was nearly about the same time, in 1586, chosen fellow of Trinity-hall, by the influence of lord Burleigh, chancellor of the university. This fellowship, however, he did not hold above two years, and having unguardedly began to preach without being admitted into orders, he received a check from archbishop Whitgift, although this irregularity was not in those days very uncommon. In 1593, however, every obstacle of this kind being removed, the earl of Huntingdon presented him to the living of Ashby-de-la Zoncb in Leicestershire, where he remained the whole of his life. Being dissatisfied with some points of ecclesiastical discipline, snch as wearing the surplice, baptizing with the cross, and kneeling at the sacrament, he often incurred the penalties of the law, and more than once was suspended from his functions; but always restored by the intervention of some friend, or the prevalence of his own excellent character. The wonder is that a man of his learning, piety, and good sense, should have adhered with such pertinacity to matters of comparatively little consequence, when he found the law and the general sentiments of his brethren against him, and when, what was of more importance to him, those labours were interrupted in which he delighted, and in which he was eminently successful. With these interruptions, however, he continued in the exercise of his ministry at Ashby until his death, March 4, 1631. He was interred in the southside of the chancel of Ashby church, with an inscription which, after adverting to his noble descent, says that he was “more honoured for his sweet 'and ingenuous disposition, his singular wisdom in settling peace, advising in secular affairs, and satisfying doubts; his abundant charity, and especially his extraordinary knowledge and judgment in the Holy Scriptures, his painful and zealous preaching, &c.” This character is amply illustrated by his biographers, and may in part be confirmed by his works, which in point of style and matter are equal, if not superior to those of his contemporaries* Those which are best known are his “Lectures on John iv.” 1623, fol. and his “CLII Lectures on Psalm 51,” 1635, fol. In all these his steady adherence to the doctrines of the church is visible, and his aversion to sectarianism and popery. He was particularly an opponent of the Brownists, or first independents. Echardjusily says he was “a great and shining light of the puritan party, and celebrated for his singular learning and piety.” Ke was the author also of “Lectures on Psalm 34,” 1632, 4to; and “A Treatise on the Lord’s Supper,” which we have never seen. He left in ms. a paraphrase on the whole Bible, from which was extracted a paraphrase on the Song of Solomon, printed, 1672, in 12mo. His son, Samuel, was ejected, for nonconformity, from the living of West Felton in Shropshire, and died in 1674. He was editor of his father’s Lectures.

At Hitchin, the value of which would not admit the expence of a curate, he began that attention to the duties of his function which predominated through his life, and having advanced considerably to repair the vicarage-house, he was obliged to add to his labours by undertaking the education of from four to six select pupils, as boarders. It was his general custom at this time to preach either from memory, or short notes; and at a visitation at Baldock he delivered a discourse to the clergy from memory alone, with very singular and agreeable address. In Oct. 1735, he succeeded to the neighbouring-rectory of Holwell, in the county of Bedford, upon the presentation of Ralph Radcliffe, esq. This living he held about thirty-two years, and during the twenty years of his residence, executed all the duties of his important function with a truly primitive fidelity, not only by frequent public preaching, but by private visiting, exhortation, and catechising, distributing good books, &c. At length his exemplary conduct became known to the duke of Athol, lord and patron of the bishopric of Sodor and Mann, who justly considered him as a proper person to succeed the excellent and venerable bishop Wilson, who died in 1755. He was accordingly consecrated in Whitehall chapel in April of that year, after being created D. D. by archbishop Herring; and on Aug. 6, was installed in the cathedral of St. German on Peel, in the Isle of Mann.

At first, with the sanction and support of the society, Dn Hildesley printed only the New Testament; the “Book of Common Prayer” translated, untler his direction, by the clergy of his diocese; “The Christian Monitor;” Mr. Lewis’s “Exposition of the Catechism,” and bishop Wilson’s “Form of Prayer” for the use of the Herring-fishery. But the benefactions came in so far beyond their expectation, that about 1766 they were encouraged to set on foot a Manks version of the Old Testament, which had scarcely, been accomplished, when the good prelate’s health, which was always delicate, showed alarming symptoms of approaching dissolution, and although he had alternations of apparent recovery, and in June 1772 had gained firmness enough to visit his hospital near Durham, yet his usual vivacity was visibly much reduced, and application to business of any kind proved rather irksome. This continued till about the middle of November following, when he was ao-ain enabled to dispatch common affairs without apparent fatio-ue. and performed the duties of his ministerial office with ereat alacrity. On Saturday, Nov. 28, he received the last part of the translation of the Bible, so long the sbject of his ardent prayers upon which occasion, accord in'g to his own repeated promise, he very emphatically sang Nunc, Dentine, Dimtitis, in the presence of his congratulating family. Next Sunday he officiated in his own chapel, and preached “on the uncertainty of human life,” which subject he repeated in private exhortation to his family in the evening. On the Monday following, Nov. 30, after dining and cheerfully conversing in his palace, with his family and one of the neighbouring clergy around him, he was seized with a stroke of apoplexy on the left side, which in a moment deprived him of his intellectual powers, and in that situation he remained, until Dec. 7, when he calmly expired, deeply regretted by the clergy and inhabitants of his diocese, to whom his amiable manners and active benevolence had endeared him. In the work to which we are indebted for the particulars of this sketch, may be found many proofs of his piety, liberality, and anxiety for the best concerns of his flock. A narrative, indeed, like that of Mr. Butler’s, strengthened by so much authentic and minute information, and interesting correspondence, cannot be too frequently consulted by the junior clergy. Bishop Hildesley is known as an author, only by a small tract which he published without his name, entitled “Plain Instructions for young persons in the principles of the Christian religion in six conferences, between a minister and his disciple designed for the use of the isle and diocese of Mann. By a resident clergyman,” in two parts, 1762 and 1767.

, an English poet and dramatic writer of some celebrity in his day, was born in Beaufort-buildings in the Strand, February 10, 1685. He was the eldest son Of George Hill, esq. of Malmsbury-abbey in Wiltshire and, in consequence of this descent, the legal heir to an, entailed estate of about 2000l. per annum; but the misconduct of his father having, by a sale of the property, which he had no right to execute, rendered it of no advanl tage to the family, our author was left, together with Mr. Hill’s other children, to the care of, and a dependence on, his mother and grandmother; the latter of whom (Mrs. Anne Gregory) was more particularly anxious for his education and improvement. The first rudiments of learning he received from Mr. Reyner, of Barnstaple in Devonshire^ to whom he was sent at nine years old, and, on his removal from thence, was placed at Westminster-school, under the care of the celebrated Dr. Knipe. After remaining here until he was fourteen years of age, he formed a resolution singular enough in one so young, of paying a visit to his relation lord Paget, then ambassador at Constantinople; and accordingly embarked for that place, March 2, 1700. When he arrived, lord Paget received him with much surprise, as well as pleasure; wondering, that a person so young should run the hazard of iuch a voyage, to visit a relation whom he only knew by character. The ambassador immediately provided for him a very learned ecclesiastic in his own house; and, under his tuition, sent him to travel, so that he had an opportunity of seeing Egypt, Palestine, and a great part of the East. With lord Paget he returned home about 1703, and in his journey saw most of the courts in Europe, and it is probable that his lordship might have provided genteelly for him at his death, had he not been dissuaded by the misrepresentations of a female about him, which in a great measure prevented his good intentions. The young man’s well known merit, however, soon recommended him to sir William Wentworth, a Yorkshire baronet, who being inclined to make the tour of Europe, his relations engaged Mr. Hill to accompany him as a travelling tutor, which office he performed, for two or three years, to their entire satisfaction. In 1709, he commenced author, by the publication of an “History of the Ottoman Empire,” compiled from tinmaterials 'which he had collected in the course of his di rent travels, and during his residence at the Turkish conr:. This work, though it met with success, Mr. Hill frequently afterwards repented the having printed, and would himself, at times, very severely criticize it; and indeed, to say the truth, there are in it a great number of puerilities, which render it far inferior to the merit of his subsequent writings; in which correctness has ever been so strong a characteristic, that his critics have even attributed it to him as a fault; whereas, in this work, there at best appears the labour of a juvenile genius, rather choosing to give the full reign to fancy, and indulge the imagination of the poet, than to aim at the plainness and perspicuity of the historian. About the same year he published his first poetical piece, entitled “Camillus,” in vindication and honour of the earl of Peterborough, who had been general in. Spain. This poem was printed without any author’s name; but lord Peterborough, having made it his business to find out to whom he was indebted, appointed Mr. JHill his secretary; which post, however, he quitted the year following, on occasion of his marriage.

This design was, for some time, carried on with great vigour and advantage, till some of the persons concerned in it thought proper to call off the men and horses from the woods of Abernethy, in order to employ them in their lead mines in the same country, from whence they promised themselves to reap a still more considerable profit. What private emolument Mr. Hill received from this affair, or whether any at all, seems unknown. However, the magistrates of Inverness, Aberdeen, &c. paid him the compliment of the freedom of their towns, and entertained him with much respect. Yet, notwithstanding these ho-> nours, which were publicly paid to cur author, and the distinguished civilities which he met with from the duke and duchess of Gordon, and other persons of rank to whom he became known during his residence in the Highlands, this Northern expedition was near proving of very unhappy consequences to his fortune; for, in his return, his lady being at that time in Yorkshire for the recovery of her health, he made so long a continuance with her in that county, as afforded an opportunity to some persons into whose hands he had confided the management of some important affairs, to be guilty of a breach of trust, that aimed at the destruction of the greatest part of what he was worth. He happily, however, returned in time to frustrate their intentions.

This, though far the gentlest piece of satire in the whole poem, and conveying at the same time a very elegant compliment, roused Hill to the taking some notice of it, which he did by a poem, written during his peregrination in the North, entitled “The Progress of Wit, a Caveat for the use of an eminent writer,” which he begins with the following eight lines, in which Pope’s too well-known disposition is elegantly, yet very severely characterized:

, a learned English gentleman, fellow and treasurer of the royal society, one of the lords of trade, and comptroller to the archbishop of Canterbury, was descended of an ancient and honourable family of that name, seated at Shilston, in Devonshire, and was the son of Richard Hill, of Shilston, esq. His father was bred to mercantile business, which he pursued with great success, was chosen an alderman of London, and v.as much in the confidence of the Long-parliament, and of Cromwell and his statesmen. Abraham, his eldest son, was born April 18, 1633, at his father’s house, in St. Botolph’s parish by Billingsgate, and after a proper education, was introduced into his business. He was also an accomplished scholar in the Greek, Latin, French, Dutch, and Italian languages, and was considered as one of very superior literary attainments. On his father’s death in 1659, he became possessed of an ample fortune, and that he might, with more ease, prosecute his studies, he hired chambers in Gresham college, where he had an opportunity of conversing with learned men, and of pursuing natural philosophy, to which he was much attached. He was one of the first eucouragers of the royal society, and on its first institution became a fellow, and in 1663 their treasurer, which office he held for two years. His reputation, in the mean time, was not confined to his native country, but by means of the correspondence of his learned friends, was known over most part of Europe. Having, like his father, been biassed in favour of the republican party from which he recovered by time and reflection, his merit was in consequence overlooked during the reigns of Charles II. and James II. but on the accession of king William, he was called to a seat at the board of trade, where his knowledge of the subject made his services of great importance; and when Dr. Tillotson was promoted to the see of Canterbury in 1691, he prevailed on Mr. Hill to take on him the office of his comptroller, which he accordingly accepted, and lived in Jiigh favour with that distinguished prelate, who would frequently term him “his learned friend and his instructing philosopher.” On the accession of queen Anne, Mr. Hill resigned his office in the Board of Trade, and retired to his seat of St. John’s in Sutton, at Hone in the county of Kent, which he had purchased in 1665, and which was always his favourite residence. Here he died Feb. 5, 1721. In 1767 a volume of his “Familiar Letters” was published, which gives us a very favourable idea of his learning, public spirit, and character; and although the information these letters contain is not of such importance now as when written, there is always an acknowledged charm in unreserved epistolary correspondence, which makes the perusal of this and all such collections interesting.

But the disposition of Dr. Hill was greatly changed with his circumstances: from being humble and diffident, he had become vain and self-sufficient. There appeared in him a pride, which was perpetually claiming a more than ordinary homage, and a vindictive spirit, which could never forgive the refusal of it. Hence his writings abounded with attacks on the understandings, morals, or peculiarities of others, descending, even to personal abuse and scurrility. This licence of his pen engaged him frequently in disputes and quarrels; and an Irish gentleman of the name of Browne, supposed to be ridiculed in an “Inspector,” proceeded so far as to cane him in the public gardens at Ranelagh. He had a paper war with Woodward the comedian was engaged with Henry Fielding in the affair of Elizabeth Canning and concerned in a contest with the Royal Society, Of this, the origin and progress has been thus detailed by one who had every opportunity of knowing the circumstances. When Mr. Hill had started all at once as before related, from a state of indigence and distress, to taste the comforts of very considerable emoluments from his labour, giddy with success, and elated beyond bounds with the warm sunshine of prosperity, he seemed to be seized with a kind of infatuation. Vanity took entire possession of his bosom, and banished from thence every consideration but of self. His conversation turned on little else, and even his very writings were tainted with perpetual details of every little occurrence that happened to him. His raillery, both in company and in his writings, frequently turned on those who closely attached themselves to philosophical investigations, especially in the branches of natural philosophy. The common -place wit of abusing the medal-scraper, the butterfly-hunter, the cockle-shell-merchant, &c. now appeared in some of his Magazines and Inspectors, and in two or three places he even indulged some distant glances of satire at the Royal Society. Notwithstanding which, however, when the Supplement to “Chambers’s Dictionary” was nearly finished, the proprietors of that work, very sensible of the weight of an F. R. S. annexed to the author’s name, were very desirous that Dr. Hill should have this addition as well as Mr. Scott, his colleague in the work. In consequence of this design, Dr. Hill procured Mr. Scott to propose him for election into that honourable body; but the doctor’s conduct for some time past having been such as had rendered him the object of contempt to some, of disgust to others, and of ridicule to almost all the rest of his former grave and philosophical acquaintances, he now stood but a very indifferent chance for carrying an election, where an opposition pf one third was sufficient to reject the candidate; and as. the failing in that attempt might have done our author more essential prejudice than the succeeding in it could even have brought him advantage, the late ingenious and worthy president, Martin Folkes, esq. whose remembrance must ever live in the highest estimation with all who ever had the honour of knowing him, notwithstanding that Dr. Hill had given him personal occasion of offence against him, yet with the utmost generosity and candour, advised Mr. Scott to dissuade his friend, for his own sake, against a design which there appeared so little probability of his succeeding in. This advice, however, Dr. Hill, instead of considering in the generous light it was meant, misinterpreted into a prejudiced opposition against his interest, am would have persisted in his intention even in despite of it, had net his being unable to obtain the subscription o requisite number of members to his recommendation^ obliged him to lay it aside, from a conviction that he could not expect to carry an election in a body composed of three hundred members, of which he could not prevail on three to set their names to the barely recommending him as a candidate. Thus disappointed, his vanity piqued, and his pride lowered, no relief was left him but railing and scurrility, for which purpose, declaring open war with the society in general, he first published a pamphlet entitled *' A Dissertation on Royal Societies,“in a letter from a Sclavonian nobleman in London to his friend in Sclavonia; which, besides the most ill-mannered and unjust abuse on the whole learned body he had been just aiming, in vain, to become a member of, is interlarded with the grossest personal scurrility on the characters of Mr. Folkes and Mr. Henry Baker, two gentlemen to whom Dr. Hill had formerly been under the greatest obligations, and whose respective reputations in both the moral and literary world had long been too firmly established for the weak efforts of a disappointed scribbler to shake or undermine. Not contented with this, he proceeded to compile together a large quarto volume entitled” A Review of the Works of the Royal Society,“in which, by the most unfair quotations, mutilations, and misrepresentations, numbers of the papers read in that illustrious assembly, and published under the title of the” Philosophical Transactions,“are endeavoured to be rendered ridiculous. This work is ushered into the world with a most abusive and infamous dedication to Martin Folkes, esq. against whom and the afore-mentioned Mr. Henry Baker the weight of this furious attack was chiefly aimed but the whole recoiled upon himself; and by such personal abuse, malignant altercation, proud and insolent behaviour, together with the slovenliness and inaccuracy of careless and hasty productions, he wrote himself out of repute both with booksellers and the town; and, after some time, sunk in the estimation of the public nearly as fast as he had risen. He found, however, as usual, resources in his own invention. He applied himself to the preparation of certain simple medicines namely,” the Essence of Water-dock; Tincture of Valerian Pectoral Balsam of Honey and Tincture of Bardana.“The well-known simplicity of these preparations led the public to judge favourably of their effects; they had a rapid sale, and once more enabled the doctor to live in splendour. Soon after the publication of the first of these medicines, he obtained the patronage of the earl of Bute; under which he published a very pompous and voluminous botanical work, entitled” A System of Botany;“but is said to have been a very considerable loser by this speculation. His botanical works, however, had a favourable influence in promoting the science in general. To wind up the whole of so extraordinary a life, having a year or two before his death presented an elegant set of his botanical works to the king of Sweden, that monarch invested him with one of the orders of his court, that of Vasa, in consequence of which he assumed the title of Sir John. He died Nov. 22, 1775, of the gout, which he professed to cure others. As to his literary character, and the rank of merit in which his writings ought to stand, Hill’s greatest enemies could not deny that he was master of considerable abilities, and an amazing quickness of parts. The rapidity of his pen was ever astonishing, and he has been known to receive within one year, no less than 1500l. for the works of his own single hand; which, as he was never in such estimation as to be entitled to any extraordinary price for his copies, is, we believe, at least three times as much as ever was made by any one writer in the same period of time. But, had he written much less, his works would probably have been much more read. The vast variety of subjects he handled, certainly required such a fund of universal knowledge, and such a boundless genius, as were never perhaps known to centre in any one man; and it is not therefore to be wondered, if, in regard to some he appears very inaccurate, in some very superficial, and in others altogether inadequate to the task he had undertaken. His works on philosophical subjects seemed most likely to have procured him fame, had he allowed himself time to digest the knowledge he possessed, or preserved that regard to veracity which the relation of scientific facts so rigidly demands. His novels, of which he has written many, such as” The History of Mr. Lovell,“(in which he had endeavoured to persuade the world he had given the detail of his own life),” The Adventures of a Creole,“” The Life of Lady Frail,“&c. have, in some parts of them, incidents not disagreeably related, but the most of them are merely narratives of private intrigues, containing throughout the grossest calumnies, and endeavouring to blacken and undermine the private characters of many worthy persons. In his” Essays,“which are by much the best of hia writings, there is, in general, a liveliness of imagination, and adroitness in the manner of extending, perhaps some very trivial thought, which at first may by many be mistaken for wit; but, on a nearer examination, will be found to lose much of its value. A continued use of smart short periods, bold assertions, and bolder egotisms, produces a transient effect, but seldom tempts the spectator to take a second glance. The utmost that can be said of Hill is, that he had talents, but that, in general, he either greatly nisapplied them, or most miserably hackneyed them for profit. As a dramatic writer he stands in no estimation^ nor has he been known in that view by any thing but three very insignificant pieces: namely, 1.” Orpheus,“an opera, 1740. 2.” The Critical Minute,“a farce, published in 1754, but not acted, 3.” The Rout," a farce, 1754*. A large volume might be written on the life and! adventures of this extraordinary man, as affording a complete history of literary quackery, every branch of which he pursued with a greater contempt for character than perhaps any man in our time.

was a man remarkable for his perseverance and talent in learning many languages by the aid of books alone, and that under every disadvantage of laborious occupation and extreme poverty. His extraordinary character was made known to the world by Mr. Spence in 1757, who, in order to promote a subscription for him, published a comparison between him and the famous Magliabecchi, with a short life of each. From this account it appears that he was born January 11, 1699, at Miswell near Tring in Hertfordshire, that he was bred a taylor, which trade and that of a staymaker he practised throughout life, sometimes adding to them that of a schoolmaster. He was three times married, and the increase of his family, with the extravagance of his second wife, kept him always in great, penury. He worked in general, or taught by day, and studied by night; in which way he acquired the Latin, Greek, and Hebrew languages, with a good knowledge of arithmetic. As he could proceed only as he accidentally picked up books in a very cheap way, his progress was slow, but by his unremitting diligence very steady. According to his own account, he was seven years acquiring Latin, twice as much in learning Greek, but Hebrew he found so easy that it cost him little time. He wrote, 1. “Remarks on Berkeley’s” Essay on Spirit“. 2.” The Character of a Jew.“3.” Criticisms on Job." He was a modest sensible man, fond of studying the Scriptures, and a zealous member of the church of England. He died at Buckingham in July 1777, after having been confined to his bed about a year and a half. During this time he employed the hours in which he was able to sit up, in his favourite study of the Old Testament in Hebrew, which he frequently said now more than repaid him for the trouble he had taken to acquire the language. It is probable, that the notice into which he was brought by Mr. Spence secured him afterwards from the extremities of poverty.

, usually called the father of physic, was born in the island of Cos, about 460 B. C. He is said to have descended from Æsculapius, through a line of physicians who had all promoted the fame of the Coan school, and by his mother’s side he was the eighteenth lineal descendant from Hercules. He appears to have devoted himself to the medical art that he might perpetuate the honours of his family, and he has eclipsed them. Besides the empirical practice which was hereditary among them, he studied under Herodicus, who had invented the gymnastic medicine, and was instructed in philosophy and eloquence by Gorgias, a celebrated sophist and brother of Herodicus. He is also said to have been a pupil of Democritus, which appears improbable, and a follower of the doctrines of Heraclitus. In whatever study, however, he engaged, he appears to have pursued a rational plan, upon actual expedience, discarding the theories of those who never had practised the art, and hence is said to have been the first who separated the science of medicine from philosophy, or rather from mere speculation, which then assumed that name. Of the events of his life little is known with cer T tainty. He spent a great part of his time in travelling: during which he resided for a considerable period, at varipus places, in which he was occupied in the practise of his art. His chief abode was in the provinces of Thessaly and Thrace, especially at Larissa, the capital of Thessaly, where he composed several books. According to Soranus, he spent some time at the court of Macedon, where he signalized himself, in consultation with Kuryphon, a senior physician, by detecting the origin of the malady of the young Perdiccas. His observation of the emotion of the prince on the appearance of Phila, a mistress of his father, led him to pronounce that love alone was capable of curing the disease which it had occasioned. His fame caused him to receive invitations from diiFerent cities of Greece. He is said to have been requested by the inhabitants of Abciera to go and cure their celebrated fellowcitizen, Democritus, of the madness under which they supposed him to labour, whom he pronounced not mad; but, the wisest man in their city. In a speech ascribed to his son Thessalus, still extant, we are told that Illyria and Paeonia being ravaged by the plague, the inhabitants of those countries offered large sums of money to induce Hippocrates to come to their relief; but forseeing that the pestilence was likely to penetrate into Greece, he refused to quit his own country, but sent his two sons, and his sonin-law, through the diiFerent provinces, to convey the proper instructions for avoiding the infection; he himself went to Thessaly, and thence to Athens, where he conferred such eminent services on the citizens, that they issued a decree honouring him with a crown of gold, and initiating him and his family in the sacred mysteries of Ceres and Proserpine. Hippocrates is likewise reported to have refused an invitation from Artaxerxes, king of Persia, accompanied by a promise of every reward and honour which he might desire, to repair to his dominions during a season of pestilence, which he refused; and that when the enraged king ordered the inhabitants of Cos to deliver up Hippocrates, they declared their resolution to defend the life and liberty of their valued countryman at all hazards, and nothing was attempted by the Persian. Most of these stories, however, are deemed fictitious by the most intelligent critics. The cure of the young Perdiccas probably originated from the report of a similar cure ascribed to Erasistratus; and the interview with Deraocntus is not supported by any satisfactory evidence. The relation of the services of Hippocrates, during the plague at Atbeps, is altogether irreconcileable with the accounts of Galen and of Thucydides: besides, that plague commenced during the Peioponnesiin war, in the second year of the 87th olympiad, at which time Hippocrates was about thirty" years old, and therefore could not have had two sons or a son-in-law in a condition to practise. Dr. Ackerman justly conjectures, that these fables were all invented after the death of Hippocrates, and ascribed to him by the followers of the dogmatic sect, of which he was regarded as the founder. The letters and other pieces, which are preserved with the works of Hippocrates, and on the authority of which these anecdotes are related, are generally deemed spurious.

, M. D. eldest son of the bishop of Winchester, was born Feb. 10, 1705-6, in Broad-street, and educated, as was his younger brother, at Dr. Newcomers at Hackney, and Benet-college, Cambridge; being admitted pensioner April 8, 1722, under archbishop Herring, then tutor there. Here he took a degree in physic in 1727; and, particularly applying to mathematical and philosophical studies, was well known (along with the learned and ingenious doctors David Hartley and Davies, both late of Bath, who with him composed the whole class) to jnake a greater progress under the blind professor Saunderson than any student then in the university. When his late majesty was at Cambridge in April 1728, he was upon

* Archbishop Seeker one day, at be Christians, replied, “If they were, his table, when the Monthly Reviewers it was certainly ‘secundum usum Winwt-re said, by one of the company, to ton’.” the list of persons to be created doctors of physic: but either by chance or management, his name was not found in the last list; and he had not his degree of M. D, till about a month after, by a particular mandamus. He was elected F. R. S. in 1726, when he was very young, and had the honour of being made known to the learned world as a philosopher, by “A Letter from the rev. Dr. Samuel Clarke to Mr. Benjamin Hoadly, F. R. S. occasioned by the present controversy among the mathematicians concerning the proportion of Velocity and Force in bodies in motion.” He was made registrar of Hereford while his father filled that see; and was appointed physician to his majesty’s household so early as June 9, 1742. Jt is remarkable, that he was for some years physician to both the royal households; having been appointed to that of the prince of Wales, Jan. 4, 1745-6, in the place of Dr. Lamotte, a Scotch physician, whom the prince had himself ordered to be struck out of the list, on some imprudent behaviour at the Smyrna coffee-house at the time of the rebellion in 1745. The appointment was attended with some circumstances of particular honour to Dr. Hoadly. The prince himself, before the warrant could be finished, ordered the style to be altered; and that he should be called physician to the household, and not extraordinary, as the other had been: observing, that this would secure that place to him in case of a demise, and be a bar against any one getting over him. Nay, not content with this, his royal highness voluntarily wrote a letter to the bishop with his own hand “that he was glad of this opportunity of giving him a token of his gratitude for his services formerly to his family; and that he was his affectionate Frederic, P.” Dr. Hoadly is said to have filled these posts with singular honour. He married, 1. Elizabeth, daughter of Henry Betts, esq. of Suffolk, counsellor at law, by whom he had one son, Benjamin, that died an infant. 2 Anne, daughter and co-heiress of the honourable general Armstrong, by whom he left no issue. He died in the lifetime of his father, Aug. 10, 1757, athishouM it Chelsea, which he had built ten years before. He published, 1. “Three Letters on the Organs of Respiration, read at the royal college of physicians, London, A. D. 1737, being the Gulstonian lectures for that year. To which is added, an Appendix, containing remarks on some experiments of Dr. Houston, published in the Transactions of the Royal Society for the year 1736, by Benjamin Hoadly, M. B. fellow of the college of physicians, and of the royal society, London,” 1740, 4to. 2. “Oratio anniversaria in Theatro Coll. Medicor. Londinensium, ex Harveii instttuto habita die 18 Oct. A. D. 1742, a Benj. Hoadly, M. D. Coll. Med. & S. R. S.” 1742, esteemed a very elegant piece of Latin. 3. “The Suspicious Husband, a Comedy.” 4. “Observations on a Series of Electrical experiments, by Dr. Hoadly and Mr. Wilson, F. R. S.” 1756, 4to. The doctor was, in his private character, an amiable humane man, and an agreeable sprightly companion. In his profession he was learned and judicious; and, as a writer, has been long known in the theatrical world as the author of a comedy, “The Suspicious Husband,” which appeared first in 1747, and has kept its place on every stage since with undiminished attractions.

His several preferments he received in the following order of time: the rectory of Michelmersh, March 8, 1737; that of Wroughton in Wiltshire, Sept. 8, 1737; and that of Alresfurd, and a prebend of Winchester, 29th of November in the same year. On June 9, 1743, he was instituted to the rectory of St. Mary near Southampton, and on Dec. 16, 1746, collated to that of Overton. He was the first person on whom archbishop Herring conferred the degree of a doctor. In May 1760, he was appointed to the mastership of St. Cross; and all these preferments he enjoyed until his death, except the living of Wroughton and the prebend of Winchester. He wrote some poems in “Dodsley’s Collection,” and is supposed very materially to have assisted his brother in “The Suspicious Husband.” He likewise published, as we have already noticed, his father’s works in 3 vols. folio. After living to the age of 64, the delight of his friends, he died March 16, 1776, and with him the name of Hoadly became extinct. He was the author of five dramas: 1. The Contrast,“a comedy, acted at Lincoln’s-mn-fields, 1731, but not printed. 2.” Love’s Revenge,“a pastoral, 1737. 3.” Phoebe,“another pastoral, 1748. 4.” Jephtha,“an oratorio, 1737. 5. And another entitled” The Force of Truth,“1764. He also revised Lillo’s” Arden of Feversham,“and wrote the fifth act of Miller’s” Mahomet.“He left several dramatic works in ms. behind him, and among the rest,” The Housekeeper, a farce,“on the plan of” High Life below Stairs,“in favour of which piece it was rejected by Mr. Garrick, together with a tragedy on a religious subject. So great, however, was the doctor’s fondness for theatrical exhibitions, that no visitors were ever long in his house before they were solicited to accept a part in some interlude or other. He himself, with Garrick and Hogarth, once performed a laughable parody on the scene in” Julius Caesar“where the ghost appears to Brutus-, Hogarth personated the spectre; but so unretentive was his memory, that, although his speech consisted only of a few lines, he was unable to get them by heart. At last they hit on the following expedient in his favour. The verses he was to deliver were written in such large letters on the outside of an illuminated paper lanthorn, that he could read them when he entered with it in his hand on the stage. Hogarth prepared the play-bill on this occasion, with characteristic ornaments, the original drawing of which is still preserved. Dr. Koadly’s tragedy was on the story of lord Cromwell, anil he once intended to give it to the stage. In a letter dated June 27, 1765, he says,” My affair with Mr. Garrick is coming upon the carpet again;“Aug. 1, 1765, he thus apologizes to Mr. Bowyer, to whom he intended to present the copy-right:” Vour kind concern, c. demanded an earlier acknowledgment, had I not delayed till an absolute answer came from irn friend David Garrick, with his fixed resolution never more ‘to strut and fret his hour upon the stage again.’ This decree has unhinged my schemes with regard to lord Cromwell, for nothing but the concurrence of so many circumstances in my favour (his entire disinterested friendship for me and the good doctor’s memory; Mrs. Hoadly’s bringing on a piece of the doctor’s at the same time the story of mine being on a religious subject, &c. and the peculiar advantage of David’s unparalleled performance in it) could have persuaded me to break through the prudery of my profession, and (in my station in the church) produce a play upon the stage." For the prudery of his profession, however, he appears to have had very little regard, and on that profession conferred very little honour. With all his preferments, which were very valuable, he is known only as the author of the dramatic pieces above mentioned, nor do they entitle him to a very high rank among writers for the stage.

, an ingenious and amiable English artist, was born about the year 1707, at Eye, near Ipswich, in Suftblk. His father was possessed of considerable property, holding a farm of large extent in his own hands. William shewing very early a disposition to study, was sent to a. school at Faringdon in Berkshire, where the master enjoyed a hii;h reputation for classical learning. The pupil eagerly availed himself of every opportunity of improvement, and in the course of a few years attained such a degree of proficiency as to assist his master occasionally in the tuition of the other scholars. To these acquirements he added no indifferent skill in drawing, which was also taught in the school; and he soon distinguished himself above his competitors in the prize exhibitions, which took place once a year. Indulging the bent of his mind to this art, he solicited and obtained his father’s permission to follow his studies in painting with a professional view. For this purpose, after having completed the school courses with great credit to himself, he was removed to London, where he was placed under the care of Grisoni, an Italian painter of history, the best, and perhaps the only one, which that time afforded. Grisoni, however, was at the best a very poor painter, and the example of his works was little calculated to produce eminence in his scholar. But he was a man of sound judgment and benevolent disposition, and it is probable that the sense of his own insufficiency induced him to persuade young William to seek a more satisfactory guidance in the pursuit to which he devoted himself so earnestly. The schools’ of Italy appeared to him the place to which a learner should resort for the means of accomplishment in his art. William caught the suggestion with eagerness, and the father’s permission was again earnestly sought, for visiting the foreign treasures of painting and sculpture, which were then known to the English only through the communications of such of our gentlemen and nobility as travelled on the continent for the purposes of polite accomplishment. William Hoare was the first English painter who visited Rome for professional study.

, an eminent English philosopher and miscellaneous writer, was born at Malmsbury in Wiltshire, April 5, 1588, his father being minister of that town. The Spanish Armada was then upon the coast of England; and his mother is said to have been so alarmed on that occasion, that she was brought to bed of him before her time. After having made a considerable progress in the learned languages at school, he was sent, in 1603, to Magdalen hall, Oxford; and, in 1608, by the recommendation of the principal, taken into the family of the right honourable William Cavendish lord Hardwicke, soon after created earl of Devonshire, as tutor to his son William lord Cavendish. Hobbes ingratiated himself so effectually with this young nobleman, and with the peer his father, that he was sent abroad with him on his travels in 16:0, and made the tour of France and Italy. Upon his return with lord Cavendish, he became known to persons of the highest rank, and eminently distinguished for their abilities and learning. The chancellor Bacon admitted him to a great degree of familiarity, and is said to have made use of his pen for translating some of his works into Latin. He was likewise much in favour with lord Herbert of Cherbury; and the celebrated Ben Jonson had such an esteem for him, that he revised the first work which he published, viz. his “English Translation of the History of Thucyciides.” This Hobbes undertook, as he tells us himself, “with an honest view of preventing, if possible, those disturbances in which he was apprehensive his country would be involved, by shewing, in the history of the Peloponnesian war, the fatal consequences of intestine troubles.” This has always been esteemed one of the best translations that we have of any Greek writer, and the author himself superintended the maps and indexes. But while he meditated this design, his patron, the earl of Devonshire, died in 1626; and in 1628, the year his work was published, his son died also. This loss affected him to such a degree, that he very willingly accepted an offer of going abroad a second time with the son of sir Gervase Clifton, whom he accordingly accompanied into France, and staid there some time. But while he continued there he was solicited to return to England, and to resume his concern for the hopes of that family, to which he had attached himself so early, and owed many and great obligations.

In 1631, the countess dowager of Devonshire was desirous of placing the young earl under his care, who was then about the age of thirteen; a trust very suitable to his inclinations, and which he discharged with great fidelity and diligence. In 1634 he republished his translation of Thucydides, and prefixed to it a dedication to that young nobleman, in which he gives a nigh character of his father, and represents in the strongest terms his obligations to that illustrious family. The same year he accompanied his noble pupil to Paris, where he applied his vacant hours to natural philosophy, especially mechanism, and the causes of animal motion. He had frequent conversations upon these subjects with father Mersenne, a man deservedly famous, who kept up a correspondence with almost all the learned in Europe. From Paris he attended his pupil into Italy, and at Pisa became known to Galileo, who communicated to him his notions very freely. After having seen all that was remarkable in that country, he returned in 1637 with the earl of Devonshire into England. The troubles in Scotland now grew high, and began to spread themselves southward, and to threaten disturbance.throughout the kingdom. Hobbes, seeing this, thought he might do good service by composing something by way of antidote to the pestilential opinions which then prevailed. This engaged him to commit to paper certain principles, observations, and remarks, out of which he composed his book “De Give,” and which grew up afterwards into that system which he called his “Leviathan.”

Not long after the meeting of the long parliament, Nov. 3, 1640, when all things fell into confusion, he withdrew, for the sake of living in quiet, to Paris; where he associated himself with those learned men, who, under the protection of Cardinal Richelieu, sought, by conferring their notions together, to promote every kind of useful knowledge. He had not been long there, when by the good offices of his friend Mersenne, he became known to Des Cartes, and afterwards held a correspondence with him upon mathematical subjects, as appears from the letters of Hobbes published in the works of Des Cartes. But when that philosopher printed afterwards his “Meditations,” in which he attempted to establish points of the highest consequence from innate ideas, Hobbes took the liberty of dissenting from him; as did also Gassendi, with whom Hobbes contracted a very close friendship, which was not interrupted till the death of the former. In 1642, he printed a few copies of his book “De Give,” which raised him many adversaries, by whom he was charged with instilling principles of a dangerous tendency. Immediately after the appearance of this book, Des Cartes said of it to a friend, “I am of opinion that the author of the book ‘ De Give,’ is the same person who wrote the third objection against my ‘ Meditations.’ I think him a much greater master of morality, than of metaphysics or natural philosophy; though I can by no means approve of his principles or maxims, which are very bad and extremely dangerous, because they suppose all men to be wicked, or give them occasion to be so. His whole design is to write in favour of monarchy, which might be done to more advantage than he has done, upon maxims more virtuous and solid. He has wrote likewise greatly to the disadvantage of the church and the Roman catholic religion, so that if he is not particularly supported by some powerful interest, I do not see how he can escape having his book censured.” The learned Conringius censures him very severely for boasting, in regard to this performance, “that though physics were a new science, yet civil philosophy was still newer, since it could not be styled older than his book * De Give;' whereas,” says Conringius, “there is nothing good in that work of his that was not always known.” But vanity was throughout life a prevailing foible with Hobbes.